Sri Ganesh Trading Company v. CIT

257 CTR 159High Court2013#2031 most cited

What is Sri Ganesh Trading Company v. CIT authority for?

An addition to income based solely on a statement recorded under Section 132(4) during a search, especially if made under pressure or later retracted, is not sustainable without corroborative evidence. Similarly, additions based on uncorroborated loose papers or unaccounted cash receipts lacking corresponding assets are unsustainable.

56

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Sri Ganesh Trading Company v. CIT · Section 132(4) · Section 132 · retraction of statement · uncorroborated evidence · addition to income · search and seizure assessment · undue pressure · loose papers · unexplained cash · voluntary admission

Sections most often in play

Section 132(4)Section 132Section 143(3)Section 147Section 37(1)Section 69ASection 133(6)Section 153A

Issues it is cited on

gaarsection 132(1)(a)section 181section 65(b)section 194qvoluntary admissioncash found during searchsection 158bb(1)retraction of statementsection 193section 158b(b)section 65b(4)

Judgments citing Sri Ganesh Trading Company v. CIT

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Mysuru vs. Kudlur Ramaswamy Sathyanarayana, Mysuru

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue is partly allowed for

ITA 1130/BANG/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Nov 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri Keshav Dubey**

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 153A

…* [2008] 174 Taxman 466/[2010] 328 ITR 411 (Guj.); *CIT* v. *Omprakash K. Jain* [2009] 178 Taxman 179/[2010] 322 ITR 362 (Bom.); *Mehta Parikh & Co.* v. *CIT* [1956] 30 ITR 181 (SC); *Shree Ganesh Trading Co.* v. *CIT* [2013] 30 taxmann.com 170/214 Taxman 262/257 CTR 159 (Jhar.); *CIT* v. *Shri Ramdas Motor Transport Ltd.* [2015] 55 taxmann.com 176/230 Taxman 187 (A.P.) *Chetnaben J. Shah* v. *ITO* [2017] 79 taxmann.com 328/[2016] 288 CTR 579 (Guj.) - **10.** We have given our anxious consideration to rival submissions and carefully perused the material on record. - **11.** Statement of the assessee under sectio…

Rajesh Products, Tonk, Rajasthan vs. ACIT, Jaipur

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 626/JPR/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur18 Jul 2024AY 2016-17
For Appellant: Shri Mahesh Jain, CA (Th. V.C)For Respondent: Shri Bhanwar Singh Ratnu, (CIT-DR)
Section 132(1)Section 132(4)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…(Gujarat): Commissioner of Income Tax, Central-ll, Mumbai Vs. Omprakash K. Jain. (2009) 178 Taxman 179 (Bombay); Mehta Parikh & Co. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, (1956) 30 (TR 181 (SC), Shree Ganesh Trading Co Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax. Dhanbad, (2013) 257 CTR 159 (Jharkhand), Commissioner of Income Tax Karnataka Vs. Shri Ramdas Motor Transport Ltd. (2015) 230 Taxman 187 (Andhra Pradesh); Chetnaben J. Shah Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward10(3), (2016) 288 CTR 579 (Gujarat)" (Emphasis Supplied) The Hon'ble Rajasthan High Court in this case further held as under, "In view of the law discussed above, it must be h…

Mohammed Ibrabim Mohideen, Kerala vs. Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Mangaluru

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA

ITA 486/BANG/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Jul 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Smt. Sheetal Borkar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri D.K. Mishra, D.R
Section 153ASection 69B

…ets with reference to unaccounted cash receipt of Rs.4,93,05,000/- was brought on record. In such circumstances, we are not in a position to sustain this addition. For this proposition, we rely on the following judgement: a) Sri Ganesh Trading Company Vs. CIT 257 CTR 159 (Jharkhand) 3.9 In the case of CIT Vs. Layer Exports Pvt. Ltd. reported in 53 ITR (Trib) 416 (Mum), wherein held that “loose papers found during the course of search and after considering the relevant facts held that no addition could be made simply on the basis of uncorroborated noting in loose paper found during the course of search action beca…

