M/S. H & F GAMES PVT. LTD.,BELLANDUR, MARATHAHALLI, BENGALURU. vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - CENTRAL CIRCLE - 1(2), BENGALURU, BENGALURU

ITA 1552/BANG/2025Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 November 2025AY 2014-15Bench: SHRI. LAXMI PRASAD SAHU (Accountant Member), SHRI. KESHAV DUBEY (Judicial Member)7 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that Section 68 requires the existence of books of account for its invocation, which the assessee did not maintain. Therefore, additions under Section 68 were not sustainable. The Tribunal also noted that the source of cash deposits was explained by Shri D.S. Nandish.

What were the facts?

The assessee company had cash deposits in its bank accounts for which the Assessing Officer (AO) made additions under Section 68. The AO also disallowed interest paid on loans from sundry creditors, claiming no TDS was deducted and the assessee could not substantiate the loans. The assessee argued that the reopening of assessment was bad in law and the additions were incorrect.

What were the issues?

Whether additions under Section 68 are valid when the assessee has not maintained books of account, and whether the reopening of assessment was legally valid.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 68,Section 37,Section 147,Section 148,Section 151

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(4)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” BENCH : BANGALORE

Before: SHRI. LAXMI PRASAD SAHU & SHRI. KESHAV DUBEY

For Appellant: Shri. Balram Rao, Adv
For Respondent: Shri. Balusamy N, Jt. CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bangalore
Hearing: 21.11.2025Pronounced: 28.11.2025

Per Laxmi Prasad Sahu, Accountant Member :

These two appeals are filed by the assessee against the common order of the CIT(Appeals)-11, Bangalore, dated 20.06.2024 for the above assessment years on the following grounds of appeal:

Grounds of appeal for Assessment Year 2013-14: The Appellant objects to the Assessment Order on the following grounds in so far as it is prejudicial to the Appellant as it is opposed to law and circumstances of the case

1.

The notice issued u/s.148 is bad in law as the A.O. has not supplied Reasons recorded for re- opening of Assessment along with notice

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 68

All 29,931 judgments and leading authorities on Section 68 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →