Ita/363/2014 Of Commissioner Of Income Tax-Ii v. Sumant Bakshi
High Court
21 May 2015 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · phhc
Parties
Ita/363/2014 Of Commissioner Of Income Tax-Ii v. Sumant Bakshi
Date of order
21 May 2015
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
Case summary
In Ita/363/2014 Of Commissioner Of Income Tax-Ii v. Sumant Bakshi, the High Court (2015) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
The order — as passed by the High Court
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA ATCHANDIGARH
ITA3632014 (O&M)Date of decision:21.05.2015
The Commissioner of Income Tax-II, Amritsar
..Appellant
Versus.
Sumant Bakshi
...Respondent
CORAMHONBLE MR. JUSTICE S.J. VAZIFDAR, ACTING CHIEF JUSTICEHON5BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S. SAANDHAWALI
Present: Mr. Denesh Goyal, Advocate, ©for the appellant.
ee
S.J. VAZIFDAR, A.C.J. (QRAL)
This is an appeal against the order of the Tribunal dated27.03.2014 confirming the order of the CIT (Appeals) setting aside theaddition made by the Assessing Officer to the respondent’s income. Thematter pertains to the year 2009-2010.
2 |No question of law arises in the present case. The issue waswhether the gifts received by the respondent from his sister, son and friendwere genuine or not. The CIT (Appeals) and the Tribunal have analyzed theentire evidence before coming to the conclusion that the gifts were genuine.The bank statements of each of the donors have also been relied upon. Thisis a case Of appreciation of facts. No question of law arises. —
3 |The appeal is, therefore, dismissed. ©
21.05.2015Amodh
(S.J. VAZIFDAR)ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE
(G.S. SANDHAWALIA) |JUDGE
This page reproduces a public-domain court order (Section 52(1)(q)(iv), Copyright Act 1957). Explanations are EaseValue's original analysis. Always read the original order.
Disclaimer: General information only — not legal, tax or professional advice, and no advocate/CA–client relationship is created. AI-generated summaries may contain errors and must be verified against the original court order. EaseValue accepts no liability for reliance on this content. Not a solicitation.
Full disclaimer & Terms.