Mohammed Ibrahim Mohideen, Kerala vs. Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Mangalore

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA

ITA 466/BANG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Jul 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Smt. Sheetal Borkar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri D.K. Mishra, D.R
Section 153ASection 69B

…ets with reference to unaccounted cash receipt of Rs.4,93,05,000/- was brought on record. In such circumstances, we are not in a position to sustain this addition. For this proposition, we rely on the following judgement: a) Sri Ganesh Trading Company Vs. CIT 257 CTR 159 (Jharkhand) 3.9 In the case of CIT Vs. Layer Exports Pvt. Ltd. reported in 53 ITR (Trib) 416 (Mum), wherein held that “loose papers found during the course of search and after considering the relevant facts held that no addition could be made simply on the basis of uncorroborated noting in loose paper found during the course of search action beca…

Mohammed Ibrahim Mohideen, Kerala vs. Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Mangalore

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA

ITA 464/BANG/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Jul 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Smt. Sheetal Borkar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri D.K. Mishra, D.R
Section 153ASection 69B

…ets with reference to unaccounted cash receipt of Rs.4,93,05,000/- was brought on record. In such circumstances, we are not in a position to sustain this addition. For this proposition, we rely on the following judgement: a) Sri Ganesh Trading Company Vs. CIT 257 CTR 159 (Jharkhand) 3.9 In the case of CIT Vs. Layer Exports Pvt. Ltd. reported in 53 ITR (Trib) 416 (Mum), wherein held that “loose papers found during the course of search and after considering the relevant facts held that no addition could be made simply on the basis of uncorroborated noting in loose paper found during the course of search action beca…

Mohammed Ibrahim Mohideen, Kerala vs. Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Mangalore

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA

ITA 463/BANG/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Jul 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Smt. Sheetal Borkar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri D.K. Mishra, D.R
Section 153ASection 69B

…ets with reference to unaccounted cash receipt of Rs.4,93,05,000/- was brought on record. In such circumstances, we are not in a position to sustain this addition. For this proposition, we rely on the following judgement: a) Sri Ganesh Trading Company Vs. CIT 257 CTR 159 (Jharkhand) 3.9 In the case of CIT Vs. Layer Exports Pvt. Ltd. reported in 53 ITR (Trib) 416 (Mum), wherein held that “loose papers found during the course of search and after considering the relevant facts held that no addition could be made simply on the basis of uncorroborated noting in loose paper found during the course of search action beca…

M/S. Hindusthan Bawa Builders, Mangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Mangalore

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 271/BANG/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore04 Jul 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav

For Appellant: Smt. Sheetal Borkar, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. Neha Sahay, D.R
Section 153CSection 69B

…ITA Nos.268 to 271/Bang/2024 M/s. Hindusthan Bawa Builders, Mangalore IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A’’ BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI PRAKASH CHAND YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos.268 to 271/Bang/2024 Assessment Years: 2014-15, 2016-17, 2017-18 & 2018-19 respectively M/s. Hindusthan Bawa Builders University Road, Smart City Thokkottu ACIT Mangalore Vs. Central Circle-2 Karnataka 575 017 Mangalore PAN NO : AAHFH2588R APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : Smt. Sheetal Borkar, A.R. Respondent by : Smt. Neha Sahay, D.R. Date of Hearing : 21.06.2024 Date of Pron…

M/S. Hindusthan Bawa Builders, Mangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Mangalore

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 270/BANG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore04 Jul 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav

For Appellant: Smt. Sheetal Borkar, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. Neha Sahay, D.R
Section 153CSection 69B

…ITA Nos.268 to 271/Bang/2024 M/s. Hindusthan Bawa Builders, Mangalore IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A’’ BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI PRAKASH CHAND YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos.268 to 271/Bang/2024 Assessment Years: 2014-15, 2016-17, 2017-18 & 2018-19 respectively M/s. Hindusthan Bawa Builders University Road, Smart City Thokkottu ACIT Mangalore Vs. Central Circle-2 Karnataka 575 017 Mangalore PAN NO : AAHFH2588R APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : Smt. Sheetal Borkar, A.R. Respondent by : Smt. Neha Sahay, D.R. Date of Hearing : 21.06.2024 Date of Pron…

M/S. Hindusthan Bawa Builders, Mangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Mangalore

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 269/BANG/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore04 Jul 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav

For Appellant: Smt. Sheetal Borkar, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. Neha Sahay, D.R
Section 153CSection 69B

…ITA Nos.268 to 271/Bang/2024 M/s. Hindusthan Bawa Builders, Mangalore IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A’’ BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI PRAKASH CHAND YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos.268 to 271/Bang/2024 Assessment Years: 2014-15, 2016-17, 2017-18 & 2018-19 respectively M/s. Hindusthan Bawa Builders University Road, Smart City Thokkottu ACIT Mangalore Vs. Central Circle-2 Karnataka 575 017 Mangalore PAN NO : AAHFH2588R APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : Smt. Sheetal Borkar, A.R. Respondent by : Smt. Neha Sahay, D.R. Date of Hearing : 21.06.2024 Date of Pron…

M/S. Hindusthan Bawa Builders, Mangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Mangalore

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 268/BANG/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore04 Jul 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav

For Appellant: Smt. Sheetal Borkar, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. Neha Sahay, D.R
Section 153CSection 69B

…ITA Nos.268 to 271/Bang/2024 M/s. Hindusthan Bawa Builders, Mangalore IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A’’ BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI PRAKASH CHAND YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos.268 to 271/Bang/2024 Assessment Years: 2014-15, 2016-17, 2017-18 & 2018-19 respectively M/s. Hindusthan Bawa Builders University Road, Smart City Thokkottu ACIT Mangalore Vs. Central Circle-2 Karnataka 575 017 Mangalore PAN NO : AAHFH2588R APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : Smt. Sheetal Borkar, A.R. Respondent by : Smt. Neha Sahay, D.R. Date of Hearing : 21.06.2024 Date of Pron…

Mr. Abdul Khader Kodi, Kasargod, Karnataka vs. Mr. C. Vijay Jayan, Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Mangaluru

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 638/BANG/2023[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Mar 2024AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiita Nos.636 To 638/Bang/2023 Assessment Years: 2016-17 To 2018-19 Mr. Abdul Khader Kodi Darul Huda, Near Salafi Masjid Kunjathur Via Dcit Manjeshwar Central Circle-2 Vs. Kasargod 671 323 Mangaluru Karnataka Pan No : Alhpk5340F Appellant Respondent Appellant By : Shri Ravishankar S.V., A.R. Respondent By : Shri G. Manoj Kumar, D.R. Date Of Hearing : 01.02.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 22.03.2024 O R D E R Per Chandra Poojari: These Appeals By Assessee Are Directed By Different Orders Of Nfac For The Assessment Years 2016-17 To 2018-19 Having Common Date Dated 23.5.2022. 2. The Grounds Raised By The Assessee In All These Appeals Are Common In Nature, Except Change In Figures. We Consider Grounds In Ita No.636/Bang/2023, Which Reads As Follows: 1. The Learned Cit(A)-2, Panaji Erred In Passing The Order In The Manner He Did. 2. The Ld. Cit(A)-2, Panaji Erred In Upholding The Additions Made By The Assessing Officer Amounting To Rs.6,25,000 As Undisclosed Business Income & Rs.1,99,40,000 As Unexplained Investments Under Section 68 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961, Which Was Purely On Assumptions & Presumptions Based On The Loose Sheet Found At The Time Of Search.

