JAYESH KISHORE JHAVERI,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, C.C 8(4), MUMBAI

ITA 183/MUM/2026Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 September 2026AY 1997-9836 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What were the facts?

The assessee was informed about an alleged bank account in his name with HSBC Bank, Geneva, based on information from French authorities. The Assessing Officer initiated reassessment proceedings after the assessee denied ownership of the account.

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the peak theory cannot be applied retrospectively to absorb an earlier year's investment into a subsequent year's peak credit without complete bank statements. The matter was remanded to the CIT(A) for fresh examination of the peak credit claim.

What were the issues?

Whether the addition of Rs. 27,50,000/- as unexplained investment under Section 69A was justified, and whether the peak theory could be applied to subsume the investment in a subsequent year's declared income.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 69A,Section 143(1),Section 147,Section 148,Section 131,Section 106

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH “H” MUMBAI

Before: SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT & SHRI ANIKESH BANERJEE

For Appellant: Shri Rajiv Khandelwal (Virtually appeared), Shri Pravin Salunkhe, Sr. DR
Hearing: 20/08/2026Pronounced: 04/09/2026

PER OM PRAKASH KANT, AM

This appeal by the assessee is directed against order dated 01.12.2025 passed by the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-50, Mumbai (in short 'the Ld. CIT(A)') for Assessment Year 1997-98. The grounds raised by the assessee are reproduced as under:

ITA 183/MUM/2026 2 Jayesh Kishore Jhaveri

a) “On the facts and in the circumstances of the case in law, the Ld. CIT Appeal erred in confirming an addition of Rs.27,50,000/- under section 69A of the IT Act, 1961. b) The Ld. CIT Appeal and Ld. JAO has erred in reopening the assessment beyond the permissible time under the law and thereafter completed the re

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.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

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 69A

All 15,187 judgments and leading authorities on Section 69A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →