MANISH KUMAR GOLECHHA,BARMER vs. ITO, BALOTRA
What were the facts?
The assessee's case was selected for scrutiny, leading to additions under Section 44AD for cash deposits and unsecured loans, and additions for interest income, unexplained sundry creditors under Section 68, and related interest disallowance under Section 69C. The first appellate authority confirmed these additions.
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal deleted the Section 44AD additions, finding the cash deposits explained and unsecured loans to be opening balances from prior years. It also deleted the interest income addition, noting the nexus with interest expenditure, and the Section 68 addition for sundry creditors as they were opening balances, consequently deleting the Section 69C disallowance.
What were the issues?
The key issues were the applicability of Section 44AD to cash deposits and unsecured loans, the taxability of gross interest income, and the validity of additions under Section 68 for opening balances of sundry creditors and related interest disallowance under Section 69C.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, JODHPUR BENCH, JODHPUR
Before: SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, HON’BLE & SHRI MAKARAND VASANT MAHADEOKAR, HON’BLE
PER: SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY; V.P. :
This is an appeal by the assessee against order dated 28-10-2025 passed by National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi for the assessment year 2018-19. 2
Ground No. 1, is general in nature hence, not pressed.
In Ground No. 2, assessee has challenged addition of Rs.2,36,560/- under Section 44AD of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [in short, “the Act”].
Briefly the facts are, the assessee is a resident individual. For
The order continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
More judgments on Section 44AD
- Late Hetalkumar Gunvantlal Soni (Through… vs ITO Ward 1(2)(3), AhmedabadITA 462/AHD/2026[2012-13]Status: Disposed9 Oct 2026AY 2012-13
- Rocky Menghrajmal Lakhwani, Ahmedabad vs Ward 7(2)(1), AhmedabadITA 1601/AHD/2026[2020-21]Status: Disposed7 Oct 2026AY 2020-21
- Ravindra Gajanan Mahadik, Pune vs ITO WD-3(1), PuneITA 2169/PUN/2026[2010-11]Status: Disposed5 Oct 2026AY 2010-11
- Atish Ashok Nahar, Pune vs Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(1), NashikITA 1999/PUN/2025[2016-17]Status: Disposed5 Oct 2026AY 2016-17
- Atish Ashok Nahar, Pune vs Income Tax Officer Ward 1(1), NashikITA 1998/PUN/2025[2015-16]Status: Disposed5 Oct 2026AY 2015-16
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Shaik Mohammed Abdul Jabbar vs. The Principal Commissioner/CommissionerTelangana · 7 Oct 2026
- Kamalakanta Nayak vs. The Additional CT And GST Officer, Mayurbhanj Circle,BalasoreOrissa · 7 Oct 2026
- Jagadish Prasad Agrawala vs. State Of OdishaOrissa · 7 Oct 2026
- M/S.Shree Jagannath Engineering Co.,Kendujhar vs. Assistant Commissioner Central GST And Customs, KeonjharOrissa · 7 Oct 2026
- Gagan Kumar Das vs. State Tax Officer, CT And GST Jagatsinghpur CircleOrissa · 7 Oct 2026