For Appellant: Shri Ravishankar S.V., A.RFor Respondent: Shri G. Manoj Kumar, D.R
Section 132Section 144Section 153ASection 34Section 68Section 69Section 69B

…ITA Nos.636 to 638/Bang/2023 Mr. Abdul Khader Kodi, Kasargod IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B’’ BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos.636 to 638/Bang/2023 Assessment Years: 2016-17 to 2018-19 Mr. Abdul Khader Kodi Darul Huda, Near Salafi Masjid Kunjathur Via DCIT Manjeshwar Central Circle-2 Vs. Kasargod 671 323 Mangaluru Karnataka PAN NO : ALHPK5340F APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : Shri Ravishankar S.V., A.R. Respondent by : Shri G. Manoj Kumar, D.R. Date of Hearing : 01.02.2024 Date of Pronouncement : 22.03.2024 O R D E R PER…

Mr. Abdul Khader Kodi, Kasargod, Karnataka vs. Mr. C. Vinod Jayan, Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Mangalore

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 637/BANG/2023[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Mar 2024AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiita Nos.636 To 638/Bang/2023 Assessment Years: 2016-17 To 2018-19 Mr. Abdul Khader Kodi Darul Huda, Near Salafi Masjid Kunjathur Via Dcit Manjeshwar Central Circle-2 Vs. Kasargod 671 323 Mangaluru Karnataka Pan No : Alhpk5340F Appellant Respondent Appellant By : Shri Ravishankar S.V., A.R. Respondent By : Shri G. Manoj Kumar, D.R. Date Of Hearing : 01.02.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 22.03.2024 O R D E R Per Chandra Poojari: These Appeals By Assessee Are Directed By Different Orders Of Nfac For The Assessment Years 2016-17 To 2018-19 Having Common Date Dated 23.5.2022. 2. The Grounds Raised By The Assessee In All These Appeals Are Common In Nature, Except Change In Figures. We Consider Grounds In Ita No.636/Bang/2023, Which Reads As Follows: 1. The Learned Cit(A)-2, Panaji Erred In Passing The Order In The Manner He Did. 2. The Ld. Cit(A)-2, Panaji Erred In Upholding The Additions Made By The Assessing Officer Amounting To Rs.6,25,000 As Undisclosed Business Income & Rs.1,99,40,000 As Unexplained Investments Under Section 68 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961, Which Was Purely On Assumptions & Presumptions Based On The Loose Sheet Found At The Time Of Search.

For Appellant: Shri Ravishankar S.V., A.RFor Respondent: Shri G. Manoj Kumar, D.R
Section 132Section 144Section 153ASection 34Section 68Section 69Section 69B

…ITA Nos.636 to 638/Bang/2023 Mr. Abdul Khader Kodi, Kasargod IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B’’ BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos.636 to 638/Bang/2023 Assessment Years: 2016-17 to 2018-19 Mr. Abdul Khader Kodi Darul Huda, Near Salafi Masjid Kunjathur Via DCIT Manjeshwar Central Circle-2 Vs. Kasargod 671 323 Mangaluru Karnataka PAN NO : ALHPK5340F APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : Shri Ravishankar S.V., A.R. Respondent by : Shri G. Manoj Kumar, D.R. Date of Hearing : 01.02.2024 Date of Pronouncement : 22.03.2024 O R D E R PER…

Mr. Abdul Khader Kodi, Kasargod, Karnataka vs. Mr. C. Vinod Jayan, Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Mangalore

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 636/BANG/2023[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Mar 2024AY 2016-2017

