Avdesh Kumar Jain v. CIT

178 ITR 443Reported decision1989#23850 most cited
3

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2023 to 2025.

Sections most often in play

Section 115BBESection 143(3)Section 68

Issues it is cited on

agricultural incomenfacdocumentinterest

Judgments citing Avdesh Kumar Jain v. CIT

M T KRISHNE GOWDA,HASSAN vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1 & TPS, , HASSAN

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 832/BANG/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore17 Dec 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri. Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri. Keshav Dubeyassessment Year : 2020-21 Shri. M. T. Krishne Gowda, Vs. Ito, Lakshmi Stone Crushing Industries, Ward – 1& Tps, Muduganur Arkalgud, Hassan. Hassan – 573 201, Karnataka. Pan : Arupk 5347 F Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri. Mahesh R Uppin, Ar Revenue By : Shri. Balusamy N, Jcit(Dr)(Itat), Bangalore. Date Of Hearing : 17.11.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 17.12.2025

For Appellant: Shri. Mahesh R Uppin, ARFor Respondent: Shri. Balusamy N, JCIT(DR)(ITAT), Bangalore
Section 115BSection 68

…requirements of the AO and noted that the entire agricultural receipts of Rs.1,35,15,000/- from walk in customers without any bills are unsubstantiated and relying on the judgment of Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in the case of Avdesh Kumar Jain Vs. CIT (1989) 178 ITR 443 and judgment of Hon’ble Apex Court in the Page 3 of 5 case of Roshan Di Hatti Vs. CIT (SC) 107 ITR 938, dismissed appeal of the assessee. 4. Aggrieved from the above Order, assessee filed appeal before the Tribunal. The learned Counsel reiterated the submissions made before the lower authorities and submitted that the entire land ownership was p…

SHRI SATBIR SINGH BHULLAR,AMRITSAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD- 5 (4), AMRITSAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No

ITA 258/ASR/2022[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar02 Mar 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

Section 139(1)Section 147Section 148Section 250(6)Section 250oSection 68

…name of the appellant along with the family members. A copy of same is enclosed at page no. 7 to 40 of the APB. Furthermore, the ld. CIT(A) has also relied upon judgment of the Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in the case of Avdesh Kumar Jain vs. CIT reported in 178 ITR 443. The ld. CIT Appeals has failed to appreciate that the fact of the said case is not applicable to the assessee particularly in the circumstance where in the present case the assessee has duly submitted the ‘Jamabandi’ mentioning the fact that the land used for the agriculture operations. 6. In order to further substantiate the claim the ld. Cou…

JAGDISH CHANDRA CHOUDHARY,AJMER vs. ITO W-2(2) AJMER, AJMER

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 378/JPR/2022[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur15 Feb 2023AY 2010-2011

Bench: Hon’ble SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Anoop Bhatia, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Monisha Choudhary, JCIT
Section 147

…ting, irrigation and similar work done on the land itself. 4. Subsequent operation is also the resultant items through basic operation should be in a shape of products either for consumption or trade. 4.7 In the case of Avdhesh Kumar Jain Vs CIT dt 27.02 1989 178 ITR 443 All, 1990 48 Taxman 266 the Hon'ble High Court upheld the order of Hon'ble ITAT wherein appellant failed to establish the primary and subsequent operation. In this case, the appellant was not able to state as to whom the said agriculture produce was sale. The appellant has also not established to show that it was engaged in commercial agricultura…