How many judgments cite ACIT v. Prabhat Oil Mills?

48 judgments on BharatTax cite ACIT v. Prabhat Oil Mills (52 TTJ 533), spanning 2016 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does ACIT v. Prabhat Oil Mills come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 143(3), Section 132, Section 69A, Section 69C, Section 147, Section 132(4).

ACIT v. Prabhat Oil Mills

52 TTJ 533Income Tax Appellate Tribunal1995#2400 most cited

What is ACIT v. Prabhat Oil Mills authority for?

Section 69A of the Income-tax Act, dealing with unexplained money, can only be invoked if the money is physically found in the possession of the assessee.

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,314 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2026.

Also referred to as

ACIT v. Prabhat Oil Mills · Prabhat Oil Mills · Section 69A · unexplained money · physical possession of money · invocation of Section 69A · money not physically found · ITAT 1995 · Income Tax Act Section 69A

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 132 Section 69A Section 69C Section 147 Section 132(4)Section 148 Section 153C

Issues it is cited on

hundi transaction principal chief commissioner of income-tax section 132(5)section 100 section 23(1)(a)third party information section 153(c)(1)section 94 abatement of assessment peak credit theory anonymous donation section 23(1)

Judgments citing ACIT v. Prabhat Oil Mills

ACIT - 17(1), Mumbai vs. Shri Anand Jaikumar Jain, Mumbai

ITA 3820/MUM/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Apr 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Vijay MehtaFor Respondent: Shri O.P. Singh

Section 131(1)Section 143(3)Section 148

…rd party or statement of a third party could not be treated as so sacrosanct so as to read as a positive material against the assessee. Therefore, addition in the hands of the assessee on account of 'on-money' was notjustified" iv) ACIT v. Prabhat Oil Mills [52 TTJ 533 (Ahd)] - Pg. nos. 38-43 In this case, the department relied upon certain notings in the seized diary found from the premises of third party and contended that the assessee had made sales outside the books of accounts. However, the assessee denied of having made any sales outside the books of accounts. The Hon'ble Tribunal held that once the assess…

Smt. Meenakshi Prakash Jadhav, Mumbai vs. ITO 21 (2)(3), Mumbai

Accordingly ground No. 5 raised by the assessee is allowed

ITA 303/MUM/2020[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Oct 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman () & Shri Ravish Sood () Assessment Year: 2010-11 Smt. Meenakshi Prakash Jadhav, Income Tax Officer-21(2)(3), 175, 5Th Floor, 845, Shivneri Vs. Room No. 105, 1St Floor, Piramal Building, B.J. Marg, Byculla West, Chambers Lalbaug, Parel, Mumbai-400011. Mumbai-400012. Pan No. Acspj 3509 K Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. Devendra Jain, Ar Revenue By : Mr. Sanjay J. Sethi, Dr Date Of Hearing : 12/08/2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 12/10/2021

For Appellant: Mr. Devendra Jain, ARFor Respondent: Mr. Sanjay J. Sethi, DR

Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…her name, does not amount to un-escaped income and re-assessment proceedings should not be done. In this regard we rely on following decisions:- 1. CIT Vs. Lata Mangeshkar 97 ITR 2. CIT Vs. M. K. Brothers 53 CTR 228 (163 IT 249) 3. ACIT Vs Prabhat Oil Mill 52 TTJ 533 4. CBI VS V. C. Shukla3 SCC 410 In all these cases, it has been held that mainly because some loose papers or noting found out from thethird party mentioned the name of the assessee, additions cannot be made unless there are concreie corroborative evidence available showing the assessee having made such investment or received such unaccounted inc…

Ag-8 Ventures Ltd., Bhopal vs. ACIT, Central-1, Bhopal

In the result appeals of the Revenue bearing No

ITA 923/IND/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore16 Feb 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon'Ble Kul Bharat & Hon'Ble Manish Borad

Section 132Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 14ASection 153ASection 271(1)(c)Section 271ASection 40A(3)Section 80I

