Sreelekha Banerjee v. CIT

ITO, Ward, Phalodi vs. M/S Rama Allure LLP, Jodhpur

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: The Date, The Appeal Is Finally Heard.”

…e, it can be used against him by holding that it was a receipt of an income nature. While considering the explanation of the assessee, the Department cannot, however, act unreasonably. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Sreelekha Banerjee V/s CIT (1963) 49 ITR 112 (SC) held that the assessee has a legal obligation to explain the nature and sources of credit. In case, assessee offers an explanation but fails to tender evidence, then the AO is justified in rejecting the explanation and holding that income is from an undisclosed source. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Kale Khan Mohammad Hanif V/s CIT…

Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(1), Raipur vs. Mesers Aryan Builders and Developers Private Limited, Raipur

In the result, both appeal of the revenue and cross objection of the assessee stand dismissed in terms of our observations

Bench: SHRI RAVISH SOOD (Judicial Member), SHRI ARUN KHODPIA (Accountant Member)

…ly saying that the loan M/S. SREELEATHERS creditor companies are paper ITAT/18/2022 (IA NO: companies and the assessee is GA/02/2022) involved in money laundering. The Calcutta High Court relying on the decisions in the case of Sreelekha Banerjee Vs CIT(1963) 49 ITR 112 and other landmark decisions held that where the assessee furnishes full details regarding the creditors, it is up to the department to pursue the matter further to locate those creditors and examine their creditworthiness. 2. ITAT SURAT BENCH- Where assessee company received Deputy Commissioner of share application money and had Income-tax submit…

M/S. Khadi Grammodhyog Pratisthan, Bikaner vs. ADIT, CPC / ITO, Ward-1(2), Bangaluru / Bikaner

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

…how the CIT (A) disbelieved the explanation/statements given by the assessee when both documents are the documents of CPC and converted good proof into no proof. Hon'ble Justice Hidayatullah of the Supreme Court in the case of Sreelekha Banerjee Vs CIT [19631 49 ITR 112 (SC); 120 observed that the Income Tax Department cannot by merely rejecting unreasonably a good explanation, convert good "proof into no proof". Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Uma Charan Shaw & Bros Co Vs CIT 37 ITR 271 has held that the surmises and conjectures, and the conclusion are the result of suspicion which cannot take the place of…

Shri Kuldeep Kumar, Bikaner vs. ITO, Ward-1(4), Bikaner

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteassessment Year : 2010-11 Sh. Kuldeep Kumar S/O Ram Income Tax Officer, Swaroop, Chak-13 Kyd Vs Ward-1(4), Bikaner Khajuwala, Bikaner-3334023 Pan: Brkpk2021B Appellant / Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Sh. Suresh Ojha, Advocate Revenue By Ms. Nidhi Nair, Jcit-Dr Date Of Hearing 09.08.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 10.08.2023 Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) (Nfac) Under Section 250 Of Income Tax Act, 1961 Dated 24.05.2023 Emanating From The Assessment Order Passed Under Section 147 R.W.S. 143(3) Of The Act Dated 21.11.2017. The Grounds Of Appeal Raised By The Assessee Are As Under:- 1. The Order Passed By The Income Tax Officer & Sustained By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Is Illegal Against The Law & Without Any Application Of Mind, Therefore, Is Liable For Quash. Sh. Kuldeep Kumar

…by the assessee during the hearing of appeal are the best evidence in 5 Sh. Kuldeep Kumar itself but the CIT(A) ignore and converted good proof into no proof. Hon'ble Justice Hidayatullah of the Supreme Court in the case of Sreelekha Banerjee Vs CIT [1963] 49 ITR 112 (SC); 120 observed that the Income Tax Department cannot by merely rejecting unreasonably a good explanation, convert good "proof into no proof". Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Uma Charan Shaw & Bros Co Vs CIT 37 ITR 271 has held that the surmises and conjectures, and the conclusion are the result of suspicion which cannot take the place of…

Ankur Agrawal, Indore vs. ITO-5(1), Indore

In the result, all three appeals of two assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, इंदौर "यायपीठ, इंदौर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI B.M. BIYANI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos.215 & 216/Ind/2019 (Assessment Years:2014-15 & 2015-16 ) Smt. Sheela Agrawal, ITO-5(5), 10/1 Ankur Villa, Indore Vs. Dr. R.S Bhandari Marg, Indore (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) PAN: ABTPA 5415 D Shri Ankur Agrawal, ITO-5(5), 10/1 Ankur Villa, Indore Dr. R.S Bhandari Marg, Vs. Indore (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) PAN: ADZPA 2154 M Assessee by Shri Hitesh Chimnani & Yash Kukreja ARs Revenue by Shri…