CIT v. Balchand Ajit Kumar

263 ITR 610High Court2003#423 most cited

What is CIT v. Balchand Ajit Kumar authority for?

When making an addition for unaccounted receipts, on-money, or non-genuine purchases/sales, the addition should be restricted to the estimated profit element embedded in such transactions, rather than the entire gross amount, particularly when evidence of corresponding expenditure is incomplete. This estimation often involves applying a net profit rate.

212

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2008 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Balchand Ajit Kumar · Section 147 · Section 148 · Section 145(3) · addition restricted to profit · estimated profit · unaccounted receipts · on-money · bogus purchases · non-genuine sales · net profit rate · income estimation

Also reported as

135 Taxmann 180

Sections most often in play

Section 147Section 132Section 143(3)Section 142(1)Section 148Section 153ASection 145(3)Section 132(4)

Issues it is cited on

section 256(1)section 256on money receipton-moneyrejection of books of accountloose paperssection 145(3)survey under section 133asection 145section 132(4a)section 292cblock period

Judgments citing CIT v. Balchand Ajit Kumar

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 1, RAJKOT, RAJKOT vs. YAGNIK ROAD HIGHSTREET LLP, RAJKOT

Appeal of the revenue is dismissed:\n(i)Ground no

ITA 684/RJT/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot12 Mar 2026AY 2021-22
For Appellant: Shri D.M. Rindani, Ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Punglia, Ld. CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)Section 147

…tent of estimated profits embedded in sales for which the net profit\nrate was adopted and hence no referrable question of law arises.;\n1) Similar view has also been taken by the High Court of Madhya Pradesh in the case\nof CIT vs. Balchand Ajit Kumar (2003) 263 ITR 610 (MP) and the Mumbai Bench of\nTribunal in the case of ITO vs. SaiKrupa Construction (2007) 13 SOT 459 (Mumbai).\n4.5 In view of the facts of the case and respectfully following the law laid down by the\njurisdictional High Court and Tribunal, where there are incomplete evidences of both\nunaccounted income (on- money) and unaccounted expenditure…

YAGNIK ROAD HIGHSTREET LLP,RAJKOT vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL -1,, RAJKOT

Appeal of the revenue is dismissed:\n(i)Ground no

ITA 512/RJT/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot12 Mar 2026AY 2021-22
For Appellant: Shri D.M. Rindani, Ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Punglia, Ld. CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)Section 147

…tent of estimated profits embedded in sales for which the net profit\nrate was adopted and hence no referrable question of law arises.;\n1) Similar view has also been taken by the High Court of Madhya Pradesh in the case\nof CIT vs. Balchand Ajit Kumar (2003) 263 ITR 610 (MP) and the Mumbai Bench of\nTribunal in the case of ITO vs. SaiKrupa Construction (2007) 13 SOT 459 (Mumbai).\n\n4.5 In view of the facts of the case and respectfully following the law laid down by the\njurisdictional High Court and Tribunal, where there are incomplete evidences of both\nunaccounted income (on- money) and unaccounted expenditur…

YAGNIK ROAD HIGHSTREET LLP,RAJKOT vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL -1,, RAJKOT

Appeal of the revenue is dismissed:\n(i)Ground no

ITA 511/RJT/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot12 Mar 2026AY 2020-21
For Appellant: Shri D.M. Rindani, Ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Punglia, Ld. CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)Section 147

…tent of estimated profits embedded in sales for which the net profit\nrate was adopted and hence no referrable question of law arises.;\n1) Similar view has also been taken by the High Court of Madhya Pradesh in the case\nof CIT vs. Balchand Ajit Kumar (2003) 263 ITR 610 (MP) and the Mumbai Bench of\nTribunal in the case of ITO vs. SaiKrupa Construction (2007) 13 SOT 459 (Mumbai).\n4.5 In view of the facts of the case and respectfully following the law laid down by the\njurisdictional High Court and Tribunal, where there are incomplete evidences of both\nunaccounted income (on- money) and unaccounted expenditure…

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 1, RAJKOT, RAJKOT vs. BUILDFOLIO REALTIES LLP, RAJKOT

ITA 683/RJT/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot11 Mar 2026AY 2021-22
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 147

