SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2020 Supreme(SC) 321

A.M.KHANWILKAR, DINESH MAHESHWARI
Basir Ahmed Sisodiya – Appellant
Versus
Income Tax Officer – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant(s) :P.V. Yogeswaran, Advocate
For the Respondent(s):Anil Katiyar, , Advocate

JUDGMENT

A.M. Khanwilkar, J.

This appeal takes exception to the final judgment and order dated 21.8.2008 passed by the High Court of Judicature for Raj as than at Jodhpur (for short, "the High Court") in Income Tax Appeal No. 69 of 2006, whereby the appellant's appeal was dismissed and the order of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Jodhpur Bench (for short, 'the ITAT) came to be upheld.

2. In short, the appellant/assessee was served with a notice under Section 143(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, 1961 Act') by the Assessing Officer (for short, 'Officer') for the assessment year 1998-1999, pursuant to which an assessment order was passed on 30.11.2000. This appeal involves limited challenge to certain addition made under the heads - "Trading Account" and "Credits" in the assessment order. The Officer, inter alia, while relying on the Balance Sheet and the books of account, took note of the credits amounting to Rs. 2,2 6,000/-(Rupees two lakhs twenty-six thousand only). The Officer treated that amount as "Cash credits" under Section 68 of the 1961 Act and added the same in declared


Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top