110 Taxmann.com 213\n• Chokshi Hiralal Maganlal Vs. DCIT, 46 SOT 349\n• M/s. Bajaj Sons Ltd. v. DCIT

82 Taxmann.com 337Reported decision2017#9896 most cited

What is 110 Taxmann.com 213\n• Chokshi Hiralal Maganlal Vs. DCIT, 46 SOT 349\n• M/s. Bajaj Sons Ltd. v. DCIT authority for?

Income surrendered during a survey on account of discrepancies in construction cost, stock, advances, and receivables is considered business income and not deemed income under Section 69, particularly when the Assessing Officer has not pointed out any unexplained credits or investments. Application of Section 115BBE in such cases may be bad in law.

11

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,314 Indian tax judgments — from 2024 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Chokshi Hiralal Maganlal · Bajaj Sons Ltd · Gaurish Steels Pvt Ltd · section 69 · section 115BBE · survey income · deemed income · business income · unexplained investment · unexplained credit · section 133A

Sections most often in play

Section 115BBESection 69ASection 133ASection 143(3)Section 69Section 131Section 142(1)Section 69B

Issues it is cited on

section 155bbesection 115beset off of lossessection 69dsection 40(b)section 71prejudicial to interest of revenuepreponderance of probabilitysection 69bsurvey under section 133aadvance taxunexplained expenditure

Judgments citing 110 Taxmann.com 213\n• Chokshi Hiralal Maganlal Vs. DCIT, 46 SOT 349\n• M/s. Bajaj Sons Ltd. v. DCIT

Shri Vishwakarama Jewellers, Akola vs. DCIT Akola Circle, Akola

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 99/NAG/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur22 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri S.G. GandhiFor Respondent: Shri Surjit Kumar Saha
Section 115BSection 133ASection 143(3)Section 69B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR BEFORE SHRI NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI K.M. ROY, ACCOUNTANT, MEMBER ITA no.99/Nag./2025 (Assessment Year : 2017–18) Shri Vishwakarma Jewellers M.G. Road, Akola 444 001 ……………. Appellant PAN – ADBFS5406Q v/s Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax ……………. Respondent Akola Circle, Akola Assessee by : Shri S.G. Gandhi Revenue by : Shri Surjit Kumar Saha Date of Hearing – 24/06/2025 Date of Order – 22/09/2025 O R D E R PER K.M. ROY, A.M. This appeal filed by the assessee is against the impugned order dated 20/01/2025, passed by the learned Com…

M/S. Shreeji Infra, Vadodara vs. The Pr. CIT-1, Vadodara

ITA 118/AHD/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad02 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Ms. Suchitra R. Kamble

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Soparkar, Sr. Advocate &For Respondent: Shri V. Nandakumar, CIT-DR
Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 269SSection 69A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE-PRESIDENT MS. SUCHITRA R. KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 117/Ahd/2022 (Assessment Year: 2017-18) M/s. Shreeji Infratech, 110, Near Silver Wood Society, Opp. Billabong School, Nr. Vadsar Bridge, Vadsar, Vadodara-390010 [PAN : ACWFS 1409 F] Vs. PCIT, Vadodara-1, Vadodara ITA No. 118/Ahd/2022 (Assessment Year: 2017-18) M/s. Shreeji Infra, 344, 375, Opp. CM Patel Farm House, Nr. Sidheswar Complex, Kalali, Vadodara-390012 [PAN : ACRFS 5269 C] Vs. PCIT, Vadodara-1, Vadodara (Appellant) Appellant by : Shri S.N. Soparkar, Sr. Advocat…

Shreeji Infratech, Vadodara vs. The Pr. CIT-1, Vadodara

ITA 117/AHD/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad02 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Ms. Suchitra R. Kamblem/S. Shreeji Infratech, Vs. Pcit, 110, Near Silver Wood Society, Vadodara-1, Opp. Billabong School, Vadodara Nr. Vadsar Bridge, Vadsar, Vadodara-390010 [Pan : Acwfs 1409 F] M/S. Shreeji Infra, Vs. Pcit, 344, 375, Opp. Cm Patel Farm Vadodara-1, House, Nr. Sidheswar Complex, Vadodara Kalali, Vadodara-390012 [Pan : Acrfs 5269 C] (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri S.N. Soparkar, Sr. Advocate & Shri Parin Shah, Ar Respondent By: Shri V. Nandakumar, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 16.04.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 02.06.2025 O R D E R Per Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-:-