…tent of estimated profits embedded in sales for which the net profit\nrate was adopted and hence no referrable question of law arises.\n(1) Similar view has also been taken by the High Court of Madhya Pradesh in the case\nof CIT vs. Balchand Ajit Kumar (2003) 263 ITR 610 (MP) and the Mumbai Bench of\nTribunal in the case of ITO vs. SaiKrupa Construction (2007) 13 SOT 459 (Mumbai).\n4.5 In view of the facts of the case and respectfully following the law laid down by the\njurisdictional High Court and Tribunal, where there are incomplete evidences of both\nunaccounted income (on- money) and unaccounted expenditure…

BUILDFOLIO REALITIES LLP,RAJKOT vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL -1,, RAJKOT

ITA 510/RJT/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot11 Mar 2026AY 2022-23

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं/.Ita No. 509 & 510/Rjt/2024 "नधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year: 2021-22 & 2022-23 (Hybrid Hearing) Buildfolio Realities Llp The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs Income Tax, Central-1 . Shop No. 5Gf, Business Edifice, Canal Road 37, Income Tax Office, Amruta Karanpura Corner, Rajkot Estate Building, Near Girnar Cinema, M G Road, Rajkot Rajkot-360005 Rajkot-360001 "ायीलेखासं/.जीआइआरसं/.Pan/Gir No.: Aawfb8233C (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri D.M. Rindani, Ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Punglia, Ld. CIT(DR)
Section 132Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 147

…extent of estimated profits embedded in sales for which the net profit rate was adopted and hence no referrable question of law arises. (1) Similar view has also been taken by the High Court of Madhya Pradesh in the case of CIT vs. Balchand Ajit Kumar (2003) 263 ITR 610 (MP) and the Mumbai Bench of Tribunal in the case of ITO vs. SaiKrupa Construction (2007) 13 SOT 459 (Mumbai). 4.5 In view of the facts of the case and respectfully following the law laid down by the jurisdictional High Court and Tribunal, where there are incomplete evidences of both unaccounted income (on- money) and unaccounted expenditure inc…

BUILDFOLIO REALITIES LLP,RAJKOT vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL -1, RAJKOT

ITA 509/RJT/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot11 Mar 2026AY 2021-22

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं/.Ita No. 509 & 510/Rjt/2024 "नधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year: 2021-22 & 2022-23 (Hybrid Hearing) Buildfolio Realities Llp The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs Income Tax, Central-1 . Shop No. 5Gf, Business Edifice, Canal Road 37, Income Tax Office, Amruta Karanpura Corner, Rajkot Estate Building, Near Girnar Cinema, M G Road, Rajkot Rajkot-360005 Rajkot-360001 "ायीलेखासं/.जीआइआरसं/.Pan/Gir No.: Aawfb8233C (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri D.M. Rindani, Ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Punglia, Ld. CIT(DR)
Section 132Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 147

…extent of estimated profits embedded in sales for which the net profit rate was adopted and hence no referrable question of law arises. (1) Similar view has also been taken by the High Court of Madhya Pradesh in the case of CIT vs. Balchand Ajit Kumar (2003) 263 ITR 610 (MP) and the Mumbai Bench of Tribunal in the case of ITO vs. SaiKrupa Construction (2007) 13 SOT 459 (Mumbai). 4.5 In view of the facts of the case and respectfully following the law laid down by the jurisdictional High Court and Tribunal, where there are incomplete evidences of both unaccounted income (on- money) and unaccounted expenditure inc…

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 1, RAJKOT, RAJKOT vs. RADHE DEVELOPERS, RAJKOT

ITA 687/RJT/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot10 Mar 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Dr. Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं/.Ita No. 549 & 550/Rjt/2024 िनधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year: 2017-18 & 2018-19 (Hybrid Hearing) Radhe Developers Vs The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central-1 . Office No. 47, Ankur Commercial Center, Opp. Income Tax Office, Amruta Swaminarayan Gurukul, Estate Building, Near Girnar Gondal Road, Rajkot Cinema, M G Road, Rajkot Rajkot-360001 Rajkot-360001 "ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aatfr3387E (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri D.M. Rindani, Ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Punglia, Ld. CIT(DR)
Section 132Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 147

…004- "It is well settled law that the entire amount of sale does not represent income of the assessee. It is only a price received by the seller of the goods and only the realization over cost that can be the profit.In case of CIT v. BalchandAjit Kumar (2003) 263 ITR 610 (MP), held that entire amount of sale proceeds cannot be regarded as profit of the assessee, the net profit rate had to be adopted for the purpose of addition. Similarly, Honble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT v. Saint Synthetics Mill (2010) 3261TR 410 (Guj), held that addition was to be made not in respect of sale consideration but only in…

RADHE DEVELOPERS,RAJKOT vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL -1, , RAJKOT

ITA 550/RJT/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot10 Mar 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Dr. Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं/.Ita No. 549 & 550/Rjt/2024 िनधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year: 2017-18 & 2018-19 (Hybrid Hearing) Radhe Developers Vs The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central-1 . Office No. 47, Ankur Commercial Center, Opp. Income Tax Office, Amruta Swaminarayan Gurukul, Estate Building, Near Girnar Gondal Road, Rajkot Cinema, M G Road, Rajkot Rajkot-360001 Rajkot-360001 "ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aatfr3387E (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri D.M. Rindani, Ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Punglia, Ld. CIT(DR)
Section 132Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 147

…004- "It is well settled law that the entire amount of sale does not represent income of the assessee. It is only a price received by the seller of the goods and only the realization over cost that can be the profit.In case of CIT v. BalchandAjit Kumar (2003) 263 ITR 610 (MP), held that entire amount of sale proceeds cannot be regarded as profit of the assessee, the net profit rate had to be adopted for the purpose of addition. Similarly, Honble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT v. Saint Synthetics Mill (2010) 3261TR 410 (Guj), held that addition was to be made not in respect of sale consideration but only in…

RADHE DEVELOPERS,RAJKOT vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL-1, RAJKOT

ITA 549/RJT/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot10 Mar 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Dr. Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं/.Ita No. 549 & 550/Rjt/2024 िनधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year: 2017-18 & 2018-19 (Hybrid Hearing) Radhe Developers Vs The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central-1 . Office No. 47, Ankur Commercial Center, Opp. Income Tax Office, Amruta Swaminarayan Gurukul, Estate Building, Near Girnar Gondal Road, Rajkot Cinema, M G Road, Rajkot Rajkot-360001 Rajkot-360001 "ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aatfr3387E (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri D.M. Rindani, Ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Punglia, Ld. CIT(DR)
Section 132Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 147

…004- "It is well settled law that the entire amount of sale does not represent income of the assessee. It is only a price received by the seller of the goods and only the realization over cost that can be the profit.In case of CIT v. BalchandAjit Kumar (2003) 263 ITR 610 (MP), held that entire amount of sale proceeds cannot be regarded as profit of the assessee, the net profit rate had to be adopted for the purpose of addition. Similarly, Honble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT v. Saint Synthetics Mill (2010) 3261TR 410 (Guj), held that addition was to be made not in respect of sale consideration but only in…

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 1, RAJKOT, RAJKOT vs. KRISHNA DEVELOPERS, RAJKOT

ITA 688/RJT/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot09 Mar 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Dr. Dinesh Mohan Sinha

For Appellant: Shri D.M. Rindani, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Punglia, Ld. CIT(DR)
Section 132Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 250

…04 "It is well settled law that the entire amount of sale does not represent income of the assessee. It is only a price received by the seller of the goods and only the realization over cost that can be the profit. In case of CIT v. Balchand Ajit Kumar (2003) 263 ITR 610 (MP), held that entire amount of sale proceeds cannot be regarded as profit of the assessee, the net profit rate had to be adopted for the purpose of addition. Similarly, Honble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT v Saint Synthetics Mill (2010) 3261TR 410 (Guj), held that addition was to be made not in respect of sale consideration but only in…

KRISHNA DEVELOPERS,RAJKOT vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL 1, RAJKOT

ITA 544/RJT/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot09 Mar 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Dr. Dinesh Mohan Sinha

For Appellant: Shri D.M. Rindani, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Punglia, Ld. CIT(DR)
Section 132Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 250

…04 "It is well settled law that the entire amount of sale does not represent income of the assessee. It is only a price received by the seller of the goods and only the realization over cost that can be the profit. In case of CIT v. Balchand Ajit Kumar (2003) 263 ITR 610 (MP), held that entire amount of sale proceeds cannot be regarded as profit of the assessee, the net profit rate had to be adopted for the purpose of addition. Similarly, Honble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT v Saint Synthetics Mill (2010) 3261TR 410 (Guj), held that addition was to be made not in respect of sale consideration but only in…

KRISHNA DEVELOPERS,RAJKOT vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL-1, RAJKOT

ITA 543/RJT/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot09 Mar 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Dr. Dinesh Mohan Sinha

For Appellant: Shri D.M. Rindani, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Punglia, Ld. CIT(DR)
Section 132Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 250

…04 "It is well settled law that the entire amount of sale does not represent income of the assessee. It is only a price received by the seller of the goods and only the realization over cost that can be the profit. In case of CIT v. Balchand Ajit Kumar (2003) 263 ITR 610 (MP), held that entire amount of sale proceeds cannot be regarded as profit of the assessee, the net profit rate had to be adopted for the purpose of addition. Similarly, Honble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT v Saint Synthetics Mill (2010) 3261TR 410 (Guj), held that addition was to be made not in respect of sale consideration but only in…

ASHOKA INDUSTRIAL FASTNERS,,LUDHIANA vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 3, , LDUHIANA

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

ITA 1141/CHANDI/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh29 Dec 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Manav Bansal, CIT,DR
Section 132Section 145(3)Section 147

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण,च"ीगढ़ "ायपीठ “ए”, च"ीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH BENCH “A”, CHANDIGARH HEARING THROUGH: PHYSICAL MODE "ी लिलत कुमार, "ाियक सद" एवं "ी कृणव" सहाय, लेखा सद" BEFORE: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR, JM&SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY, AM आयकर अपील सं./ ITA Nos. 1139 To 1141/Chd/ 2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2019-20, 2020-21, 2022-23 Ashoka Industrial Fastners, बनाम The DCIT E-108 Phase IV Focal Point Ludhana- Circle-3, Ludhiana 141010 "ायीलेखासं./PAN NO: AAHFA0183D अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""थ"/Respondent िनधा"रती की ओर से/Assessee by : Shri Sudhir Sehgal, Advocate राज" की ओर से/ Revenue by : Shr…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI vs. S S PULSES MANUFACTURING PVT LTD, DELHI

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

ITA 2384/DEL/2024[2012]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Dec 2025

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Manish Gupta, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 69C

…ed or addition should be restricted to the profits embodied on sale proceeds was answered by Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT Vs. President Industries (258 ITR 654) and Hon’ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Balchand Ajit Kumar (263 ITR 610). 5.8 Considering the above decisions, and a catena of recent decisions passed by the Tribunals relying on the aforesaid decisions, only the profits embodied on sale proceeds should be taxed instead of addition on account of entire purchases. Looking to the circumstantial evidence in the present case, it is evident that impugned purchases from th…

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-4, JAIPUR vs. PAWAN KUMAR JHALANI, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the revenue in ITA No

ITA 966/JPR/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur17 Nov 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Rohan Sogani, CAFor Respondent: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT
Section 132(1)Section 153CSection 4

…t justified in making further addition as the undisclosed income offered by assessee covers such amount. Mohan Sadhani Vs. CIT 304 ITR 52 (MP) Held that entire sale proceeds cannot be added to income, only NP rate to be adopted. CIT Vs. Balchand Ajit Kumar 263 ITR 610 (MP) In a search, it was found that there were credit sales which were not reflected in the books of account. It is held that the total sale could not be regarded as the profit of the assessee. The net profit rate had to be adopted and once it was adopted it could not be said that there was perversity of approach. Agrawal Motors Vs ACIT 68 ITD…

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT vs. SURESH JEWELLERS, SHAKUNTLA PALACE

ITA 246/PAT/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Patna26 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubeyआयकर अपील सं No.244/Pat/2023 (नििाारणवर्ा / Assessment Year :2017-2018) Acit, Central Circle-3, Patna Vs Sachchu Prasad, Kasap, Udwant Nagar, Bhojpur Bihar-802206 Pan No. :Ajspp 8058 Q & आयकर अपील सं No.245/Pat/2023 (नििाारणवर्ा / Assessment Year : 2017-2018) Acit, Central Circle-3, Patna Vs Suresh Prasad, Udwant Nagar, Kasap Bihar-802206 Pan No. :Ajspp 8056 A & आयकर अपील सं No.246/Pat/2023 (नििाारणवर्ा / Assessment Year : 2017-2018) Acit, Central Circle-3, Patna Vs Suresh Jewellers, Shakuntla Palace, Bakarganj, Patna, Bihar-800004 Pan No. :Adhfs 5624 G (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) .. नििााररतीकीओरसे /Assessee By : Shri Devesh Poddar, Advocate राजस्वकीओरसे /Revenue By : Shrirajat Datta, Cit-Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 28/07/2025 घोषणाकीतारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 26/08/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench: These Are The Appeals Filed By The Revenue Against Three Different Assessees Against The Separate Orders Of The Id.Cit(A), Patna-3,All Dated 31.05.2023For The Assessment Year 2017-2018. 2