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiita Nos.636 To 638/Bang/2023 Assessment Years: 2016-17 To 2018-19 Mr. Abdul Khader Kodi Darul Huda, Near Salafi Masjid Kunjathur Via Dcit Manjeshwar Central Circle-2 Vs. Kasargod 671 323 Mangaluru Karnataka Pan No : Alhpk5340F Appellant Respondent Appellant By : Shri Ravishankar S.V., A.R. Respondent By : Shri G. Manoj Kumar, D.R. Date Of Hearing : 01.02.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 22.03.2024 O R D E R Per Chandra Poojari: These Appeals By Assessee Are Directed By Different Orders Of Nfac For The Assessment Years 2016-17 To 2018-19 Having Common Date Dated 23.5.2022. 2. The Grounds Raised By The Assessee In All These Appeals Are Common In Nature, Except Change In Figures. We Consider Grounds In Ita No.636/Bang/2023, Which Reads As Follows: 1. The Learned Cit(A)-2, Panaji Erred In Passing The Order In The Manner He Did. 2. The Ld. Cit(A)-2, Panaji Erred In Upholding The Additions Made By The Assessing Officer Amounting To Rs.6,25,000 As Undisclosed Business Income & Rs.1,99,40,000 As Unexplained Investments Under Section 68 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961, Which Was Purely On Assumptions & Presumptions Based On The Loose Sheet Found At The Time Of Search.

For Appellant: Shri Ravishankar S.V., A.RFor Respondent: Shri G. Manoj Kumar, D.R
Section 132Section 144Section 153ASection 34Section 68Section 69Section 69B

…ITA Nos.636 to 638/Bang/2023 Mr. Abdul Khader Kodi, Kasargod IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B’’ BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos.636 to 638/Bang/2023 Assessment Years: 2016-17 to 2018-19 Mr. Abdul Khader Kodi Darul Huda, Near Salafi Masjid Kunjathur Via DCIT Manjeshwar Central Circle-2 Vs. Kasargod 671 323 Mangaluru Karnataka PAN NO : ALHPK5340F APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : Shri Ravishankar S.V., A.R. Respondent by : Shri G. Manoj Kumar, D.R. Date of Hearing : 01.02.2024 Date of Pronouncement : 22.03.2024 O R D E R PER…

M/S. Shivangi Oils Pvt. Ltd., Shahdol vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (Central), Jabalpur

In the result, Appeal of the Assessee in ITA No

ITA 8/JAB/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur22 Dec 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.

Section 132(1)Section 132(4)Section 153ASection 234B

…1 ITA No. 08 & 21/Jab/2018 Shivangi Oils Mills Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ACIT IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL JABALPUR BENCH, JABALPUR BEFORE DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S., JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No.08/JAB/2018 Assessment Year:2015-16 M/s Shivangi Oils Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Dy. C.I.T., Opp. Railway Station, Burhar, Jabalpur. Distt. Shahdol. PAN:AAHCS1774M (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A. No.21/JAB/2018 Assessment Year:2015-16 A.C.I.T., Vs. M/s Shivangi Oil Pvt. Ltd., Central, Plot No.18,19,32 & 33, Sector- Jabalpur. B, Industrial Area, Sirgitti, Bilaspur (C.G.) PAN:AACHCS1774M Assessee by Shri…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (Central), Jabalpur vs. M/S. Shivangi Oil Pvt. Ltd., Shahdol

In the result, Appeal of the Assessee in ITA No

ITA 21/JAB/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur22 Dec 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.

Section 132(1)Section 132(4)Section 153ASection 234B

…1 ITA No. 08 & 21/Jab/2018 Shivangi Oils Mills Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ACIT IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL JABALPUR BENCH, JABALPUR BEFORE DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S., JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No.08/JAB/2018 Assessment Year:2015-16 M/s Shivangi Oils Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Dy. C.I.T., Opp. Railway Station, Burhar, Jabalpur. Distt. Shahdol. PAN:AAHCS1774M (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A. No.21/JAB/2018 Assessment Year:2015-16 A.C.I.T., Vs. M/s Shivangi Oil Pvt. Ltd., Central, Plot No.18,19,32 & 33, Sector- Jabalpur. B, Industrial Area, Sirgitti, Bilaspur (C.G.) PAN:AACHCS1774M Assessee by Shri…

Emkay Hindustan Infrastructure, Mangaluru vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle - 2, Mangaluru

