Vijay Trading Co. v. ITO

388 ITR 377High Court2016#899 most cited

What is Vijay Trading Co. v. ITO authority for?

When purchases are found bogus, only the profit element embedded therein, and not the entire purchase value, can be added to the assessee's income.

119

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2018 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Vijay Trading Co v ITO · bogus purchases · entire purchases addition · profit element · gross profit addition · restricted disallowance · Section 37(1) · Section 69B · genuineness of purchases · Gujarat High Court

Issues it is cited on

Judgments citing Vijay Trading Co. v. ITO

INCOME TAX OFFICER, ALIGARH vs. SANJAY SINGH, ALIGARH

The appeal stand dismissed

ITA 182/AGR/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Agra28 Mar 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Satbeer Singh Godara, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.181/Agr/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2018-19) & 2. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.182/Agr/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2018-19) Income-Tax Officer Shri Sanjay Singh 4(1)(1), Aligarh. S/O Sh. Yogendra Singh, बनाम/ V.S. Enterprises, Gali No.1, Vs. Tikonia Nagla Road Sangam Vihar, Aligarh. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Gtrps-3169-E (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : None ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Dr. Arun Kumar Yadav – Ld. Cit/Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 18-02-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 28-03-2025 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1. Aforesaid Appeals By Revenue For Assessment Year (Ay) 2018-19 Arises Out Of Separate Orders Of Learned First Appellate Authority. First, We Take Up Appeal Ita No.181/Agr/2023 Which Arises Out Of An Order Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Nfac [Cit(A)] Dated 29- 09-2023 In The Matter Of An Assessment Framed By Ld. Ao U/S 144 R.W.S. 144B Of The Act Vide Order Dated 22-04-2021. At The Time Of Hearing, None Appeared For Assessee. Therefore, The Appeals Were Heard With The Able Assistance Of Ld. Cit-Dr Who Pleaded For Restoration Of Assessment Order. Upon Perusal Of Case Records, The Appeal Is Disposed-Off As Under.

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Dr. Arun Kumar Yadav – Ld. CIT/DR
Section 144

…ese items could be made on the basis of same books of accounts as held by Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court in the case of Malpani House of Stones vs. CIT (395 ITR 385) as well as the decision of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Vijay Trading Co. vs. ITO (76 Taxmann.com 366). Aggrieved, the revenue is in further appeal before us. 4. From the assessment order, it is quite clear that Ld. AO has rejected the books of accounts and estimated the business income of the assessee. In such a case, separate addition of sundry creditors, opening stock and cash deposit is not warranted since the same are in the course of…

INCOME TAX OFFICER- 4(1)(1) , ALIGARH vs. SANJAY SINGH, ALIGARH

The appeal stand dismissed

ITA 181/AGR/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Agra28 Mar 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Satbeer Singh Godara, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.181/Agr/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2018-19) & 2. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.182/Agr/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2018-19) Income-Tax Officer Shri Sanjay Singh 4(1)(1), Aligarh. S/O Sh. Yogendra Singh, बनाम/ V.S. Enterprises, Gali No.1, Vs. Tikonia Nagla Road Sangam Vihar, Aligarh. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Gtrps-3169-E (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : None ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Dr. Arun Kumar Yadav – Ld. Cit/Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 18-02-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 28-03-2025 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1. Aforesaid Appeals By Revenue For Assessment Year (Ay) 2018-19 Arises Out Of Separate Orders Of Learned First Appellate Authority. First, We Take Up Appeal Ita No.181/Agr/2023 Which Arises Out Of An Order Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Nfac [Cit(A)] Dated 29- 09-2023 In The Matter Of An Assessment Framed By Ld. Ao U/S 144 R.W.S. 144B Of The Act Vide Order Dated 22-04-2021. At The Time Of Hearing, None Appeared For Assessee. Therefore, The Appeals Were Heard With The Able Assistance Of Ld. Cit-Dr Who Pleaded For Restoration Of Assessment Order. Upon Perusal Of Case Records, The Appeal Is Disposed-Off As Under.

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Dr. Arun Kumar Yadav – Ld. CIT/DR
Section 144

…ese items could be made on the basis of same books of accounts as held by Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court in the case of Malpani House of Stones vs. CIT (395 ITR 385) as well as the decision of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Vijay Trading Co. vs. ITO (76 Taxmann.com 366). Aggrieved, the revenue is in further appeal before us. 4. From the assessment order, it is quite clear that Ld. AO has rejected the books of accounts and estimated the business income of the assessee. In such a case, separate addition of sundry creditors, opening stock and cash deposit is not warranted since the same are in the course of…

MOHAMMED TAJ,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T., CC - 3(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1184/KOL/2024[2021-2022]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 Nov 2024AY 2021-2022

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Sanjay Awasthii.T.A. No.1184/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2021-22 Mohammed Taj……….………………………..……….………….…..……Appellant 11, Balmukund Macker Road, Kolkata – 700007. [Pan: Aaccpt0441J] Vs. Dcit, Central Circle-3(1), Kolkata.…....…………..…........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Manish Tiwari, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri A. Kundu, Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : November 12, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : November 20, 2024 Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: The Present Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 28.03.2024 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-21, Kolkata [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. The Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Is An Individual & Filed Its Return Of Income On 26.03.2022 Declaring Total Income Of Rs.38,93,560/- U/S Section 139 Of The Act. Subsequently, A Search & Seizure Operation U/S 132 Of The Act Was Conducted On 13.01.2021 In The Case Of Hospitality Group Of Cases To Which The Assessee Belongs. The Search Operation Extended To The Premises Of The Assessee At 11, Bal Mukund Mackar Road, Khaja House, Barabazar, Kolkata-700007. Following The Search Operation, The Case Of The Assessee Was Centralized With Central Circle-3(1), Kolkata & Subsequently, The Case Was Transferred To The Pr. Cit-13, Kolkata. Consequently, A Notice U/S 143(2) Of The Act Was Issued Which Was Followed By Issuing A Notice U/S 142(1)

Section 132Section 139Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 250Section 69C

…as unexplained, only the profit element embedded in such transaction should be subjected to tax as held by various judicial precedents. The ld. AR in this context has referred to a judgment of the Gujarat High Court in the case of Vijay Trading v. ITO [2016] 388 ITR 377/76 taxmann.com 366. The principle enunciated in such judgment is that when undisclosed purchases of such nature are discovered, it is only the profit embedded in the transaction which can be added to the total income. The Gujarat High Court relied on some of its previous judgments to hold that "not the entire purchase price but only the profit el…

Showing 120 of 119 · Page 1 of 6