Case LawHigh Court › Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax - 5...

Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax - 5 v. Kamlesh Jayantilal Jhaveri

High Court 05 May 2018 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · gujarathc
Parties
Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax - 5 v. Kamlesh Jayantilal Jhaveri
Date of order
05 May 2018
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Dismissed

Case summary

In Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax - 5 v. Kamlesh Jayantilal Jhaveri, the High Court (2018) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.

Issue: KARIA Date : 05/05/2018ORAL ORDER (PER : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI) 1.The Revenue is in appeal against the judgment of the Tribunal dated 25.01.2017 raising the following substantial question of law for our consideration; Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the assess...

Decision: The Tax Appeal is dismissed.

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 GUJARAT AT AHMEDABADR/TAX APPEAL NO. 464 of 2018 ==========================================================PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - 5VersusKAMLESH JAYANTILAL JHAVERI ========================================================== Appearance:MRS MAUNA M BHATT(174) for the PETITIONER(s) No. 1 for the RESPONDENT(s) No. 1 ========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHIandHONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE B.N. KARIA Date : 05/05/2018ORAL ORDER (PER : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI) 1.The Revenue is in appeal against the judgment of the Tribunal dated 25.01.2017 raising the following substantial question of law for our consideration; Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the assessee was entitled to loss of Rs.77,95,670/-, which was found self generated and also was not incidental to the business of the assessee ? 2.The Tribunal, while deleting the addition of a sum of Rs.77.95 Lakhs (rounded off) made by the Assessing Officer holding that the assessee had projected a contrived loss, observed that all the transactions had taken place through banking channels, confirmations were received from the transacting parties and their statements were also recorded. These entities were also maintainingtheirregularbooks.More importantly, the Tribunal recorded that while analyzing the transactions, the Assessing Officer took into account only few transactions where the assessee had suffered loss, ignoring those where the assessee had gained. 3.The entire issue is factual in nature. No question of law arises. The Tax Appeal is dismissed. (AKIL KURESHI, J) PRAVIN KARUNAN (B.N. KARIA, J)
Facing a similar income-tax issue?
Our CA-led litigation team handles notices, scrutiny, penalties and appeals (CIT(A) & ITAT) end-to-end.
✅ File an income-tax appeal (CIT(A)/ITAT) → 💬 Ask our CA
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.
Contact Careers Media / Press · Privacy Terms Refund Cancellation Cookies Disclaimer
© 2026 EaseValue Advisors LLP · LLPIN ACN-4920 · Jaipur, Rajasthan