Chadha v. ITO

202 Taxmann 395High Court2011#3166 most cited

What is Chadha v. ITO authority for?

Jewellery found during a search that is adequately explained as being owned by a married lady for a long time, even without documentary evidence, should not be added to income, as this recognizes realities of life.

37

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Chadha v. ITO · 202 Taxmann 395 · unexplained jewellery · jewellery found during search · married lady · streedhan · reasonable quantity of jewellery · documentary evidence · realities of life · addition to income

Issues it is cited on

Judgments citing Chadha v. ITO

Bhaveshbhai Amulakhbhai Sonani, Surat vs. DCIT, Central Circlle-3, Surat

In the result, the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed

ITA 118/SRT/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Surat17 Jul 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Pawan Singhआ.अ.सं./Ita No.118/Srt/2022 (Ay 2018-19) (Hearing In Physical Court) Bhaveshkumar Deputy Commissioner Of Amulakhbhai Sonani, A- Income-Tax, Central Vs 604, Sai Residency, Near Circle-3, Surat, 5Thfloor, Gajera School, Katargam, Aayakar Bhavan, Majura Surat-395004 Gate, Surat-395001 Pan No: Apsps 0912 G अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By Ms. Chaitali Shah, Ca राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By Shri Ashok B. Koli, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing 03.05.2023 उ"घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of 17.07.2023 Pronouncement Order Under Section 254(1) Of Income Tax Act Per Pawan Singh: 1. This Appeal By Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)-4, Surat [For Short To As “Ld. Cit(A)”] Dated 03.03.2022 For Assessment Year 2018- 19, Which In Turn Arises From The Addition Made By The Assistant Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Central Circle-3, Surat / Assessing Officer In Assessment Order Passed Under Section 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) Dated 28.12.2019. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Ground Of Appeal:- Bhaveshkumar A Sonani “1. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Learned Cit(A) Has Grossly Erred In In Making An Addition Of Rs.16,32,732/- U/S 69A Of The Act Treating The Jewellery Found & Seized During The Cruse Of Search As Unexplained, On Erroneous Grounds Without Appreciating That The Same Is Fully Reflected In The Appellant’S & His Family Member’S Regular Books Of Accounts. Hence, The Impugned Addition As Confirmed By The Learned Cit(A) Needs To Be Deleted As Being Absolutely Erroneous, Incorrect, Illegal & Bad-In-Law.

Section 115BSection 132Section 143(3)Section 254(1)Section 69A

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, सुरत "यायपीठ, सुरत IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, SURAT “SMC” BENCH, SURAT BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER आ.अ.सं./ITA No.118/SRT/2022 (AY 2018-19) (Hearing in Physical Court) Bhaveshkumar Deputy Commissioner of Amulakhbhai Sonani, A- Income-tax, Central Vs 604, Sai Residency, Near Circle-3, Surat, 5thFloor, Gajera School, Katargam, Aayakar Bhavan, Majura Surat-395004 Gate, Surat-395001 PAN No: APSPS 0912 G अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee by Ms. Chaitali Shah, CA राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue by Shri Ashok B. Koli, CIT-DR सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of hear…

Late Smt. Kailash Agrawal Through Lh Mr. Sushil Agrawal, Bhopal vs. The DCIT Central-1, Bhopal

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 426/IND/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Indore06 Feb 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Hon'Ble Kul Bharat & Hon'Ble Manish Boradassessment Year: 2012-13 Late Smt. Kailash Agrawal Dcit-1 Through Lh Mr. Sudhir बनाम/ Kumar Agrawal, Bhopal Vs. E-2/4, Arera Colony, Bhopal (Appellant) (Revenue) Pan: Aarpa4436B Appellant By Shri S.S. Deshpande, Ca Revenue By Smt. Ashima Gupta, Cit- Dr Date Of Hearing: 23.01.2019 Date Of Pronouncement: 06.02.2019 आदेश / O R D E R Per Manish Borad, A.M: This Appeal By Assessee Pertaining To A.Y. 2012-13 Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)-3 Bhopal, (In Short ‘Cit(A)’), Dated 28.02.2017 Which Is Arising Out Of The Order U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act 1961(Hereinafter Called As The ‘Act’) Framed On 31.01.2014 By Dcit(Central) Bhopal. The Assessee Has Raised Following Grounds Of Appeal:

Section 132Section 132ASection 143(3)

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, इ"दौर "यायपीठ, इ"दौर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE HON'BLE KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND HON'BLE MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2012-13 Late Smt. Kailash Agrawal DCIT-1 Through LH Mr. Sudhir बनाम/ Kumar Agrawal, Bhopal Vs. E-2/4, Arera Colony, Bhopal (Appellant) (Revenue) PAN: AARPA4436B Appellant by Shri S.S. Deshpande, CA Revenue by Smt. Ashima Gupta, CIT- DR Date of Hearing: 23.01.2019 Date of Pronouncement: 06.02.2019 आदेश / O R D E R PER MANISH BORAD, A.M: This appeal by Assessee pertaining to A.Y. 2012-13 is directed against the…

Asst CIT CC 3(2) Cen RG 3, Mumbai vs. Vinod Ramniwas Garg, Nagpur

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 2899/MUM/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Mar 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 2249/Mum/2015 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12) Shri Vinod Garg, The Dy. Commissioner Of बनाम/ C/O M/S Loya Bagri & Co., Income Tax – Central Cir V. Chartered Accountants, 18 & 19, Gandhibag, Mumbai. Nagpur – 440 002. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Abopg 6195 R (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent)

For Respondent: Shri Rahul Raman, CIT DR
Section 132Section 132(1)Section 143(3)Section 234BSection 69B

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण “H” "यायपीठ मुंबई म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “H” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI C.N. PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAMIT KOCHAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 2249/Mum/2015 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12) Shri Vinod Garg, The Dy. Commissioner of बनाम/ C/o M/s Loya Bagri & Co., Income Tax – Central Cir v. Chartered Accountants, 18 and 19, Gandhibag, Mumbai. Nagpur – 440 002. "थायी लेखा सं./PAN : ABOPG 6195 R (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 2899/Mum/2015 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12) The Asstt. Commissioner of…

Vinod Garg, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen Cir 18 & 19, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 2249/MUM/2015[201-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Mar 2017

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 2249/Mum/2015 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12) Shri Vinod Garg, The Dy. Commissioner Of बनाम/ C/O M/S Loya Bagri & Co., Income Tax – Central Cir V. Chartered Accountants, 18 & 19, Gandhibag, Mumbai. Nagpur – 440 002. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Abopg 6195 R (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent)

For Respondent: Shri Rahul Raman, CIT DR
Section 132Section 132(1)Section 143(3)Section 234BSection 69B

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण “H” "यायपीठ मुंबई म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “H” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI C.N. PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAMIT KOCHAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 2249/Mum/2015 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12) Shri Vinod Garg, The Dy. Commissioner of बनाम/ C/o M/s Loya Bagri & Co., Income Tax – Central Cir v. Chartered Accountants, 18 and 19, Gandhibag, Mumbai. Nagpur – 440 002. "थायी लेखा सं./PAN : ABOPG 6195 R (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 2899/Mum/2015 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12) The Asstt. Commissioner of…