AMITBHAI PRAVINBHAI KOTHARI,RAJKOT vs. THE DCIT / ACIT, RAJKOT
What were the facts?
The assessee purchased a plot of land and the AO reopened the assessment based on seized documents from a search operation related to real estate developers. The AO proposed an addition for alleged on-money payment based on third-party digital data and ledger entries.
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that the addition was based on uncorroborated WhatsApp chats and digital data without establishing a nexus with actual investment or income. The assessee was also a non-resident, and the alleged income did not accrue or arise in India.
What were the issues?
Whether the reopening of assessment was valid and if the addition for alleged on-money payment was justified based on uncorroborated digital evidence and the assessee's non-resident status.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
Section 147,Section 148,Section 151,Section 69B,Section 132,Section 143(2),Section 142(1),Section 129,Section 139,Section 5(2)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Rajkot Bench, Rajkot
Before: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Sonjoy Sarma
Per, Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, AM: Captioned appeal filed by the assessee, pertaining to assessment year (AY) 2019-20, is directed against the order under section 250 of the Income- tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NAC) Delhi/Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) [in short ‘NFAC/Ld.CIT(A)’], dated 03.05.2026, which in turn arises out of an assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer u/s 147 of the Act, dated 19.03.2024. 2. The grounds of appeal raised b
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 147
- Nohar Yadav, Mandir Hasoud, Teh. Arang vs Income Tax Officer - Ward 1(2), Raipur…ITA 640/RPR/2026[2018-19]Status: Disposed9 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Nohar Yadav, Mandir Hasoud, Teh. Arang vs Income Tax Officer - Ward 1(2), Raipur…ITA 639/RPR/2026[2018-19]Status: Disposed9 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Nohar Yadav, Mandir Hasoud, Teh. Arang vs Income Tax Officer - Ward 1(2), Raipur…ITA 638/RPR/2026[2018-19]Status: Disposed9 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Kishorbhai C Bhagtani, Rajkot vs Income Tax Officer Ward 2(1)(1), RajkotITA 999/RJT/2026[2020-21]Status: Disposed9 Oct 2026AY 2020-21
- Malhar Nitin Bhuptani, Rajkotq vs Assisstant Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 1054/RJT/2026[2019-20]Status: Disposed9 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Sri Kamatchi Agencies vs. The Deputy Commissioner (Appeal)Madras · 6 Oct 2026
- Dr S.Surya Prakash vs. The Secretary TO GovernmentMadras · 6 Oct 2026
- Madhusudan Agarwal vs. Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax Midnapore Charge And Ors.Calcutta · 6 Oct 2026
- M/S Sanmargg Agrotrade INDIA Private Limtied And Anr. vs. Superintendent Central Tax Group-36 Circle-08 Office Of The Commissioner Of Central Tax And Ors.Calcutta · 6 Oct 2026
- Ramkrishna Datta vs. State Of West Bengal And Ors.Calcutta · 6 Oct 2026