…“on- money” payment is merely a bald allegation which is not corroborated. Statement of third person, which is not corroborated by any evidence, has no evidentiary value and in support of this contention on following decisions:- i. ACT vs Prabhat Oil Mills 52 TTJ 533 (Ahd); ii. Chironjilal Steel Rolling Mills vs CIT 84 ITR 222 (P&H). iii. CBIvs V.C. Shukla 1998 SCC 410; iw. Ashwini Kumar 39 ITR 183 (Del.); v. Satnam Singh Chhabra 74 TTJ 976 (Luck.); vi. Ashadevi 101 TTJ 332 (Ahd.); vii. ACIT vs Kamla Prasad Singh 3 ITR (Trib.) 533 (Pat.); viii. Sheth Akshya Pushpavandan 130 TTJ 42 (Ahd.); ix. Balram Jakh…

Ag-8 Ventures Ltd., Bhopal vs. ACIT, Central-1, Bhopal

In the result appeals of the Revenue bearing No

ITA 922/IND/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Indore16 Feb 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon'Ble Kul Bharat & Hon'Ble Manish Borad

Section 132Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 14ASection 153ASection 271(1)(c)Section 271ASection 40A(3)Section 80I

DCIT, CC-1, Jaipur vs. Shri Jugal Kishore Garg(Derewala), Jaipur

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 34/JPR/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur14 Sept 2020AY 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri S.L. Poddar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ambrish Bedi, CIT- DR fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@

Section 143(3)

…th the assessee with proper evidence: - (i) CIT vs. Kalyan Sundram (2007) 294 ITR 94 (SC) No addition can be made where no enquiry is made and no evidence is found during search except the conflicting statement of the third party. ACTT Vs. Prabhat Oil Mills 52 TTJ 533 (Ahm) Entries in the diary seized from the premises of third party were not sufficient to make addition in the hands of the assessee. The Assessing Officer was required to bring on record corroborative material. 20 DCIT, Central Circle-1, Jaipur vs Jugal Kishore Garg (Derewala) (iii) Associated Stone Industries (Kotah ) Ltd Vs. Dy. Deputy Commis…

Uma Singal, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Centrl Circle-3, New Delhi

ITA 1484/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Dec 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri S. K. Tulsiyan, AdvFor Respondent: Shri S S Rana CIT DR

Section 10(38)Section 143Section 153ASection 250Section 68

…7 SOT 380 (Chd.): Held that though the diary seized enabled the revenue to presume that its contents are true, such presumption is available only against the person to whom it belongs and this is a rebuttable presumption. (7) ACIT Vs. Prabhat Oil Mills (1995) 52 TTJ 533 (Ahd.): It was held that mere entries in the accounts of a third party were not sufficient to prove that the assessee indulged in such transactions. (8) Sheth Akshay Pushpavadan Vs. DCIT (2010) 130 TTJ 42 (Ahd. UO): Held that presumption u/s 132(4A) is not available when the seized papers are recovered from third party and not from the assessee. (…

Ritu Singal, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle- 3, New Delhi

ITA 1481/DEL/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Dec 2018AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri S. K. Tulsiyan, AdvFor Respondent: Shri S S Rana CIT DR

Section 10(38)Section 143Section 153ASection 250Section 68

Binod Kumar Goenka, Kolkata vs. ACIT, Cir-45, Kolkata

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

ITA 1651/KOL/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata02 Dec 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh, Am & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi, Jm]

For Appellant: Shri A. K. Tibrewal, FCA, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Sallong Yaden, Addl. CIT

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)

…ss for cross examination by the assessee which could have brought the truth with regard to omission of an entry by the said party on record. He further placed reliance on the decision of Ahmedabad Tribunal in the case of ACIT Vs. Prabhat Oil Mills Ltd. (1995) 52 TTJ 533 (Ahd.) in support of his contentions. In response to this, the ld. DR vehemently relied on the orders of the lower authorities. 5. We have heard rival submissions and gone through facts and circumstances of the case including the paper book filed by the assessee. The facts stated hereinabove remain undisputed and hence the same are not reiterated…