Ashok Kumar Rastogi v. CIT

241 ITR 464High Court2000#10892 most cited

What is Ashok Kumar Rastogi v. CIT authority for?

Income-tax authorities cannot make additions for unexplained investment solely based on seized documents without supporting evidence or material. Similarly, penalties levied on estimations can only be sustained if supported by relevant judicial considerations.

10

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,315 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Ashok Kumar Rastogi v. CIT · unexplained investment · seized documents · no supporting evidence · penalty on estimation · CIT(Appeals) relying on Explanation 5A

Also reported as

55 Taxmann 433

Sections most often in play

Section 1961Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153CSection 271(1)(c)Section 132(1)

Issues it is cited on

section 106furnishing inaccurate particulars of incomesection 132(1)furnishing inaccurate particularspenalty u/s 271(1)(c)unexplained investmentcommissioner (appeals)section 133asection 271(1)assistant commissionersection 153csection 10

Judgments citing Ashok Kumar Rastogi v. CIT

Shree Mangalam Aluminium, Patna vs. Dc/ACIT, Central Circle-3, Patna

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 488/PAT/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Patna29 Jul 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) I.T.A. Nos. 486 To 488/Pat/2022 Assessment Year: 2014-2015 To 2016-2017 Shree Mangalam Aluminium,…...….………Appellant Pandey Plaza Building, Exhibition Road, Patna-800001, Bihar [Pan:Abkfs3963M] -Vs.- Deputy/Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax,……………………………………………………..Respondent Central Circle-3, Patna, Bihar

Section 106Section 132Section 132(1)Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153CSection 271(1)(c)

…orders merely by relying on Explanation 5A and without considering the ratios laid down by various judicial forums. Ld. counsel also relied on the decision of the Hon’ble High Court of Allahabad in the case of Ashok Kumar Rastogi -vs.- CIT reported in (1991) 55 Taxmann 433 and also relied on the decision of Coordinate Bench of Mumbai in the case of Mun Gems -vs.- Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax reported in (2023) 155 taxmann.com 1 (Mumbai – Trib.). He also relied on the decision of the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in the case of CIT -vs.- Aero Traders (P.) Limited reported in (2010) 322 ITR 316 (Del.). In all t…

Shree Mangalam Aluminium, Patna vs. Dc/ACIT, Central Circle-3, Patna

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 487/PAT/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Patna29 Jul 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) I.T.A. Nos. 486 To 488/Pat/2022 Assessment Year: 2014-2015 To 2016-2017 Shree Mangalam Aluminium,…...….………Appellant Pandey Plaza Building, Exhibition Road, Patna-800001, Bihar [Pan:Abkfs3963M] -Vs.- Deputy/Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax,……………………………………………………..Respondent Central Circle-3, Patna, Bihar

Section 106Section 132Section 132(1)Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153CSection 271(1)(c)

…orders merely by relying on Explanation 5A and without considering the ratios laid down by various judicial forums. Ld. counsel also relied on the decision of the Hon’ble High Court of Allahabad in the case of Ashok Kumar Rastogi -vs.- CIT reported in (1991) 55 Taxmann 433 and also relied on the decision of Coordinate Bench of Mumbai in the case of Mun Gems -vs.- Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax reported in (2023) 155 taxmann.com 1 (Mumbai – Trib.). He also relied on the decision of the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in the case of CIT -vs.- Aero Traders (P.) Limited reported in (2010) 322 ITR 316 (Del.). In all t…

Shree Mangalam Aluminium, Patna vs. Dc/ACIT, Central Circle-3, Patna

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 486/PAT/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Patna29 Jul 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) I.T.A. Nos. 486 To 488/Pat/2022 Assessment Year: 2014-2015 To 2016-2017 Shree Mangalam Aluminium,…...….………Appellant Pandey Plaza Building, Exhibition Road, Patna-800001, Bihar [Pan:Abkfs3963M] -Vs.- Deputy/Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax,……………………………………………………..Respondent Central Circle-3, Patna, Bihar

