Deepak Garg v. ITO - Taxpublishers.in

Case Laws Analysis
REFERRED CIT v. Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd. 2018 TaxPub(DT) 2139 (SC)
REFERRED CIT v. Sugauli Sugar Works (P) Ltd. 1999 TaxPub(DT) 1163 (SC)

SUBSCRIBE FOR FULL CONTENT


The Tax Publishers2020 TaxPub(DT) 1507 (Del-Trib) IN THE ITAT, DELHI BENCH PRASHANT MAHARISHI, A.M. & K. NARASIMHA CHARY, J.M. Deepak Garg v. ITO ITA No. 3175/Del/2017 A.Y. 2012-13 19 February, 2020 Appellant by: Lalit Mohan, C.A. Respondent by: Ashima Neb. Sr. DR ORDER *K. Narasimha Chary, J.M.* Challenging the Order, dated 24-3-2017 in Appeal No. 26/15-16 passed by the learned Commissioner (Appeals)-14, New Delhi ('Ld. CIT(A)'), for assessment year 2012-13, Shri Deepak Garg ('the assessee') preferred this appeal. 2. The assessee is engaged in the business of trading in bullions and all types of gold and diamond jewellery under the name and style of M/s. Sai Jewels. For the assessment year 2012-13, assessee had filed its return of income on 13-6-2012 declaring total income of Rs. 4,87,370. Assessment under section 143(3) was, however, complete at an income of Rs. 64,53,540 making certain additions including addition of Rs. 45 lacs on account of sundry creditors. 3. Aggrieved by such addition, the assessee preferred appeal before the learned Commissioner (Appeals) and by way of the impugned order, learned Commissioner (Appeals) deleted other additions but confirmed the addition of Rs. 40 lacs out of Rs. 45 lacs added by the assessing officer under section 28 read with section 41 of the Income Tax Act ('the Act'). SUBSCRIBE FOR FULL CONTENT

The Tax Publishers2020 TaxPub(DT) 1507 (Del-Trib)

IN THE ITAT, DELHI BENCH

PRASHANT MAHARISHI, A.M. & K. NARASIMHA CHARY, J.M.

Deepak Garg v. ITO

ITA No. 3175/Del/2017

A.Y. 2012-13

19 February, 2020

Appellant by: Lalit Mohan, C.A.

Respondent by: Ashima Neb. Sr. DR

ORDER

K. Narasimha Chary, J.M.

Challenging the Order, dated 24-3-2017 in Appeal No. 26/15-16 passed by the learned Commissioner (Appeals)-14, New Delhi ('Ld. CIT(A)'), for assessment year 2012-13, Shri Deepak Garg ('the assessee') preferred this appeal.

2. The assessee is engaged in the business of trading in bullions and all types of gold and diamond jewellery under the name and style of M/s. Sai Jewels. For the assessment year 2012-13, assessee had filed its return of income on 13-6-2012 declaring total income of Rs. 4,87,370. Assessment under section 143(3) was, however, complete at an income of Rs. 64,53,540 making certain additions including addition of Rs. 45 lacs on account of sundry creditors.

3. Aggrieved by such addition, the assessee preferred appeal before the learned Commissioner (Appeals) and by way of the impugned order, learned Commissioner (Appeals) deleted other additions but confirmed the addition of Rs. 40 lacs out of Rs. 45 lacs added by the assessing officer under section 28 read with section 41 of the Income Tax Act ('the Act').