Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

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 / NCLT & Others
  • 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
In Favour Of: New
---- In Favour Of ----
  • ---- In Favour Of ----
  • Assessee
  • In favour of Assessee
  • Partly in favour of Assessee
  • Revenue
  • In favour of Revenue
  • Partly in favour of Revenue
  • Appellant / Petitioner
  • In favour of Appellant
  • In favour of Petitioner
  • In favour of Respondent
  • Partly in favour of Appellant
  • Partly in favour of Petitioner
  • Others
  • Neutral (alternate remedy)
  • Neutral (Others)
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
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court.
Eg: Madhya Pradesh, Orissa, Hyderabad

Use comma for multiple locations.

AY/FY: New?
Enter only the year or year range (e.g., 2025, 2025–26, or 2025–2026).
Include Word: ?
Searches for this word in Main (Whole) Text
Exclude Word: ?
This word will not be present in Main (Whole) Text
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:

---------------- For section wise search only -----------------


Statute Type: ?
This filter alone wont work. 1st select a law > statute > section from below filter
New
---- All Statutes----
  • ---- All Statutes ----
  • Select the law first, to see the statutes list
Sections: ?
Select a statute to see the list of sections here
New
---- All Sections ----
  • ---- All Sections ----
  • Select the statute first, to see the sections list

Accuracy Level ~ 90%



TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2026
  • 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
Sort By: ?
In Sort By 'Default', exact matches for text search are shown at the top, followed by the remaining results in their regular order.
RelevanceDefaultDate
TMI Citation
    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
      Show All SummariesHide All Summaries
      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

        whatsappJoin Channel
        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        2018 (6) TMI 276 - AT - Income Tax

        📋
        Contents
        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

        ITAT rules in favor of assessee, dismisses Revenue's appeal on unexplained gold stock. Evidence crucial. The ITAT allowed the assessee's appeal, directing the deletion of the addition of Rs. 72,13,000 on account of gifts. The Revenue's appeal regarding the ...
                        Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.

                            ITAT rules in favor of assessee, dismisses Revenue's appeal on unexplained gold stock. Evidence crucial.

                            The ITAT allowed the assessee's appeal, directing the deletion of the addition of Rs. 72,13,000 on account of gifts. The Revenue's appeal regarding the addition of Rs. 54,76,827 on account of unexplained stock of gold was dismissed, upholding the deletion. The judgment stressed the necessity of supporting additions with solid evidence and accurately understanding the facts presented in the case.




                            Issues Involved:
                            1. Addition of Rs. 72,13,000 on account of gifts.
                            2. Deletion of addition of Rs. 54,76,827 on account of unexplained stock of gold.

                            Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

                            1. Addition of Rs. 72,13,000 on account of gifts:

                            The primary issue in the assessee's appeal was the confirmation of the addition of Rs. 72,13,000 by the CIT(A) as made by the AO on account of gifts. The facts reveal that during a survey conducted on 23.11.2004, gift declarations/deeds from various donors were found at the assessee's premises. The AO issued show cause notices and summons to the donors, but the responses were either non-existent or inadequate. Consequently, the AO added the amount as unexplained income. The CIT(A) upheld this addition, reasoning that the onus was on the assessee to prove the transactions were not related to him since the documents were found on his premises. The CIT(A) referenced the Supreme Court's decision in CIT vs Durga Prasad More and Sumati Dayal vs CIT, emphasizing the need to consider surrounding circumstances and human probabilities.

                            However, the ITAT found that the assessee had provided sufficient evidence, including names and addresses of donees and donors, who were income tax assessees. The AO had issued summons u/s. 131, and the donees had responded with necessary documents. The ITAT concluded that the addition was unwarranted as the Revenue failed to prove that the money belonged to the assessee or was received by him. Thus, the ITAT directed the AO to delete the addition.

                            2. Deletion of addition of Rs. 54,76,827 on account of unexplained stock of gold:

                            In the Revenue's appeal, the issue was the deletion of an addition of Rs. 54,76,827 by the CIT(A) on account of unexplained stock of gold. During the survey, the AO found a discrepancy in the stock of gold, with 8862.18 gms recorded as belonging to customers but only 5935.37 gms physically found. The AO added the value of the alleged unexplained stock to the assessee's income, claiming the reconciliation provided by the assessee was incorrect.

                            The CIT(A) deleted the addition, noting that the AO had taken the wrong stock figure and failed to properly verify the inventories and statements recorded during the survey. The CIT(A) found that the actual discrepancy was 5935.37 gms, not 8862.18 gms, and that the stock belonged to customers, as corroborated by statements from third parties. The CIT(A) concluded that the AO's findings were not substantiated by evidence.

                            The ITAT upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, agreeing that the AO had confused the stock figures and failed to appreciate the reconciliation provided by the assessee. The ITAT found no reason to interfere with the CIT(A)'s well-reasoned order based on correct appreciation of facts.

                            Conclusion:

                            The ITAT allowed the assessee's appeal, directing the deletion of the Rs. 72,13,000 addition on account of gifts, and dismissed the Revenue's appeal, upholding the deletion of the Rs. 54,76,827 addition on account of unexplained stock of gold. The judgment emphasized the importance of substantiating additions with concrete evidence and correctly appreciating the facts on record.
                            Full Summary is available for active users!
                            Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.

                            Topics

                            ActsIncome Tax
                            No Records Found