ACIT CC-6(1), Mumbai, Bkc vs. Sharad Nagnath Rajbhoj, Pune
In the result, the appeal by the Revenue is dismissed
ITA 5661/MUM/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jan 2025AY 2021-22
Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiyashri Sandeep Singh Karhailacit, Central Circle – 6(1), Room No.445, 4Th Floor, Bkc, Mumbai – 400051 ............... Appellant Pan : Abapr6416N V/S Sharad Nagnath Rajbhoj, 502 Dsk Haiyali Phase-Ii, ……………… Respondent Modi Baug, Shivaji Nagar, Pune - 411005 Assessee By : Shri Rashmikant Modi Ms. Ketki Rajshirke Revenue By : Shri Dr. Kishor Dhule, Cit-Dr
For Appellant: Shri Rashmikant ModiFor Respondent: Shri Dr. Kishor Dhule, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 69ASection 69C
…hi) of 2012, dated 6.12.2013] also held that presumption u/s 132(4A) or 292C of the Act could be taken only in the case of a person from whose possession the document or material has been found. 7.3.5 In the case of Straptex (India) (P.) Ltd. v Dy. CIT [2003] 84 ITD 320 (Mum- Trib.), the Hon'ble Mumbai ITAT also held that the presumption u/s 132(4A) is only in respect of the person in whose possession the books or documents are found. While utilizing such documents in the case of any other person, there could not be any presumption about the correctness of such books of accounts. 7.3.6 Also, the Hon'ble Kolkata I…