PURTI MARKETING PRIVATE LIMITED,NAGPUR vs. DCIT/ ACIT - CIRCLE 4, NAGPUR
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that the AO was not justified in invoking Section 68 as the cash deposits were recorded as cash sales in the assessee's regular books of account, which were not rejected. The addition was based on suspicion without cogent material to disprove the assessee's explanation.
What were the facts?
The assessee company reported abnormal cash deposits during the demonetisation period, attributed to increased sales of a new product. The Assessing Officer (AO) treated these deposits as unexplained cash credits, disallowing the claim due to the assessee's failure to produce books of account and supporting documents.
What were the issues?
Whether cash deposits recorded as sales in accepted books of account can be treated as unexplained cash credits under Section 68 without rejecting the books or disproving the explanation with cogent evidence.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, NAGPUR BENCH :: NAGPUR
PER KHETTRA MOHAN ROY, AM:
This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of ADDL/JCIT (Appeals)-2, Gurugram (for short, “CIT(A)”), dated 16/09/2025 passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, “Act”) which is emanating from the assessment order dated 31.12.2019 passed u/s. 143(3) of the Act by the ACIT, Circle-4, Nagpur, for the Assessment Year (AY) 2017-18. 2. The only effective ground raised by the assessee in this appeal is that Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 83,57,901/- made by the Ld.AO as unexplained cash credit u/s. 68 of the Act without giving proper opportunity of hearing and also not considered the books of accounts produced by the assessee.
Facts of the case in brief are th
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 68
- ACIT Central Bilaspur, Bilaspur vs Arun Kumar Agrawal, SaktiITSSA 26/RPR/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Neo Incorporation, Rajkot vs DCIT Circle- 1(2), RajkotITA 471/RJT/2026[2012-2013]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2012-2013
- Bliss Dealtrade Private Limited, Kolkata vs Income Tax Officer - Ward 9(2) Kolkata…ITA 208/KOL/2026[2012-13]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2012-13
- Hemal Paresh Madeka, Rajkot vs Asst.Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 955/RJT/2026[2020-21]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2020-21
- Ajaybhai Dineshbhai Bagdai, Near Central… vs The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(2)(1), New…ITA 74/RJT/2026[2013-14]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2013-14
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Giri Paints vs. The Assistant Commissioner (St)Madras · 15 Oct 2026
- Rahul Radheshyam Chauhan vs. Union Of INDIA Thru The Sec. Ministry Of Law And Justice And OrsBombay · 15 Oct 2026
- S.Murugesan vs. The Deputy Commercial Tax OfficerMadras · 15 Oct 2026
- Tvl. Annai Garden vs. The Commercial Tax Officer / The State Tax OfficerMadras · 15 Oct 2026
- Yadeshwar Mallekedi vs. The State Of TelanganaTelangana · 15 Oct 2026