For Appellant: Shri Devesh Poddar, AdvocateFor Respondent: ShriRajat Datta, CIT-DR
Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 153A

…/- which was not in consonance with the accounting principles and the applicable law. The Ld. AR has relied upon following authorities to buttress his arguments:- 1. CIT vs President Industries Ltd. (2002) 258 ITR 654 (Guj) 2. CIT vs BalchandAjit Kumar (2003) 263 ITR 610 (MP) 3. Man Mohan Sadani vs CIT (2008) 304 ITR 52 4. Kishore Mohanlal Telwala vs ACIT (1999) 64 ITJ 543 (Ahd) 5. Agarwal Motors vs ACIT (1999) 68 ITD 407 (Jab) In all the above cited authorities the accounting principle has been reiterated that it is the net profit contained in the unrecorded sales that has to be added not the goods sales. 6 ITA…

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT vs. SURESH PRASAD, BHOJPUR

ITA 245/PAT/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Patna26 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubeyआयकर अपील सं No.244/Pat/2023 (नििाारणवर्ा / Assessment Year :2017-2018) Acit, Central Circle-3, Patna Vs Sachchu Prasad, Kasap, Udwant Nagar, Bhojpur Bihar-802206 Pan No. :Ajspp 8058 Q & आयकर अपील सं No.245/Pat/2023 (नििाारणवर्ा / Assessment Year : 2017-2018) Acit, Central Circle-3, Patna Vs Suresh Prasad, Udwant Nagar, Kasap Bihar-802206 Pan No. :Ajspp 8056 A & आयकर अपील सं No.246/Pat/2023 (नििाारणवर्ा / Assessment Year : 2017-2018) Acit, Central Circle-3, Patna Vs Suresh Jewellers, Shakuntla Palace, Bakarganj, Patna, Bihar-800004 Pan No. :Adhfs 5624 G (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) .. नििााररतीकीओरसे /Assessee By : Shri Devesh Poddar, Advocate राजस्वकीओरसे /Revenue By : Shrirajat Datta, Cit-Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 28/07/2025 घोषणाकीतारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 26/08/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench: These Are The Appeals Filed By The Revenue Against Three Different Assessees Against The Separate Orders Of The Id.Cit(A), Patna-3,All Dated 31.05.2023For The Assessment Year 2017-2018. 2

For Appellant: Shri Devesh Poddar, AdvocateFor Respondent: ShriRajat Datta, CIT-DR
Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 153A

…/- which was not in consonance with the accounting principles and the applicable law. The Ld. AR has relied upon following authorities to buttress his arguments:- 1. CIT vs President Industries Ltd. (2002) 258 ITR 654 (Guj) 2. CIT vs BalchandAjit Kumar (2003) 263 ITR 610 (MP) 3. Man Mohan Sadani vs CIT (2008) 304 ITR 52 4. Kishore Mohanlal Telwala vs ACIT (1999) 64 ITJ 543 (Ahd) 5. Agarwal Motors vs ACIT (1999) 68 ITD 407 (Jab) In all the above cited authorities the accounting principle has been reiterated that it is the net profit contained in the unrecorded sales that has to be added not the goods sales. 6 ITA…

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT vs. SACHCHU PRASAD, BHOJPUR

