The High Court dismissed an Income Tax Appeal challenging an ITAT decision that deleted an addition of Rs. 35.54 lakhs. The Court held that the Tribunal acted correctly in deleting the addition due to lack of evidence and invited testimony.
The appeal was dismissed with no costs.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
kvm
1
ITXA2509_11
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 2509 OF 2011
The Commissioner of Income Tax - 24
..... Appellant
Vs.
M/s.Balaji Developers ..... Respondent
Mr.A.K.Saxena for the Appellant.
None for the Respondent.
CORAM : DR.D.Y.CHANDRACHUD & R.D. DHANUKA, JJ.
DATE : APRIL 25, 2012
P.C. :
On the Appeal being restored to file, it has been taken up on board for admission and has been called out by consent.
Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Hon’ble ITAT is justified in deleting the addition of Rs.35,54,000/- without appreciating that the information of taking on money was given by no other person than the partner of the assessee firm ?
kvm
2
ITXA2509_11
3. We, therefore, dismiss the same. No costs.
DR.D.Y.CHANDRACHUD, J.
R.D. DHANUKA, J.
1 224 CTR 62 (Cal.)
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the Hon'ble ITAT was justified in deleting the addition of Rs. 35,54,000 without appreciating that the information about 'on-money' came from the assessee's partner.
Whether the Tribunal was correct in relying on Bangodaya Cotton Mill Ltd. vs. CIT to delete the addition due to lack of corroborative evidence.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Bangodaya Cotton Mill Ltd. vs. CITExplained¶21
224 CTR 62 (Cal.)
Commissioner of Income Tax - 24
M/s. Balaji Developers
D.Y. Chandrachud
R.D. Dhanuka
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