Section 106Section 132Section 132(1)Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153CSection 271(1)(c)

…orders merely by relying on Explanation 5A and without considering the ratios laid down by various judicial forums. Ld. counsel also relied on the decision of the Hon’ble High Court of Allahabad in the case of Ashok Kumar Rastogi -vs.- CIT reported in (1991) 55 Taxmann 433 and also relied on the decision of Coordinate Bench of Mumbai in the case of Mun Gems -vs.- Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax reported in (2023) 155 taxmann.com 1 (Mumbai – Trib.). He also relied on the decision of the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in the case of CIT -vs.- Aero Traders (P.) Limited reported in (2010) 322 ITR 316 (Del.). In all t…

Kalyanasundaram Suresh, Chennai vs. ACIT Non Corporate Circle 2, Chennai

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

ITA 297/CHNY/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Aug 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.297/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2013-14 Shri Kalyanasundaram Suresh, Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of Old No. 12-A, New No. 24, Income Tax, Swarnamangalam East Road, West Non Corporate Circle 2, Cit Nagar, Nandanam, Chennai. Chennai 600 035. [Pan: Aobps4696F] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri K. Ravi Kannan, Advocate & Shri Varun Ranganathan, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri R.V. Aroon Prasad, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 23.07.2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 28.08.2024 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 28.12.2018 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Chennai For The Assessment Year 2013-14. 2. The Ld. Ar Shri K. Ravi Kannan, Advocate Drew Our Attention To The Additional Grounds Of Appeal Filed On 10.12.2023 & Submits That The Said 3 Grounds Of Appeal May Be Taken Up First The Ld. Dr Shri R.V.

For Appellant: Shri K. Ravi Kannan, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri R.V. Aroon Prasad, Addl. CIT
Section 127Section 143(2)Section 5

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ’सी’ "ायपीठ, चे"ई IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘C’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी एसएस िव"ने" रिव, "ाियक सद" एवं "ी एस.आर. रगुनाथॎ, लेखा सद" के सम" Before Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Judicial Member & Shri S.R. Raghunatha, Accountant Member आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.297/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2013-14 Shri Kalyanasundaram Suresh, Vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Old No. 12-A, New No. 24, Income Tax, Swarnamangalam East Road, West Non Corporate Circle 2, CIT Nagar, Nandanam, Chennai. Chennai 600 035. [PAN: AOBPS4696F] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant b…

M/S. Mandviwala Developers, Surat vs. The Dy.Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(2), Surat

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1192/AHD/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Surat26 Mar 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini(Virtual Court Hearing) M/S Mandviwala Developers, Vs Deputy Commissioner Of Income Survey No.405-406, Tax, Circle-1(2), Surat Opp. Din Dayal Ashram, Sachin Magdalla Road, Surat (Gujarat). Pan : Aaqfm7563C Appellant Respondednt

Section 133ASection 143(2)Section 254(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, SURAT BENCH, SURAT BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND DR. ARJUN LAL SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (Virtual Court Hearing) M/s Mandviwala Developers, Vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Survey No.405-406, Tax, Circle-1(2), Surat Opp. Din Dayal Ashram, Sachin Magdalla Road, Surat (Gujarat). PAN : AAQFM7563C APPELLANT RESPONDEDNT Appellant by Shri Saurabh Soparkar, Sr. Advocate with Ms Urvashi Shodhan Advocate Respondent by Shri S T Bidari, CIT (DR) & Sh. O.P Vaishnav CIT-DR Date of hearing 05/02/2021 Date of pronouncement 26/03/2021 Order Under section 254(1) of Income-ta…

K.Suresh, Chennai vs. DCIT, Chennai

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 572/CHNY/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai19 Jun 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri G. Pavan Kumar

For Appellant: Shri K. Ravi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Supriyo Pal, JCIT
Section 148