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Soparkar, Sr. Advocate &For Respondent: Shri V. Nandakumar, CIT-DR
Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 269SSection 69A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE-PRESIDENT MS. SUCHITRA R. KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER M/s. Shreeji Infratech, Vs. PCIT, 110, Near Silver Wood Society, Vadodara-1, Opp. Billabong School, Vadodara Nr. Vadsar Bridge, Vadsar, Vadodara-390010 [PAN : ACWFS 1409 F] M/s. Shreeji Infra, Vs. PCIT, 344, 375, Opp. CM Patel Farm Vadodara-1, House, Nr. Sidheswar Complex, Vadodara Kalali, Vadodara-390012 [PAN : ACRFS 5269 C] (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri S.N. Soparkar, Sr. Advocate & Shri Parin Shah, AR Respondent by: Shri V. Nandakumar, CIT-DR Date of Hear…

Kath Brothers, Jaipur vs. ACIT, Central Circle-3, Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 77/JPR/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur28 Apr 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Shrawan Kumar Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Anoop Singh, Addl. CIT
Section 115BSection 133ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 234ASection 69

…eal also and hold that the application of provisions of section 115BBE of the Act in the case of M/s Sham Fashion Mall was bad in law and the same cannot be sustained.” • Hon’ble Chandigarh Bench of ITAT in the case of Gaurish Steels Pvt. Ltd. as reported in 82 Taxmann.com 337 wherein it has been held as under: 38 Kath Brothers vs. ACIT “It has been held that income surrendered by the assessee during the survey on account of discrepancy in cost of construction of building, discrepancy in stock and discrepancy in advances and receivables would be considered as business income and not as deemed income under sec…

Mukesh Kumar Ahuja, Kota vs. ACIT, Central Circle, Kota

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 109/JPR/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur07 Apr 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Rajendra Sisodia, C.AFor Respondent: Mrs. Swapnil Parihar, JCIT-DR
Section 115BSection 127Section 133ASection 139Section 142Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 69

…आयकरअपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुरन्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”B” JAIPUR Mk0 ,l- lhrky{eh]U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh jkBkSM+ deys'k t;UrHkkbZ] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA. No. 109/JPR/2025 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year : 2019-20 Mukesh Kumar Ahuja cuke The ACIT, Vs. 1-SA-3, Vigyan Nagar, Central Circle, Kota. Kota. LFkk;hys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: ABKPA3722C vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@Assessee by : Shri Rajendra Sisodia, C.A. jktLo dh vksj ls@Revenue by : Mrs. Swapn…

Jagdish Kumar Arora, Bhawanimandi vs. DCIT, Central Circle- Kota, Kota

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1195/JPR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur11 Feb 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member), SHRI NARINDER KUMAR (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Shrawan Kumar Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT-Sr. DR
Section 115BSection 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 234ASection 69

…eal also and hold that the application of provisions of section 115BBE of the Act in the case of M/s Sham Fashion Mall was bad in law and the same cannot be sustained.” • Hon’ble Chandigarh Bench of ITAT in the case of Gaurish Steels Pvt. Ltd. as reported in 82 Taxmann.com 337 wherein it has been held as under: “It has been held that income surrendered by the assessee during the survey on account of discrepancy in cost of construction of building, discrepancy in stock and discrepancy in advances and receivables would be considered as business income and not as deemed income under section 69.” • In the case of…

Dy.Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Aurangabad vs. Shri. Balaji Ramchandra Ande, Latur

In the result, appeal of the Revenue dismissed

ITA 625/PUN/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune21 Jan 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Sharad A Shah And Shri Rohit S TapadiyaFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde
Section 115BSection 131Section 133ASection 143(2)Section 68Section 69ASection 69BSection 69C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE “A” BENCH : PUNE BEFORE SHRI RAMA KANTA PANDA, VICE PRESIDENT AND MS. ASTHA CHANDRA, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A.No.625/PUN./2024 [E-APPEAL] Assessment Year 2018-2019 The DCIT, Shri Balaji Ramchandra Ande, Central Circle-1, 15, Ande Niwas, Adarsh Aayakar Bhavan, Near Colony, Ausa Road, vs. English Holly Cross High LATUR – 413 512. School, Contonment Area, Maharashtra. AURANGABAD – 431001. PAN AANPA4348N Maharashtra. (Appellant) (Respondent) For Revenue : Shri Ramnath P Murkunde For Assessee : Shri Sharad A Shah And Shri Rohit S Tapadiya Date of Hearing : 02.01.2025 Date of…

Sh. Mohit Mittal Prop. Mittal Enterprises, Ludhiana, Punjab vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle - 1 Ludhiana, Ludhiana, Punjab

In the result, appeal is allowed

ITA 198/CHANDI/2024[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh17 Jan 2025AY 2020-2021

