CHANDRA KUMAR JAIN,DAMOH vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, DAMOH
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed
ITA 70/JAB/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur21 May 2025AY 2011-12
Bench: Sh. Kul Bharat & Sh. Nikhil Choudharya.Y. 2011-12 Chandra Kumar Jain, Vs. Nfac, Delhi, (Jurisdiction Prop. M/S Chandra & Sons, 14, 121 Officer, Ito, Damoh, M.P. Kirana Merchant, Bakoli Kirana Line, Damoh, M.P. Pan:Acjpj7460N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Sh. Dhiraj Ghai, Fca Revenue By: Sh. Alok Bhura, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 19.05.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 21.05.2025 O R D E R Per Nikhil Choudhary, A.M. This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A), Nfac Dated 29.12.2023 Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Dismissing The Appeal Of The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ito, Ward, Damoh Dated 12.12.2018. The Grounds Of Appeal Are As Under:- “1. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Confirming The Order Of Ld. Ao Being Based On Third Party'S Statements Without Allowing Their Cross Verification & Hence Addition Made Are Against Law & Natural Justice As Has Been Held In The Case Of C. Vasantlal & Co. V. Cit [1962] 45 Itr 206 By Supreme Court. Hence Additions Of Rs 4,65,700/-And Rs 10,525,/- May Kindly Be Deleted. 2. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, Ld Cit (A) Erred In Confirming The Additions Made By Ao Of Rs. 4,76,225/-Without Considering The Fact That Bill Issued By M/S Narmada Sugar Pvt Ltd Narsinghpur.As Considered To Be That Of Assessee Was Not In Assessee Name & Hence Addition Was Based On Mere Assumptions & Presumptions.
For Appellant: Sh. Dhiraj Ghai, FCAFor Respondent: Sh. Alok Bhura, Sr. DR
Section 147Section 250Section 69
bogus purchase of Rs.4,65,700/- without considering the fact that purchase was not in name of assessee
