Vijay Kumar Talwar v. CIT

334 ITR 287High Court2011#17683 most cited
5

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 344,197 Indian tax judgments — from 2018 to 2020.

Judgments citing Vijay Kumar Talwar v. CIT

Sudhir Jain HUF, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward- 25(1), New Delhi

In the result, all the 04 appeals of different assesses are dismissed

ITA 1741/DEL/2018[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Feb 2020AY 2005-06

Bench: Sh. H.S. Sidhuassessment Year: 2005-06 Smt. Meenu Jain, Ito, 158, Rajdhani Enclave, Vs. Ward : 25 (1), Pitampura, New Delhi – 34 New Delhi (Pan: Aalpj5836E) A N D Assessment Year: 2005-06 Smt. Sushma Jain, Ito, 158, Rajdhani Enclave, Vs. Ward : 25 (1), Pitampura, New Delhi – 34 New Delhi (Pan: Aagpj6675A) A N D Assessment Year: 2005-06 Smt. Daya Jain, Ito, 158, Rajdhani Enclave, Vs. Ward : 25 (1), Pitampura, New Delhi – 34 New Delhi (Pan: Adrpj4409L) A N D Assessment Year: 2005-06 Shri Sudhir Jain (Huf), Ito, 158, Rajdhani Enclave, Vs. Ward : 25 (1), Pitampura, New Delhi – 34 New Delhi (Pan: Aalpj5836E) (Appellants) (Respondents)

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 68

…e identity of the donor, his creditworthiness, relationship with the donee and the occasion are to be proved to be genuine. 2. Balbir Singh Vs CIT P&H High Court 2010 [2010] 8 taxmann.com 202 (Punjab & Haryana)/[2011] 196 Taxman 339 (Punjab & Haryana)/[2011] 334 ITR 287 (Punjab & Haryana) High Court affirmed findings of Assessing Officer and Commissioner (Appeals) holding that gift was not genuine 3. Jaspal Singh Vs. CIT P & H High Court 2006 (2007) 158 Taxman 306 (Punjab & Haryana)/[2007] 290 ITR 306 (Punjab & Haryana)/[2006] 205 CTR 624 (P & H) where assessee claimed to have received certain sum as giffs but…

Daya Jain, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward- 25(1), New Delhi

In the result, all the 04 appeals of different assesses are dismissed

ITA 1740/DEL/2018[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Feb 2020AY 2005-06

Bench: Sh. H.S. Sidhuassessment Year: 2005-06 Smt. Meenu Jain, Ito, 158, Rajdhani Enclave, Vs. Ward : 25 (1), Pitampura, New Delhi – 34 New Delhi (Pan: Aalpj5836E) A N D Assessment Year: 2005-06 Smt. Sushma Jain, Ito, 158, Rajdhani Enclave, Vs. Ward : 25 (1), Pitampura, New Delhi – 34 New Delhi (Pan: Aagpj6675A) A N D Assessment Year: 2005-06 Smt. Daya Jain, Ito, 158, Rajdhani Enclave, Vs. Ward : 25 (1), Pitampura, New Delhi – 34 New Delhi (Pan: Adrpj4409L) A N D Assessment Year: 2005-06 Shri Sudhir Jain (Huf), Ito, 158, Rajdhani Enclave, Vs. Ward : 25 (1), Pitampura, New Delhi – 34 New Delhi (Pan: Aalpj5836E) (Appellants) (Respondents)

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 68

…e identity of the donor, his creditworthiness, relationship with the donee and the occasion are to be proved to be genuine. 2. Balbir Singh Vs CIT P&H High Court 2010 [2010] 8 taxmann.com 202 (Punjab & Haryana)/[2011] 196 Taxman 339 (Punjab & Haryana)/[2011] 334 ITR 287 (Punjab & Haryana) High Court affirmed findings of Assessing Officer and Commissioner (Appeals) holding that gift was not genuine 3. Jaspal Singh Vs. CIT P & H High Court 2006 (2007) 158 Taxman 306 (Punjab & Haryana)/[2007] 290 ITR 306 (Punjab & Haryana)/[2006] 205 CTR 624 (P & H) where assessee claimed to have received certain sum as giffs but…

Sushma Jain, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward- 25(1), New Delhi

In the result, all the 04 appeals of different assesses are dismissed

ITA 1739/DEL/2018[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Feb 2020AY 2005-06