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Krinwant Sahay

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Ranjit Kaur, Addl.CIT, Sr.DR
Section 115BSection 131Section 133ASection 69A

…Act in the case of M/s Sham Fashion Mall was bad in law and the same cannot be sustained. 13.0 In the result, ITA No. 315/Chd/2022 also stands allowed." • Hon'ble Chandigarh (Jurisdictional) Bench of ITAT in the case of Gaurish Steels Pvt. Ltd. as reported in 82 Taxmann.com 337, wherein, it has been held as under: "It has been held that income surrendered by the assessee during the survey on account of discrepancy in cost of construction of building, discrepancy in stock and discrepancy in advances and receivables would be considered as business income and not as deemed income under section 69." • In the case o…

Silver Wings Life Spaces, Kota vs. DCIT Circle-1 Kota, Kota

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 511/JPR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur31 Jul 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Learned Cit(A), Which Appeal Was Filed By The Assessee

For Appellant: Sh. Shrawan Kumar Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. A. S. Nehra(Addl. CIT)
Section 115BSection 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 234ASection 69

…eal also and hold that the application of provisions of section 115BBE of the Act in the case of M/s Sham Fashion Mall was bad in law and the same cannot be sustained.” • Hon’ble Chandigarh Bench of ITAT in the case of Gaurish Steels Pvt. Ltd. as reported in 82 Taxmann.com 337 wherein it has been held as under: “It has been held that income surrendered by the assessee during the survey on account of discrepancy in cost of construction of building, discrepancy in stock and discrepancy in advances and receivables would be considered as business income and not as deemed income under section 69.” • In the case of…

Sanjeev Kumar Goyal, Fatehabad vs. DCIT, CC-2, Ludhiana

In the result, the appeal of the assesse is allowed

ITA 80/CHANDI/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh22 May 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: This Hon’Ble Tribunal Under Section 253 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 As Amended From Time To Time. 2. The Assessee Is Aggrieved By The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A) Dt. 20/01/2023 In Appeal No. 10853/2018-19/It/Cit(A)-5/Ldh/2021-22 For The A.Y. 2019-20 Under Section 250(6) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Which Was Dismissed. Therefore The Present Second Appeal Under Section 253 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Before Us Against The Aforesaid Order Dt. 20/01/2023 Which Is Hereinafter Referred To As The Impugned Order.

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, Advocate and Shri Rishaba Marwaha, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Dharamvir, JCIT, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 250(6)Section 253Section 68

…of M/s Sham Jewellers in ITA No. 375/CHD/2022. v) Hon'ble Chandigarh (Jurisdictional) Bench of ITAT in the case of M/s Sham Jewellers in ITA No. 315/CHD/2022. vi) Hon'ble Chandigarh (Jurisdictional) Bench of ITAT in the case of M/s Gaurish Steels Pvt. Ltd. in 82 Taxmann.com 337. vii) Hon'ble Chandigarh (Jurisdictional) Bench of ITAT in the case of M/s Bajaj Sons Ltd. in ITA No. 1127/CHD/2019. viii) The binding judgment of Hon'ble Chandigarh Bench in the case of M./s Khurana Rolling Mills Pvt. Ltd in ITA No. 745/CHD/2016. ix) The Hon'ble Chandigarh (Jurisdictional) Bench of ITAT in the case of M/s Prashanti Surya…

M/S Jashan Finlease Ltd., Khanna vs. DCIT, CC-1, Ludhiana

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 132/CHANDI/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh28 Mar 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: SHRI. AAKASH DEEP JAIN (Vice President), SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Amanpreet Kaur, Sr. DR
Section 115BSection 133ASection 143(2)Section 68Section 69

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण,च"डीगढ़ "यायपीठ “ए” , च"डीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH BENCH “A”, CHANDIGARH HEARING THROUGH: VIRTUAL MODE "ी आकाश दीप जैन, उपा"य" एवं "ी िव"म "सह यादव, लेखा सद"य BEFORE: SHRI. AAKASH DEEP JAIN, VP & SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, AM आयकर अपील सं./ ITA NO. 132/Chd/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2019-20 M/s Jashan Finlease Limited बनाम The DCIT, Malerkotla Road, Khanna-141401 Central Circle-1 Punjab Ludhiana "थायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: AACCJ1698Q अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent िनधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee by : Shri Sudhir Sehgal, Advocate राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue by : Smt. Am…

110 Taxmann.com 213\n• Chokshi Hiralal Maganlal Vs. DCIT, 46 SOT 349\n• M/s. Bajaj Sons Ltd. v. DCIT (82 Taxmann.com 337) — Cited in 11 Judgments | BharatTax