TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Appeals Allowed for Fresh Consideration: Emphasis on Genuine Transactions and Legal Compliance</h1> <h3>Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Aurangabad Versus Shri. Jethanand M. Jagwani and Shri Gurumukh M. Jagwani C/o Shri Jethanand M. Jagwani M/s. Laxmi Industries</h3> Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Aurangabad Versus Shri. Jethanand M. Jagwani and Shri Gurumukh M. Jagwani C/o Shri Jethanand M. Jagwani ... Issues involved: The Revenue challenged the first appellate orders on the grounds of deleting additions made u/s. 68 of the Act for gifts and loans credited in the books of account.Issue 1 - Gifts under u/s 68 of the Act:The Revenue contested the deletion of additions made on account of gifts in the name of various persons. The assessee claimed to have received gifts from different donors, and the Assessing Officer doubted the genuineness of these gifts. However, the Ld. CIT(A) deleted the additions, stating that the assessee satisfactorily explained the credit with evidence of identity, genuineness, and creditworthiness of the donors. The Tribunal found that the Ld. CIT(A) acted correctly in deleting the additions based on the evidence provided by the assessee.Issue 2 - Loans under u/s 68 of the Act:In the case of Shri Gurumukh Jagwani, the Revenue challenged the deletion of additions made on account of loans credited in the books of account. The assessee claimed to have received loans from various creditors, and the genuineness of these transactions was questioned by the Assessing Officer. However, the Ld. CIT(A) deleted the additions, stating that the assessee satisfactorily explained the credit with evidence of identity, genuineness, and creditworthiness of the creditors. The Tribunal upheld the decision of the Ld. CIT(A) in deleting the additions based on the evidence provided by the assessee.Separate Judgement:In a separate judgment involving Shri Brijlal M. Jagwani and Smt. Anita B. Jagwani, the Tribunal set aside the matter to the file of the Ld CIT(A) for fresh consideration. The Tribunal highlighted the need for proper examination of evidence and legal aspects related to gifts under u/s 68 of the Act. The Tribunal emphasized the importance of fulfilling legal requirements and addressing concerns raised by the Assessing Officer to establish the genuineness of transactions. The Tribunal directed a reevaluation of the issue to ensure fairness and compliance with legal procedures.Conclusion:The Tribunal allowed the appeals for statistical purposes, setting aside the issues of gifts and loans for fresh consideration by the Ld. CIT(A) based on the directions provided in the separate judgment. The Tribunal emphasized the importance of establishing the genuineness of transactions and fulfilling legal requirements under u/s 68 of the Act.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