Bench: Sh. H.S. Sidhuassessment Year: 2005-06 Smt. Meenu Jain, Ito, 158, Rajdhani Enclave, Vs. Ward : 25 (1), Pitampura, New Delhi – 34 New Delhi (Pan: Aalpj5836E) A N D Assessment Year: 2005-06 Smt. Sushma Jain, Ito, 158, Rajdhani Enclave, Vs. Ward : 25 (1), Pitampura, New Delhi – 34 New Delhi (Pan: Aagpj6675A) A N D Assessment Year: 2005-06 Smt. Daya Jain, Ito, 158, Rajdhani Enclave, Vs. Ward : 25 (1), Pitampura, New Delhi – 34 New Delhi (Pan: Adrpj4409L) A N D Assessment Year: 2005-06 Shri Sudhir Jain (Huf), Ito, 158, Rajdhani Enclave, Vs. Ward : 25 (1), Pitampura, New Delhi – 34 New Delhi (Pan: Aalpj5836E) (Appellants) (Respondents)

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 68

…e identity of the donor, his creditworthiness, relationship with the donee and the occasion are to be proved to be genuine. 2. Balbir Singh Vs CIT P&H High Court 2010 [2010] 8 taxmann.com 202 (Punjab & Haryana)/[2011] 196 Taxman 339 (Punjab & Haryana)/[2011] 334 ITR 287 (Punjab & Haryana) High Court affirmed findings of Assessing Officer and Commissioner (Appeals) holding that gift was not genuine 3. Jaspal Singh Vs. CIT P & H High Court 2006 (2007) 158 Taxman 306 (Punjab & Haryana)/[2007] 290 ITR 306 (Punjab & Haryana)/[2006] 205 CTR 624 (P & H) where assessee claimed to have received certain sum as giffs but…

Meenu Jain, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward- 25(1), New Delhi

In the result, all the 04 appeals of different assesses are dismissed

ITA 1738/DEL/2018[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Feb 2020AY 2005-06

Bench: Sh. H.S. Sidhuassessment Year: 2005-06 Smt. Meenu Jain, Ito, 158, Rajdhani Enclave, Vs. Ward : 25 (1), Pitampura, New Delhi – 34 New Delhi (Pan: Aalpj5836E) A N D Assessment Year: 2005-06 Smt. Sushma Jain, Ito, 158, Rajdhani Enclave, Vs. Ward : 25 (1), Pitampura, New Delhi – 34 New Delhi (Pan: Aagpj6675A) A N D Assessment Year: 2005-06 Smt. Daya Jain, Ito, 158, Rajdhani Enclave, Vs. Ward : 25 (1), Pitampura, New Delhi – 34 New Delhi (Pan: Adrpj4409L) A N D Assessment Year: 2005-06 Shri Sudhir Jain (Huf), Ito, 158, Rajdhani Enclave, Vs. Ward : 25 (1), Pitampura, New Delhi – 34 New Delhi (Pan: Aalpj5836E) (Appellants) (Respondents)

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 68

…e identity of the donor, his creditworthiness, relationship with the donee and the occasion are to be proved to be genuine. 2. Balbir Singh Vs CIT P&H High Court 2010 [2010] 8 taxmann.com 202 (Punjab & Haryana)/[2011] 196 Taxman 339 (Punjab & Haryana)/[2011] 334 ITR 287 (Punjab & Haryana) High Court affirmed findings of Assessing Officer and Commissioner (Appeals) holding that gift was not genuine 3. Jaspal Singh Vs. CIT P & H High Court 2006 (2007) 158 Taxman 306 (Punjab & Haryana)/[2007] 290 ITR 306 (Punjab & Haryana)/[2006] 205 CTR 624 (P & H) where assessee claimed to have received certain sum as giffs but…

The Assisatant Commissioenr of Income-Tax, Hoshiarpur vs. Sh. Maninder Singh Cheema, Hoshiarpur

In the result, the Revenue’s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 719/ASR/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar31 Jul 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arora & Sh. N. K. Choudhryi.T.A. No. 719/Asr/2013 Assessment Year: 2007-08

For Appellant: Sh. Rajeev K. Gubgotra (D.R.)For Respondent: Sh. Surinder Mahajan, (C.A.)
Section 131Section 143(3)Section 68Section 69

…which is principally a question of fact, as again emphasized time and again by the Apex 6 Maninder Singh Cheema v. Asstt. CIT Court, as recently in Vijay Kumar Talwar v. CIT [2011] 330 ITR 1 (SC); P. Mohankala (supra) (also refer Balbir Singh v. CIT [2011] 334 ITR 287 (P&H)). 4.3 Coming to the facts of the case, we are unable to persuade ourselves to be satisfied with the credits under the reference as proved, or that the AO, in rejecting the assessee’s explanation qua the nature and source thereof, was not acting reasonably, and ought to have been satisfied therewith. To begin with, no confirmation has been…

Vijay Kumar Talwar v. CIT (334 ITR 287) — Cited in 5 Judgments | BharatTax