Vaibhav Jain vs. DCIT

Parties Involved

Facts Summary

The assessee, Vaibhav Jain, filed an income return under section 139 of the Income Tax Act, declaring an income of Rs 22,81,440. A notice under section 142(1) was issued, and a search and seizure action was carried out on 06-01-2021 under section 132 of the Act. Various documents and incriminating material were seized from the residence/business premises of the Hans Group. The Assessing Officer (AO) recorded satisfaction on 10-05-2022. The AO passed an assessment order under section 143(3) on 27-12-2022, determining the income at Rs 37,16,440 after making additions of Rs 12,00,000 towards undisclosed income from interest and Rs 2,35,000 as undisclosed commission from commission. The assessee filed an appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), which was partly allowed. The assessee further filed an application for admission of additional grounds of appeal.…

Legal Issues

• 1. Whether the order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) is bad both in the eye of law and on facts?
• 2. Whether the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in confirming the action of the AO despite the fact that the assessment order under section 143(3) is illegal, void, and non-est?
• 3. Whether the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 2,35,000 made by the AO on account of undisclosed commission income?

Judgment Outcome

Decided in favour of Assessee.

Precedents Relied Upon

Similar Judgements

• Raja Varshney vs. DCIT,CENTRAL CIRCLE-31

  Delhi bench

• Goyallmpex & Industries Limited vs Income-tax Officer

  Delhi bench

• Smt. Bharti Sharma vs. Dy. CIT and Sh. Pankaj Sharma vs. Dy. CIT

  Delhi Bench benchAY 2021-22Allowed

• Sri Dilip Kumar Ghosh Vs DCIT, Central Circle-4(3), Kolkata

  Kolkata Bench benchAY 2021-2022Allowed

• ITA No.2145/Del/2024

  Delhi bench

• Asha Ranjit Shivdasani v/s. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)