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.
Include Word: ?
Searches for this word in Main (Whole) Text
Exclude Word: ?
This word will not be present in Main (Whole) Text
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:
RelevanceDefaultDate
    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

        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        📋
        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

        <h1>Tribunal rules in favor of assessee, directing deletion of additions for 3 years</h1> <h3>Abhay Kumar Bharamgouda Patil Versus Assistant Commissioner Income Tax, Circle-1, Belagavi</h3> The Tribunal ruled in favor of the assessee, directing the AO to delete the impugned additions for all three years under consideration. The Tribunal found ... Addition towards undisclosed income relating to alleged deposits made in all the three years under consideration in a co-operative society - Held that:- The manner of repayment of money, if any, has also not been examined. Since the deposits do not stand in the name of the assessee, effectively the assessee will not have control over the deposits. However, in respect of loan taken, the borrowers would be liable to repay the loans, since the society/bank can always initiate legal action against the borrowers for recovery of loans. A prudent man cannot be expected to enter into such kind of deals. The loans taken through accounting channels can be repaid only through accounting channels only. We have noticed that the loans taken by the relatives have been repaid by them. Neither Shri S.K. Tardale nor the Assessing Officer has brought on record any material to show that the loan amounts have been repaid out of the deposits alleged to have been received from the assessee. Hence the presumption drawn by the AO that the assessee has indulged in the practice of converting the black money into white may not be correct in the facts and circumstances of the case. Apart from the loan transactions, the AO has relied upon the statements given by Shri S.K. Terdale. We have noticed earlier that the statements given by him were not substantiated and hence not reliable. We have also noticed that the assessee cannot be expected to prove a negative fact. Accordingly we are of the view that the statements given by Shri S.K. Terdale cannot be taken support by the Assessing Officer. The assessee has not accepted the statements of Shri S.K. Terdale. D.R mentioned about the failure of the assessee to avail cross-examination. We agree with the contentions of the ld A.R that there was no requirement to make any cross examination, since the assessee was not required to prove any negative fact. Hence, for the detailed reasons, discussed in the preceding paragraphs, we are of the view that none of the evidences support the case of the Assessing Officer. Accordingly we set aside the orders passed by ld CIT(A) on this issue in all the three years under consideration and direct the AO to delete the impugned additions made in all the three years under consideration. Issues Involved:1. Addition towards undisclosed income relating to alleged deposits.2. Validity of reopening of assessments.3. Reliability of statements given by Shri S.K. Terdale.4. Burden of proof and presumption under section 292C of the Income Tax Act.5. Correlation between loans given to relatives of the assessee and alleged undisclosed deposits.Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:1. Addition towards undisclosed income relating to alleged deposits:The assessee challenged the addition towards undisclosed income based on alleged deposits made in a co-operative society. The revenue had carried out survey operations and impounded a diary maintained by Shri S.K. Terdale, which recorded the receipt of deposits from certain persons, including the assessee. The assessee denied any connection with the deposits and refused to cross-examine Shri S.K. Terdale. The AO reopened the assessments and made additions based on the diary entries and statements from Shri S.K. Terdale. The Tribunal found that Shri S.K. Terdale's statements were unsubstantiated and unreliable, and the assessee could not be compelled to prove a negative fact. The Tribunal concluded that the additions were made on surmises and conjectures and directed the AO to delete the impugned additions.2. Validity of reopening of assessments:The assessee raised grounds regarding the validity of reopening the assessments. However, since the Tribunal decided the grounds on merits in favor of the assessee and the learned AR did not advance arguments on the legal ground, the Tribunal did not find it necessary to adjudicate these grounds.3. Reliability of statements given by Shri S.K. Terdale:The Tribunal examined the reliability of the statements given by Shri S.K. Terdale, who admitted to maintaining the diary and recording the deposits against the name of the assessee. However, Terdale could not identify the persons who brought the money or provide any corroborative evidence. The Tribunal found that Terdale's statements were not substantiated and could not be used against the assessee. The Tribunal noted that the assessee denied the transactions and did not accept Terdale's statements, reinforcing the view that the statements were unreliable.4. Burden of proof and presumption under section 292C of the Income Tax Act:The Tribunal discussed the presumption under section 292C, which applies to the person from whom documents are seized during a survey. In this case, the presumption applied to the society/bank, not the assessee. The Tribunal found that the society/bank failed to discharge its burden of proof to substantiate the diary entries. The Tribunal agreed with the assessee's contention that proving a negative fact is impermissible under the law.5. Correlation between loans given to relatives of the assessee and alleged undisclosed deposits:The AO attempted to correlate the loans given to the assessee's relatives with the alleged undisclosed deposits. The Tribunal found that the loans were business loans secured against stock and repaid within a short period, indicating they were independent transactions unconnected with the alleged deposits. The Tribunal concluded that the AO's theory of converting black money into white was not supported by the facts and circumstances of the case.Conclusion:The Tribunal set aside the orders passed by the CIT(A) and directed the AO to delete the impugned additions for all three years under consideration. The appeals of the assessee were allowed, and the stay applications were dismissed as infructuous.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found