ACIT, CC-15, NEW DELHI vs. YASH PAL MENDIRATTA, DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and the Cross Objections of the assessees are also dismissed

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarms. Astha Chandra

section 292C, of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Unexplained money (Presumptive addition) - Assessment year 2009- 10 - Assessee sold a property and derived long-term capital gain

ITO, WARD-4(4), GURGAON vs. TRIBHAWAN KUMAR PARNAMI, GURGAON

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal

capital gains; as the case may be, except to the tune of Rs. 23,23,333/- which has already been directed to be assessed under the latter head. It is further clear from a perusal of the case record that the learned Assessing Officer had adopted the sale price of the above said property

DCIT,CENTRAL CIRCLE-30 , NEW DELHI vs. RAJAN SHARMA, DELHI

capital gain taxable in the\nhands of the appellant i.e. Rs.23,33,333/- and the remaining addition of\nRs.3,13,77,600/- is hereby deleted.\"\n25.\nLearned CIT(DR) could hardly dispute that there is no evidence at all\nagainst the assessee indicating him to have either derived any business income or\n31\nITA 2117 to 2120 & 2441/Del/2022 &\nCO Nos.155

DCIT,CENTRAL CIRCLE-30, NEW DELHI vs. RAJAN SHARMA, DELHI

capital gain taxable in the\nhands of the appellant i.e. Rs.23,33,333/- and the remaining addition of\nRs.3,13,77,600/- is hereby deleted.\"\n25.\nLearned CIT(DR) could hardly dispute that there is no evidence at all\nagainst the assessee indicating him to have either derived any business income or\n31\nITA 2117 to 2120 & 2441/Del/2022 &\nCO Nos.155

DCIT, CC-30, NEW DELHI vs. RAJAN SHARMA, NEW DELHI

capital gain taxable in the\nhands of the appellant i.e. Rs.23,33,333/- and the remaining addition of\nRs.3,13,77,600/- is hereby deleted.\"\n25. Learned CIT(DR) could hardly dispute that there is no evidence at all\nagainst the assessee indicating him to have either derived any business income or\n31\nITA 2117 to 2120 & 2441/Del/2022 &\nCO Nos.155

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-30, NEW DELHI vs. RAJAN SHARMA , DELHI

capital gain taxable in the\nhands of the appellant i.e. Rs.23,33,333/- and the remaining addition of\nRs.3,13,77,600/- is hereby deleted.\"\n25.\nLearned CIT(DR) could hardly dispute that there is no evidence at all\nagainst the assessee indicating him to have either derived any business income or\n31\nITA 2117 to 2120 & 2441/Del/2022 &\nCO Nos.155

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-30, NEW DELHI vs. RAJAN SHARMA, DELHI

capital gain taxable in the\nhands of the appellant i.e. Rs.23,33,333/- and the remaining addition of\nRs.3,13,77,600/- is hereby deleted.\"\n25. Learned CIT(DR) could hardly dispute that there is no evidence at all\nagainst the assessee indicating him to have either derived any business income or\n31\nITA 2117 to 2120 & 2441/Del/2022 &\nCO Nos.155

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, NOIDA, NOIDA vs. SARASWATI AMMAL EDUCATION AND CHARITABLE TRUST, CHENNAI

292C and section 132(4A) of the IT Act, 1961 in the\nhands of the Appellant.\n7.\nThat in the facts and circumstances of the case the Ld.\nCommissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in law in\nadjudicating appeal by holding that unaccounted income\nsubjected to tax by the Assessing Officer has accrued or arisen in\nthe hands

SARASWATHI AMMAL EDUCATIONAL AND CHARITABLE TRUST,CHENNAI vs. ACIT CENTRE CIRCLE II, NOIDA

292C and section 132(4A) of the IT Act, 1961 in the\nhands of the Appellant.\n7.\nThat in the facts and circumstances of the case the Ld.\nCommissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in law in\nadjudicating appeal by holding that unaccounted income\nsubjected to tax by the Assessing Officer has accrued or arisen in\nthe hands

SUSHMA YADAV,GURGAON vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-7, DELHI

In the result, Appeal of the Assessees in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singhsumitra Yadav Vs. Dcit B-550, Sushantlok Central Circle-7, Phase-1, Galleria Dlf-Iv Delhi S.O. Gurgaon, Haryana Pan: Ahtpy0138M Appellant Respondent

capital gain’, To discredit the same and to connect assessee with the pseudonymous entries of cash, some evidence or circumstance based on preponderance of probability was required to be shown by Ld. AO, then mere presumption. What entries JBL was making in accounts is not conclusive against the assessee. May be the Gold purchased was not accounted in stock

