CIT v. Anil Bhalla

322 ITR 191High Court2010#1710 most cited

What is CIT v. Anil Bhalla authority for?

Additions to income cannot be sustained solely based on "dumb documents" seized during a search if such documents are unsigned, undated, or unverified and do not clearly reveal undisclosed income without corroborative evidence.

66

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Anil Bhalla · Anil Bhalla · 322 ITR 191 · Section 132 · Section 153A · Section 292C · dumb documents · unsigned documents · unverified documents · additions to income · search and seizure assessment · evidentiary value

Also reported as

38 DTR 113

Sections most often in play

Section 132Section 115BBESection 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 292CSection 69CSection 153C

Issues it is cited on

section 132(5)section 100section 153(c)(1)section 94abatement of assessmentanonymous donationdumb documentssurvey under section 133asection 153(c)section 292cthird party informationsection 164

Judgments citing CIT v. Anil Bhalla

DCIT, Meerut vs. M/S. Godwin Construction (P) Ltd., Meerut

In the result appeal filed by the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 4011/DEL/2015[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Jun 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri N.K.Saini & Smt. Beena A Pillaiay: 2005-06 & Ay: 2006-07 Godwin Construction Pvt.Ltd. Vs. Acit, Central Circle A-151, Defence Colony Bhaisali Ground Mawana Road Meerut Meerut Pan: Aaefg 1843 R Ay: 2006-07 Ay: 2007-08 Ay: 2008-09 Dcit, Central Circle Vs. Godwin Construction Pvt.Ltd. Meerut Meerut (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Sh. Sandeep Sapra, Adv. & Sh. Ravinder Agarwal, C.A. Department By : Sh.Sanjit Singh, Cit, D.R. Date Of Hearing : 09.05.2018 Date Of Pronouncement: 08/06/2018

For Appellant: Sh. Sandeep Sapra, Adv. And Sh. Ravinder Agarwal, C.AFor Respondent: Sh.Sanjit Singh, CIT, D.R
Section 292CSection 68

…s of addition. Jurisdictional Allahabad High Court judgment dated 17.02.2017 in CIT vs. Shri Yogendra Singh ITAT Delhi Bench judgment dated 25.07.2014 in ACIT vs. Shri Sharad Chaudhary CIT vs. Vatika Landbase P Ltd. (Del) 383 ITR 320 CIT vs. Anil Bhalla (Del) 322 ITR 191 5.3. On the contrary Ld.DR placed reliance upon the submissions filed before us in writing. He submitted that all the receipts/counter foils of cash receipts have been seized from the premises of assessee and that section 292C of the Act strengthens the presumption of such receipts belonging to assessee. He submitted that it was upon assessee to…

DCIT, Meerut vs. M/S. Godwin Construction (P) Ltd., Meerut

In the result appeal filed by the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 4010/DEL/2015[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Jun 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri N.K.Saini & Smt. Beena A Pillaiay: 2005-06 & Ay: 2006-07 Godwin Construction Pvt.Ltd. Vs. Acit, Central Circle A-151, Defence Colony Bhaisali Ground Mawana Road Meerut Meerut Pan: Aaefg 1843 R Ay: 2006-07 Ay: 2007-08 Ay: 2008-09 Dcit, Central Circle Vs. Godwin Construction Pvt.Ltd. Meerut Meerut (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Sh. Sandeep Sapra, Adv. & Sh. Ravinder Agarwal, C.A. Department By : Sh.Sanjit Singh, Cit, D.R. Date Of Hearing : 09.05.2018 Date Of Pronouncement: 08/06/2018

For Appellant: Sh. Sandeep Sapra, Adv. And Sh. Ravinder Agarwal, C.AFor Respondent: Sh.Sanjit Singh, CIT, D.R
Section 292CSection 68

…s of addition. Jurisdictional Allahabad High Court judgment dated 17.02.2017 in CIT vs. Shri Yogendra Singh ITAT Delhi Bench judgment dated 25.07.2014 in ACIT vs. Shri Sharad Chaudhary CIT vs. Vatika Landbase P Ltd. (Del) 383 ITR 320 CIT vs. Anil Bhalla (Del) 322 ITR 191 5.3. On the contrary Ld.DR placed reliance upon the submissions filed before us in writing. He submitted that all the receipts/counter foils of cash receipts have been seized from the premises of assessee and that section 292C of the Act strengthens the presumption of such receipts belonging to assessee. He submitted that it was upon assessee to…

M/S. Godwin Construction Pvt. Ltd., Meerut vs. ACIT, Meerut

In the result appeal filed by the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 3227/DEL/2015[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Jun 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri N.K.Saini & Smt. Beena A Pillaiay: 2005-06 & Ay: 2006-07 Godwin Construction Pvt.Ltd. Vs. Acit, Central Circle A-151, Defence Colony Bhaisali Ground Mawana Road Meerut Meerut Pan: Aaefg 1843 R Ay: 2006-07 Ay: 2007-08 Ay: 2008-09 Dcit, Central Circle Vs. Godwin Construction Pvt.Ltd. Meerut Meerut (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Sh. Sandeep Sapra, Adv. & Sh. Ravinder Agarwal, C.A. Department By : Sh.Sanjit Singh, Cit, D.R. Date Of Hearing : 09.05.2018 Date Of Pronouncement: 08/06/2018

