Smt. Harshila Chordiya v. ITO

208 CTR 208High Court2007#23573 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 348,631 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2024.

Sections most often in play

Section 115BBE Section 131 Section 133A Section 69A

Judgments citing Smt. Harshila Chordiya v. ITO

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Kota vs. Nisha Jain, Kota

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed with no orders as to cost

ITA 378/JPR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur05 Aug 2024AY 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Mahendra Gargieya AdvFor Respondent: Shri A.S. Nehra, Addl. CIT-DR fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@

Section 131

…ncome by the assessee, the question of treating the same amount as unexplained money u/s 69A of the Act results in double addition which is not permissible in the eyes of law. 9.3 Reliance is placed on: 9.3.1 Kindly refer Smt. Harshila Chordiya vs. ITO (2008) 208 CTR 208 / 298 ITR 349 (Raj) wherein it was held that the Tribunal has found as a fact that the assessee was receiving money from the customers against which delivery of vehicles was made – such cash deposits are self – explanatory and would not attract S. 68/69A – Therefore, no addition could be made. The relevant extract of the said judgement is reprodu…

Vishnu Realcon Private Limited, Jaipur vs. ITO, Ward 4(1), Jaipur

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes only

ITA 305/JPR/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur08 Feb 2022AY 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Kr. Gogra (CA)For Respondent: Smt. Monisha Choudhary (JCIT)

Section 143(3)Section 40A(3)

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES “B”, JAIPUR Jh ,u-ds-lSuh] mik/;{k ,oa Jh lanhi x®lkÃa] U;kf;d lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: SHRI N.K. SAINI, VICE PRESIDENT & SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 305/JP/2020 Assessment Year: 2012-13 cuke Vishnu Realcon Private Limited, I.T.O., Vs. 18-A, Nemi Nagar Extn., Vaishali Ward 4(1), Nagar, Jaipur. Jaipur. PAN No.: AADCV 3474 D vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Shri Sunil Kr. Gogra (CA) jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by : Smt. Monisha Choudhary (JCIT) lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@ D…

Radhey Construction Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur vs. ITO, Jaipur

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 822/JPR/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur21 Apr 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Or At The Time Of Hearing.”

For Appellant: Shri S.L.Poddar (Advocate)For Respondent: Shri R.A. Verma(Addl.CIT)

Section 143(3)Section 22Section 23Section 40A(3)

…sweep of the section. (ii) Anupam Tele Services vs. Income Tax Officer (2014) 100 DTR 411 (Guj. High Court) Rigours of section 40A(3) are lifted when the identity of the payee is not in doubt and payment is genuine. (iii) Smt. Harshila Chordia Vs. ITO (2007) 208 CTR 208(Raj.) (iv) Kanti Lal Purshottam & Co. vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (1985) 155 ITR 519 (Raj) (v) Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Nikko Auto Ltd. (2002) 256 ITR 476 (P&H) (vi) Janambhumi v. CIT (1997) 141 CTR (Gau) 518: (1997) 225 ITR 517 (Gau): TC S18.2032 In view of the aforesaid facts the addition made by the ld. Assessing Officer u/s 40A(3) de…