M/s. Kanika Gems vs. ITO

Parties Involved

Facts Summary

The assessee, M/s. Kanika Gems, had not filed its return of income for the year under consideration. The assessee’s case was reopened for the reason that the assessee had availed bogus accommodation entries to the tune of Rs.13,39,584/- from the Rajendra Jain Group. The assessee was non compliant during the assessment proceeding and the Assessing Officer passed the assessment order determining the total income at Rs.13,39,584/- by making an addition u/s. 69C of the Act as ‘unexplained expenditure’. The assessee was in appeal before the first appellate authority, challenging the assessment order. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) upheld the order of the Assessing Officer. The assessee is in appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, challenging the impugned order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals).…

Legal Issues

• 1. The assessee challenges the addition of Rs.1339584/- made by the Assessing Officer under section 69C of the Act as unexplained expenditure.
• 2. The assessee challenges the delay in filing the appeal and the inordinate delay in submitting any cogent explanation.

Judgment Outcome

Decided in favour of Assessee.

Similar Judgements

• Bhavika Siddharth Shah vs. ITO

  Mumbai bench

• Shree Sambhavnath Rajendra Jain vs. ACIT

  Delhi bench

• Sh. Mahesh Chand Vs. Income Tax Officer, Delhi

• Abhishek Jain vs. Commissioner of Income Tax

  Delhi Bench benchAY 2017-18, 2018-19Partly Allowed

• M/s. Harbel Singh and Sons vs. DCIT, Central Circle-30

  Delhi Bench benchAY 2018-19 to 2021-22Partly Allowed

• SCK Infratech Pvt. Ltd. Vs. DCIT

  Delhi Bench benchAY 2020-21Partly Allowed