For Appellant: Sh. Sandeep Sapra, Adv. And Sh. Ravinder Agarwal, C.AFor Respondent: Sh.Sanjit Singh, CIT, D.R
Section 292CSection 68

…s of addition. Jurisdictional Allahabad High Court judgment dated 17.02.2017 in CIT vs. Shri Yogendra Singh ITAT Delhi Bench judgment dated 25.07.2014 in ACIT vs. Shri Sharad Chaudhary CIT vs. Vatika Landbase P Ltd. (Del) 383 ITR 320 CIT vs. Anil Bhalla (Del) 322 ITR 191 5.3. On the contrary Ld.DR placed reliance upon the submissions filed before us in writing. He submitted that all the receipts/counter foils of cash receipts have been seized from the premises of assessee and that section 292C of the Act strengthens the presumption of such receipts belonging to assessee. He submitted that it was upon assessee to…

The Dy. CIT- 2(1), Raipur (Cg) vs. M/S. Arya Energy Ltd., Raipur (Cg)

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue for assessment year 2011-

ITA 139/BIL/2014[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur25 May 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya (Am) & Shri Ram Lal Negi (Jm) Assessment Year: 2011-12 The Dy. Commissioner Of M/S Arya Energy Ltd., Income-Tax-2(1), C/O Avinash Builders, Central Revenue Building, Avinash House, Civil Lines, Vs. Near Anupam Garden, Raipur (C.G.) G.B. Road, Raipur (C.G.) Pan: Aagca2002F (Appellant) (Respondent) Revenue By : Shri P.K. Mishra (Dr) Assessee By : Shri Abhishek Jain (Ar) Date Of Hearing: 07/03/2018 Date Of Pronouncement: 25/05/2018

For Appellant: Shri Abhishek Jain (AR)For Respondent: Shri P.K. Mishra (DR)
Section 132Section 143Section 153(1)(b)Section 2Section 69C

…s of the ITAT. The Ld. counsel for the assessee further submitted that since the Ld. CIT(A) has decided this ground of appeal by following the decisions rendered in case of DCIT Vs. Radhe Developers India Ltd. (2010) 329 ITR 1 (Guj), CIT vs Anil Bhalla (2010) 322 ITR 191 (Del) CIT vs. Maulik Kumar K. Shah (2008) 307 ITR 137 (Guj), Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Atam Valves (P) Ltd. (2009) 184 Taxman 6 (P&H) Nagarjuna Construction Co. Ltd. Vs. Deputy CIT (2012) 52 SOT 178 (Hyderabad) (URO), Amar Natvarlal Vs. ACIT (1197) 57 TTJ (Ahd) 454: 60 ITD 560 and Nishant Construction Pvt. Ltd. vs ACIT, ITA No 1505/Ahd/2015…

Shyam Sunder Jindal, New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

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

ITA 5448/DEL/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Apr 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Smt. Beena Pillai, Jm Ita No. 5448/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year : 2006-07 Shyam Sunder Jindal, Vs Asstt. Commissioner Of Income 12A, Green Avenue, Sector-D, Tax, Central Circle-30, Pocket-3, Vasant Kunj, New Delhi New Delhi-110070 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aagpj0184N Assessee By : Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv. & Sh. Rohit Garg, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. S. S. Rana, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 16.02.2017 Date Of Pronouncement : 10.04.2017 Order Per N. K. Saini, Am: This Is An Appeal By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 24.08.2016 Of Ld. Cit(A)-30, New Delhi

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. S. S. Rana, CIT DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153B(1)(viii)Section 4

…the assessee but that onus was not discharged. Therefore, the addition made by the AO and sustained by the ld. CIT(A) was not justified. The reliance was placed on the following case laws: " CIT Vs Ved Prakash Choudhary 305 ITR 245 (Del.) " CIT Vs Anil Bhalla 322 ITR 191 (Del.) " CIT Vs Lubtec India Ltd. 311 ITR 175 (Del.) " CIT Vs Atam Valves (P.) Ltd. 332 ITR 468 (P&H) " CIT Vs Dolphin Builders (P.) Ltd. 356 ITR 420 (MP) " ACIT Vs Sharad Chaudhary 165 TTJ 145 (Del. Trib.) " CIT Vs Ravi Kumar 294 ITR 78 (P&H) " ITO Vs Twinkle Papers (P.) Ltd. 95 TTJ 987 (Chd. Trib.) (TM) 17. In his rival submissions the ld. DR s…

Raj Hans Towers Pvt. Ltd vs. Commissioner of Income Tax-V

ITA/24/2015HC Delhi27 Jan 2015
Section 132Section 133ASection 260ASection 69C

…pts, thus reducing the total taxable income. 4. The assessee appealed; the Revenue too cross appealed. The assessee’s appeals were rejected. In support of its appeal, reliance was placed upon three decisions of this Court in CIT v. Anil Bhalla (2010) 322 ITR 191 (Delhi), CIT v. Dhingra Metal Works (2010) 328 ITR 384 (Delhi) and CIT v. Akme Projects (judgment of this Court in ITA 596/2012, dated 2.5.2013). It is contended that the Revenue could not have included the amount merely on the basis of some rough noting and brought them to tax. Counsel particularly relied upon the decision in Dhingra Meta…