…e or material,the ITO cannot make any addition as unexplained investment notwithstanding seizure of certain documents from the assessee [Ashok Kumar Rastogi vs. CIT (1991) 100 CTR (All) 204. 12.4 In the case of CIT vs. Southern Shipping Co. (P) Ltd. (2000) 241 ITR 464 (Mad), the assessee had advanced a sum of Rs. 5 lakhs on a pronote which stipulated interest at 44 paise per thousand rupees per day. The said pronote was recovered during the search of the business premises by the Revenue authorities. Sustaining addition, the High Court held that even though the assessee’s accounts do not reveal any receipt…

K.Suresh, Chennai vs. DCIT, Chennai

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 571/CHNY/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai19 Jun 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri G. Pavan Kumar

For Appellant: Shri K. Ravi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Supriyo Pal, JCIT
Section 148

…e or material,the ITO cannot make any addition as unexplained investment notwithstanding seizure of certain documents from the assessee [Ashok Kumar Rastogi vs. CIT (1991) 100 CTR (All) 204. 12.4 In the case of CIT vs. Southern Shipping Co. (P) Ltd. (2000) 241 ITR 464 (Mad), the assessee had advanced a sum of Rs. 5 lakhs on a pronote which stipulated interest at 44 paise per thousand rupees per day. The said pronote was recovered during the search of the business premises by the Revenue authorities. Sustaining addition, the High Court held that even though the assessee’s accounts do not reveal any receipt…

K.Suresh, Chennai vs. DCIT, Chennai

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 570/CHNY/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai19 Jun 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri G. Pavan Kumar

For Appellant: Shri K. Ravi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Supriyo Pal, JCIT
Section 148

…e or material,the ITO cannot make any addition as unexplained investment notwithstanding seizure of certain documents from the assessee [Ashok Kumar Rastogi vs. CIT (1991) 100 CTR (All) 204. 12.4 In the case of CIT vs. Southern Shipping Co. (P) Ltd. (2000) 241 ITR 464 (Mad), the assessee had advanced a sum of Rs. 5 lakhs on a pronote which stipulated interest at 44 paise per thousand rupees per day. The said pronote was recovered during the search of the business premises by the Revenue authorities. Sustaining addition, the High Court held that even though the assessee’s accounts do not reveal any receipt…

K.Suresh, Chennai vs. DCIT, Chennai

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 569/CHNY/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai19 Jun 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri G. Pavan Kumar

For Appellant: Shri K. Ravi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Supriyo Pal, JCIT
Section 148

…e or material,the ITO cannot make any addition as unexplained investment notwithstanding seizure of certain documents from the assessee [Ashok Kumar Rastogi vs. CIT (1991) 100 CTR (All) 204. 12.4 In the case of CIT vs. Southern Shipping Co. (P) Ltd. (2000) 241 ITR 464 (Mad), the assessee had advanced a sum of Rs. 5 lakhs on a pronote which stipulated interest at 44 paise per thousand rupees per day. The said pronote was recovered during the search of the business premises by the Revenue authorities. Sustaining addition, the High Court held that even though the assessee’s accounts do not reveal any receipt…

K.Suresh, Chennai vs. DCIT, Chennai

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 568/CHNY/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai19 Jun 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri G. Pavan Kumar

For Appellant: Shri K. Ravi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Supriyo Pal, JCIT
Section 148

…e or material,the ITO cannot make any addition as unexplained investment notwithstanding seizure of certain documents from the assessee [Ashok Kumar Rastogi vs. CIT (1991) 100 CTR (All) 204. 12.4 In the case of CIT vs. Southern Shipping Co. (P) Ltd. (2000) 241 ITR 464 (Mad), the assessee had advanced a sum of Rs. 5 lakhs on a pronote which stipulated interest at 44 paise per thousand rupees per day. The said pronote was recovered during the search of the business premises by the Revenue authorities. Sustaining addition, the High Court held that even though the assessee’s accounts do not reveal any receipt…