Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India. Com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Acts / Rules Notifications Circulars Tariff/ ITC HSN Forms Case Laws Manuals Short Notes Articles SMS News Highlights
        Home        
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

Smt. Sheela Ahuja @ Lata Ahuja Versus The Commissioner of Income Tax And Another

2017 (11) TMI 686 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT

Reopening of assessment - unexplained gifts - Held that:- The argument with regard to the permission to the assessee for inspection of material, the Tribunal has observed that the fact reveals that a gift of ₹ 3,00,000/- has been received but the same has not been disclosed by the assessee and since the intimation from the investigation unit is an administrative in nature therefore the same cannot be permitted to be demonstrated to the assessee. The claim of the appellant/ assessee is that .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

der of the Tribunal and since the assessee/appellant has failed to prove the creditworthiness of the donors as well as failed to place any evidence in support of her contention in respect of the issue which are raised before the Tribunal therefore we find no error in the order of the Tribunal. - Decided against assessee. - Income Tax Appeal No. 24 of 2008 - Dated:- 9-11-2017 - Hon'ble Abhinava Upadhya And Hon'ble Ashok Kumar, JJ. For the Appellant : Shakeel Ahmad For the Respondent : S.S .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

issuance of notice under Section 147/148 of the Act? (b) Whether upon the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in not considering the vital issue of not issuing the copies of the return with annexures filed by the appellant while observing that the same is an administrative decision, which has to be taken up with the departmental authorities? (c) Whether upon the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the appellant should have .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

in bank account is correct in law?" Heard Sri Shakeel Ahmad, learned counsel for the appellant and Sri Krishna Agarwal, learned counsel appeared on behalf of the Revenue. The brief facts of the case are that in the assessment year 2000-01 the appellant has filed her return. During the pendency of the return a notice dated 28.11.2003 has been issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, hereinafter referred as 'The Act'. The reasons for issuance of the notice under Section .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

e notice issued under Section 148, the appellant has informed, vide letter dated 12.01.2004, that her return which had already been filed on 15.05.2000 be treated as response to the notice. After the said reply notices under Sections 142(1) and 143(2) are issued along with the detailed questionnaire. After discussion with the authorised representative about the said amount of ₹ 3,00,000/-, which has been transferred through cheque from the account of two persons of Co-operative Bank, Kanpu .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

through cheques from two persons who operated the bank account of the appellant. The relevant extract of the conclusion of the assessing authority is quoted herein below. " From the perusal of bank a/c of M.K. Shukla & R.A. Shukla as received from Directorate of Income-tax (Inv.) Kanpur, it is clear that the persons are habitual donors and had given entries to so many persons. The assessee was not able to produce these persons for confirmation of gift of ₹ 3,00000/- and the credi .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

8377; 1,00,000/- 5) 10.03.2000 by cash - ₹ 9,000/- 6) 10.03.2000 by cash - ₹ 1,000/- since no evidences of above credits have been provided by the assessee, the sum of ₹ 5,10,000/- as detailed above is being trated as income of the assessee. The assessee never came forward to prove the above transactions hence she concealed true and fair facts of her income and is to be penalized as per provisions contained in Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. For this purpose pena .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

led to prove the genuineness of the credits. The C.I.T. (Appeals) has further observed that the appellant has not offerred any explanation regarding the credits in the bank account. He has further observed that on the other hand, the Assessing Officer has proved that the credits were not genuine, though, he is not supposed to prove it as per law. Aggrieved by the order of the CIT (Appeals) the appeal has been preferred by the appellant before the ITAT. The appellant has reiterated the same submi .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

Discussion Forum
what is new what is new
 


Share:            

|| Home || About us || Feedback || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version