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 983/BANG/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 Jun 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Smt. Sheetal Borkar, A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, D.R
Section 131Section 132Section 132(4)

…ets with reference to unaccounted cash receipt of Rs.4,93,05,000/- was brought on record. In such circumstances, we are not in a position to sustain this addition. For this proposition, we rely on the following judgement: a) Sri Ganesh Trading Company Vs. CIT 257 CTR 159 (Jharkhand) 3.9 In the case of CIT Vs. Layer Exports Pvt. Ltd. reported in 53 ITR (Trib) 416 (Mum), wherein held that “loose papers found during the course of search and after considering the relevant facts held that no addition could be made simply on the basis of uncorroborated noting in loose paper found during the course of search action beca…

Emkay Hindustan Infrastructure, Mangaluru vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle - 2, Mangaluru

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 982/BANG/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 Jun 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Smt. Sheetal Borkar, A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, D.R
Section 131Section 132Section 132(4)

…ets with reference to unaccounted cash receipt of Rs.4,93,05,000/- was brought on record. In such circumstances, we are not in a position to sustain this addition. For this proposition, we rely on the following judgement: a) Sri Ganesh Trading Company Vs. CIT 257 CTR 159 (Jharkhand) 3.9 In the case of CIT Vs. Layer Exports Pvt. Ltd. reported in 53 ITR (Trib) 416 (Mum), wherein held that “loose papers found during the course of search and after considering the relevant facts held that no addition could be made simply on the basis of uncorroborated noting in loose paper found during the course of search action beca…

Emkay Hindustan Infrastructure, Mangaluru vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle - 2, Mangaluru

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 981/BANG/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 Jun 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Smt. Sheetal Borkar, A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, D.R
Section 131Section 132Section 132(4)

…ets with reference to unaccounted cash receipt of Rs.4,93,05,000/- was brought on record. In such circumstances, we are not in a position to sustain this addition. For this proposition, we rely on the following judgement: a) Sri Ganesh Trading Company Vs. CIT 257 CTR 159 (Jharkhand) 3.9 In the case of CIT Vs. Layer Exports Pvt. Ltd. reported in 53 ITR (Trib) 416 (Mum), wherein held that “loose papers found during the course of search and after considering the relevant facts held that no addition could be made simply on the basis of uncorroborated noting in loose paper found during the course of search action beca…

Emkay Hindustan Infrastructure, Mangaluru vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle - 2, Mangaluru

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 980/BANG/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 Jun 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Smt. Sheetal Borkar, A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, D.R
Section 131Section 132Section 132(4)

…ets with reference to unaccounted cash receipt of Rs.4,93,05,000/- was brought on record. In such circumstances, we are not in a position to sustain this addition. For this proposition, we rely on the following judgement: a) Sri Ganesh Trading Company Vs. CIT 257 CTR 159 (Jharkhand) 3.9 In the case of CIT Vs. Layer Exports Pvt. Ltd. reported in 53 ITR (Trib) 416 (Mum), wherein held that “loose papers found during the course of search and after considering the relevant facts held that no addition could be made simply on the basis of uncorroborated noting in loose paper found during the course of search action beca…

Emkay Hindustan Infrastructure, Mangaluru vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle - 2, Mangaluru

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 979/BANG/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 Jun 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Smt. Sheetal Borkar, A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, D.R
Section 131Section 132Section 132(4)

…ets with reference to unaccounted cash receipt of Rs.4,93,05,000/- was brought on record. In such circumstances, we are not in a position to sustain this addition. For this proposition, we rely on the following judgement: a) Sri Ganesh Trading Company Vs. CIT 257 CTR 159 (Jharkhand) 3.9 In the case of CIT Vs. Layer Exports Pvt. Ltd. reported in 53 ITR (Trib) 416 (Mum), wherein held that “loose papers found during the course of search and after considering the relevant facts held that no addition could be made simply on the basis of uncorroborated noting in loose paper found during the course of search action beca…