SUMITRA YADAV,GURGAON vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-7, DELHI

In the result, Appeal of the Assessees in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singhsumitra Yadav Vs. Dcit B-550, Sushantlok Central Circle-7, Phase-1, Galleria Dlf-Iv Delhi S.O. Gurgaon, Haryana Pan: Ahtpy0138M Appellant Respondent

capital gain’, To discredit the same and to connect assessee with the pseudonymous entries of cash, some evidence or circumstance based on preponderance of probability was required to be shown by Ld. AO, then mere presumption. What entries JBL was making in accounts is not conclusive against the assessee. May be the Gold purchased was not accounted in stock

SWAMI SARAN SHARMA HUF,GURGAON vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-7, DELHI

In the result, Appeal of the Assessees in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singhsumitra Yadav Vs. Dcit B-550, Sushantlok Central Circle-7, Phase-1, Galleria Dlf-Iv Delhi S.O. Gurgaon, Haryana Pan: Ahtpy0138M Appellant Respondent

capital gain’, To discredit the same and to connect assessee with the pseudonymous entries of cash, some evidence or circumstance based on preponderance of probability was required to be shown by Ld. AO, then mere presumption. What entries JBL was making in accounts is not conclusive against the assessee. May be the Gold purchased was not accounted in stock

SMT. SUSHMA YADAV,HARYANA vs. DCIT,CENTRAL CIRCLE-7, DELHI

In the result, Appeal of the Assessees in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singhsumitra Yadav Vs. Dcit B-550, Sushantlok Central Circle-7, Phase-1, Galleria Dlf-Iv Delhi S.O. Gurgaon, Haryana Pan: Ahtpy0138M Appellant Respondent

capital gain’, To discredit the same and to connect assessee with the pseudonymous entries of cash, some evidence or circumstance based on preponderance of probability was required to be shown by Ld. AO, then mere presumption. What entries JBL was making in accounts is not conclusive against the assessee. May be the Gold purchased was not accounted in stock

SWAMI SARAN SHARMA HUF,GURGAON vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-7, NEW DELHI

In the result, Appeal of the Assessees in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singhsumitra Yadav Vs. Dcit B-550, Sushantlok Central Circle-7, Phase-1, Galleria Dlf-Iv Delhi S.O. Gurgaon, Haryana Pan: Ahtpy0138M Appellant Respondent

capital gain’, To discredit the same and to connect assessee with the pseudonymous entries of cash, some evidence or circumstance based on preponderance of probability was required to be shown by Ld. AO, then mere presumption. What entries JBL was making in accounts is not conclusive against the assessee. May be the Gold purchased was not accounted in stock

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, , NOIDA vs. SARASWATI AMMAL EDUCATION AND CHARITABLE TRUST, , CHENNAI

Appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal

292C and section 132(4A) of the IT Act, 1961 in the hands of the Appellant. 7. That in the facts and circumstances of the case the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in law in adjudicating appeal by holding that unaccounted income subjected to tax by the Assessing Officer has accrued or arisen in the hands

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, NOIDA vs. SARASWATI AMMAL EDUCATION AND CHARITABLE TRUST, CHENNAI

Appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal

292C and section 132(4A) of the IT Act, 1961 in the hands of the Appellant. 7. That in the facts and circumstances of the case the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in law in adjudicating appeal by holding that unaccounted income subjected to tax by the Assessing Officer has accrued or arisen in the hands

SARASWATHI AMMAL EDUCATIONAL AND CHARITABLE TRUST,CHENNAI vs. ACIT CENTRE CIRCLE II, NOIDA

Appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal

292C and section 132(4A) of the IT Act, 1961 in the hands of the Appellant. 7. That in the facts and circumstances of the case the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in law in adjudicating appeal by holding that unaccounted income subjected to tax by the Assessing Officer has accrued or arisen in the hands

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, NOIDA, NOIDA vs. SARASWATI AMMAL EDUCATION AND CHARITABLE TRUST, CHENNAI

Appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal

292C and section 132(4A) of the IT Act, 1961 in the hands of the Appellant. 7. That in the facts and circumstances of the case the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in law in adjudicating appeal by holding that unaccounted income subjected to tax by the Assessing Officer has accrued or arisen in the hands