C.I.T., Udaipur v. M/s. Mateshwari Indrani Contractors Pvt. Ltd - 2015-LL-0521-5

Citation	2015-LL-0521-5
Appellant Name	C.I.T., Udaipur
Respondent Name	M/s. Mateshwari Indrani Contractors Pvt. Ltd.
Court	HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
Relevant Act	Income-tax
Date of Order	21/05/2015
Judgment	View Judgment
Keyword Tags	source of income
Bot Summary:	In this appeal the only argument advanced by the learned counsel for the appellant is that the Commissioner of Income Tax as well as the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Jodhpur Bench, Jodhpur failed to appreciate that Sri Rajendra Singh advanced Rs.35,00,000/- to the assessee M/s Mateshwari Indarani Contractors Pvt. Ltd. and certain other transactions remained unexplained. Having considered the orders passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax, it is apparent that whatever transactions occurred were made through negotiable instruments and the assessee shown those in its returns as loan. The amount unexplained is on the part of the person who advanced the amount to the assessee and as such it cannot be said that the assessee failed to explain its source of income shown as loan. The appeal, as such, does not involve any substantial question of law that may require adjudication by this Court.

D.B. INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.252/2013 [C.I.T. Udaipur VS. M/S Mateshwari Indrani Contractors Pvt. Ltd.] DATE OF ORDER : 21.05.2015 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GOVIND MATHUR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BANWARI LAL SHARMA Mr.K.K. Bissa for appellant. ... In this appeal only argument advanced by learned counsel for appellant is that Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) as well as Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Jodhpur Bench, Jodhpur failed to appreciate that Sri Rajendra Singh advanced Rs.35,00,000/- to assessee M/s Mateshwari Indarani Contractors Pvt. Ltd. and certain other transactions remained unexplained. Having considered orders passed by Commissioner of Income Tax, it is apparent that whatever transactions occurred were made through negotiable instruments and assessee shown those in its returns as loan. amount unexplained is on part of person who advanced amount to assessee and as such it cannot be said that assessee failed to explain its source of income shown as loan. appeal, as such, does not involve any substantial question of law that may require adjudication by this Court. appeal is dismissed. [BANWARI LAL SHARMA], J. [GOVIND MATHUR], J. mamta S.No.47 C.I.T., Udaipur v. M/s. Mateshwari Indrani Contractors Pvt. Ltd

Metadata

Judgment