Just a moment...

Top
FeedbackReport
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Feedback/Report an Error
Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:
TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
By Case ID:

When case Id is present, search is done only for this

Sort By: ?
Even if Sort by Date is selected, exact match will be shown on the top.
RelevanceDate
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        Note

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        <h1>ITAT Confirms Deletions & Set-Offs in Tax Case: Undisclosed Income, Unexplained Jewellery, Cash Credits</h1> <h3>Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle, Katni Versus Vishwanath Prasad Gupta</h3> Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle, Katni Versus Vishwanath Prasad Gupta - TMI Issues Involved:1. Deletion of addition of Rs. 20 lakhs as undisclosed income.2. Addition of Rs. 13,11,500 on account of unexplained jewellery.3. Deletion of addition of Rs. 48,285 and Rs. 38,018 on account of jewellery belonging to Smt. Smita Gupta and Shri Mukesh Gupta respectively.4. Deletion of addition of Rs. 2 lakhs treating the gift received as unexplained cash credit.5. Deletion of addition of Rs. 4,50,000 on account of unexplained cash credits.6. Deletion of addition of Rs. 18,000 on account of interest paid to cash creditors.7. Allowing set-off of Rs. 5,28,302 from the addition of Rs. 12 lakhs confirmed by the CIT(A).Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:1. Deletion of Addition of Rs. 20 Lakhs as Undisclosed Income:The revenue appealed against the deletion of Rs. 20 lakhs added by the Assessing Officer as undisclosed income. The CIT(A) deleted the addition, verifying that the amount was withdrawn from M/s. Dolphin Marbles Pvt. Ltd. and paid to the assessee. The ITAT confirmed the CIT(A)'s order, noting no evidence that the amount was used elsewhere, thus, no addition was warranted.2. Addition of Rs. 13,11,500 on Account of Unexplained Jewellery:The Assessing Officer added Rs. 13,11,500 as unexplained jewellery in the name of Smt. Saroj Gupta. The CIT(A) deleted the addition, noting that Smt. Saroj Gupta was assessed to tax and the jewellery was explained through purchase bills and past assessments. The ITAT upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, agreeing that any unexplained jewellery should be taxed in Smt. Saroj Gupta's hands, not the assessee's.3. Deletion of Addition of Rs. 48,285 and Rs. 38,018 on Account of Jewellery Belonging to Smt. Smita Gupta and Shri Mukesh Gupta:The Assessing Officer added Rs. 48,285 and Rs. 38,018 for unexplained jewellery belonging to Smt. Smita Gupta and Shri Mukesh Gupta. The CIT(A) deleted these additions, accepting the explanations provided. The ITAT upheld the CIT(A)'s order, noting that the jewellery received during marriage and purchases were adequately explained and supported by evidence.4. Deletion of Addition of Rs. 2 Lakhs Treating the Gift Received as Unexplained Cash Credit:The Assessing Officer added Rs. 2 lakhs as unexplained cash credit, questioning the genuineness of the gift received from Shri Naveen Khera. The CIT(A) deleted the addition, accepting the gift deed and confirmation from the donor. The ITAT upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, noting the absence of evidence that the money was routed back to the assessee.5. Deletion of Addition of Rs. 4,50,000 on Account of Unexplained Cash Credits:The Assessing Officer added Rs. 4,50,000 as unexplained cash credits. The CIT(A) deleted the addition, noting that the creditors were assessed to tax, and the loans were reflected in their balance sheets. The ITAT upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, agreeing that the assessee had discharged the onus of proving the identity, capacity, and genuineness of the transactions.6. Deletion of Addition of Rs. 18,000 on Account of Interest Paid to Cash Creditors:This addition was consequential to the previous issue. Since the ITAT upheld the deletion of Rs. 4,50,000, the deletion of Rs. 18,000 on account of interest paid was also upheld.7. Allowing Set-off of Rs. 5,28,302 from the Addition of Rs. 12 Lakhs Confirmed by the CIT(A):The CIT(A) allowed the set-off of Rs. 5,28,302 against the addition of Rs. 12 lakhs confirmed on account of blank cheques found with the assessee. The ITAT upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, noting that the set-off was justified based on the excess disclosure of income by the assessee.Separate Judgments:The Accountant Member dissented on several issues, particularly on the deletion of Rs. 20 lakhs and the addition of Rs. 2 lakhs as unexplained cash credit. The Third Member agreed with the Vice-President on these issues, confirming the deletion of Rs. 20 lakhs and the gift of Rs. 2 lakhs as explained. The Third Member also upheld the set-off of Rs. 5,28,302 and the deletion of Rs. 4,50,000 and Rs. 18,000.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found