ACIT v. Hirapanna Jewellers

128 Taxmann.com 291Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2021#1186 most cited

What is ACIT v. Hirapanna Jewellers authority for?

An abnormal increase in declared cash sales and deposits during demonetization does not warrant an addition under Section 68, as Section 68 applies to unexplained cash credits, not disclosed sales receipts supported by stock and purchases.

97

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2022 to 2026.

Also referred to as

ACIT v. Hirapanna Jewellers · Section 68 · cash sales demonetization · unexplained cash credit · sales receipts · rejection of books of account · stock matching · Section 115BBE · addition under section 68

Issues it is cited on

Judgments citing ACIT v. Hirapanna Jewellers

SANJAY MALHOTRA,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, WARD-29(3), DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2255/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmansanjay Malhotra, Vs. Ito, Ward 29 (3), Hs – 23, Second Floor, Kailash Colony, Delhi. New Delhi – 122 002. (Pan : Aaipm0514F) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri K. Sampath, Advocate Shri V. Rajkumar, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Manish Gupta, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 17.07.2025 Date Of Order : 13.10.2025 O R D E R Per S. Rifaur Rahman: 1. This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [For Short ‘Ld. Cit (A)] For The Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are, Assessee Filed Its Return Of Income For Assessment Year 2017-18 On 27.10.2017 Declaring An Income Of Rs.15,06,840/-. The Case Was Selected For Complete Scrutiny Under Cass. Notices Under Section 143(2) & 142(1) Of The Income-Tax Act

For Appellant: Shri K. Sampath, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Manish Gupta, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)

…serably failed to appreciate this aspect of the matter. 4.6 The essential features of cash deposits during the demonetization period have been lucidly and succinctly dealt with by the Vishakapatnam Bench of the Tribunal in ACIT vs. Hira Panna Jewellers (2021) 189 ITD 608. Being on similar facts this order is relied upon for relief in the subject case also. 4.7 According to the AO the deposits were to be added to the income of the Assessee u/s. 68 of the Act. The AO erred in failing to appreciate that Sec.68 of the Act applied to cash credits. It does not apply to sales receipts. Besides Sec.68 of the Act deems a…

DEVNGI JEWELLWERS PVT. LTD.,SURAT vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), SURAT

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 672/SRT/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Surat13 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha & Shri Bijayananda Pruseth, Accountant Mmber आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.672/Srt/2024 Assessment Year: (2017-18) (Hybrid Hearing) Devngi Jewellers Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Dcit, 109 -110, Shreyas Diamond Centre, Circle – 1(1)(1), Mini Bazar, Varachha Road, Surat Surat - 395006 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aabcd3227A (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri Sapnesh R. Sheth, Ca Respondent By Shri Ravi Kant Gupta, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 31/07/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 13/08/2025

Section 115BSection 142(1)Section 144Section 145(3)Section 250Section 68

…IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, SURAT BENCH, SURAT BEFORE SHRI DINESH MOHAN SINHA, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI BIJAYANANDA PRUSETH, ACCOUNTANT MMBER आयकरअपीलसं./ITA No.672/SRT/2024 Assessment Year: (2017-18) (Hybrid hearing) Devngi Jewellers Pvt. Ltd. Vs. DCIT, 109 -110, Shreyas Diamond Centre, Circle – 1(1)(1), Mini Bazar, Varachha Road, Surat Surat - 395006 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No: AABCD3227A (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Shri Sapnesh R. Sheth, CA Respondent by Shri Ravi Kant Gupta, CIT-DR Date of Hearing 31/07/2025 Date of Pronouncement 13/08/2025 आदेश /O R D E R PER BIJAYANANDA PRUSETH, AM…

Showing 120 of 97 · Page 1 of 5