Follow Us:

Case Law Details

Case Name : Pinkydevi Mahendrakumar Jain Vs ACIT (ITAT Mumbai)
Related Assessment Year : 2019-20
Become a Premium member to Download. If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.
Pinkydevi Mahendrakumar Jain Vs ACIT (ITAT Mumbai) On-Money Addition Deleted in Platinum Mall Cases – Third-Party Pen Drive & Statements Not Sufficient – Sec 153C Addition Quashed – ITAT Mumbai Based on a search in Rubberwala Group, AO invoked sec 153C and added ₹5 lakh alleging cash payment (“on-money”) for purchase of shop in Platinum Mall, relying mainly on a pen drive, excel sheets and statement of a third-party employee. CIT(A) confirmed the addition. ITAT held that no incriminating material directly linked to the assessee—such as cash receipts, signed documents or corr...
This is premium content. Please become a Premium member. If you are already a member, login here to access the full content.

Author Bio

CA Vijayakumar Shetty qualified in 1994 and in practice since then. Founding partner of Shetty & Co. He is a graduate from St Aloysius College, Mangalore . View Full Profile

My Published Posts

Penny Stock Addition Fails: ITAT Says Suspicion Cannot Replace Evidence Borrowed Satisfaction: ITAT Quashes Penny Stock Additions in Multiple Family Cases Statement Alone Cannot Justify ‘On-Money’ Addition: ITAT Mumbai Genuine ITR Mistake Cannot Lead to Tax on Wrong Income: ITAT Mumbai AO Cannot Reopen on the Same Material Examined in U/s 153C Assessment: ITAT Quashes ₹2.90 Crore Addition View More Published Posts

Join Taxguru’s Network for Latest updates on Income Tax, GST, Company Law, Corporate Laws and other related subjects.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Search Post by Date
June 2026
M T W T F S S
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
2930