ITA 244/PAT/2023[2017]Status: DisposedITAT Patna26 Aug 2025

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubeyआयकर अपील सं No.244/Pat/2023 (नििाारणवर्ा / Assessment Year :2017-2018) Acit, Central Circle-3, Patna Vs Sachchu Prasad, Kasap, Udwant Nagar, Bhojpur Bihar-802206 Pan No. :Ajspp 8058 Q & आयकर अपील सं No.245/Pat/2023 (नििाारणवर्ा / Assessment Year : 2017-2018) Acit, Central Circle-3, Patna Vs Suresh Prasad, Udwant Nagar, Kasap Bihar-802206 Pan No. :Ajspp 8056 A & आयकर अपील सं No.246/Pat/2023 (नििाारणवर्ा / Assessment Year : 2017-2018) Acit, Central Circle-3, Patna Vs Suresh Jewellers, Shakuntla Palace, Bakarganj, Patna, Bihar-800004 Pan No. :Adhfs 5624 G (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) .. नििााररतीकीओरसे /Assessee By : Shri Devesh Poddar, Advocate राजस्वकीओरसे /Revenue By : Shrirajat Datta, Cit-Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 28/07/2025 घोषणाकीतारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 26/08/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench: These Are The Appeals Filed By The Revenue Against Three Different Assessees Against The Separate Orders Of The Id.Cit(A), Patna-3,All Dated 31.05.2023For The Assessment Year 2017-2018. 2

For Appellant: Shri Devesh Poddar, AdvocateFor Respondent: ShriRajat Datta, CIT-DR
Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 153A

…/- which was not in consonance with the accounting principles and the applicable law. The Ld. AR has relied upon following authorities to buttress his arguments:- 1. CIT vs President Industries Ltd. (2002) 258 ITR 654 (Guj) 2. CIT vs BalchandAjit Kumar (2003) 263 ITR 610 (MP) 3. Man Mohan Sadani vs CIT (2008) 304 ITR 52 4. Kishore Mohanlal Telwala vs ACIT (1999) 64 ITJ 543 (Ahd) 5. Agarwal Motors vs ACIT (1999) 68 ITD 407 (Jab) In all the above cited authorities the accounting principle has been reiterated that it is the net profit contained in the unrecorded sales that has to be added not the goods sales. 6 ITA…

ARIHANT ENTERPRISE,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-7(2)(1), AHMEDABAD

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

ITA 590/AHD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad19 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Ms Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Abhijit, Sr DR
Section 115BSection 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 234ASection 270ASection 36(1)(iii)Section 68

…that only ‘profit element’ embedded in ‘sales value’ can be brought to tax and ‘not the entire transaction value'. Reliance is being placed on the following:- a. CIT v. President Industries - [2002] 258 ITR 654 (Guj.); b. CIT v. Balchand Ajit Kumar - [2003] 263 ITR 610 (MP) c. CIT v. Gurubachhan Singh - [2008] 302 ITR 63 (Guj.); d. Man Mohan Sadani v. CIT - [2008] 304 ITR 52 (MP); 9. It is an equally settled principle that the addition shall be made on the basis of estimation of “profit on turnover” when books of accounts are rejected. Thus, addition, if any, shall be restricted to the profit amount embedded i…

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, SURAT, SURAT vs. MS. JANANI EXPORTS, MUMBAI

ITA 604/SRT/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Surat31 Jul 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.604/Srt/2024 (Assessment Year:2019-20) (Hybrid Hearing) Acit, Vs. M/S Janani Exports, Central Circle – 2, 704, Vastu Slip Apt., 7Th Floor, Nr. Surat Parsi Colony, Pump House, Andheri (E), Mumbai - 400093 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaefj3969P (Appellant) (Respondent) It(Ss)A Nos.9, 10 & 19/Srt/2024 (Ays:2013-14, 2014-15 & 2018-19) Acit, Vs. M/S Janani Exports, Central Circle – 2, 704, Vastu Slip Apt., 7Th Floor, Nr. Surat Parsi Colony, Pump House, Andheri (E), Mumbai - 400093 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaefj3969P (Appellant) (Respondent) It(Ss)A Nos.20 To 22/Srt/2024 (Ays: 2013-14 To 2015-16) M/S Janani Exports, Vs. Acit, 704, Vastu Slip Apt., 7Th Floor, Nr. Central Circle – 2, Parsi Colony, Pump House, Andheri Surat (E), Mumbai - 400093 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaefj3969P (Appellant) (Respondent) It(Ss)A Nos.35 To 38/Srt/2024 (Ays: 2016-17 To 2019-20) M/S Janani Exports, Vs. Acit, 704, Vastu Slip Apt., 7Th Floor, Nr. Central Circle – 2, Parsi Colony, Pump House, Andheri Surat (E), Mumbai - 400093 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaefj3969P (Appellant) (Respondent)

…ATs in the following cases have approved adoption of NP rate: (i) CIT vs. President Industries, 258 ITR 654 (Guj.), (ii) CIT vs. Abhishek Corporation, 158 CTR (Guj.) 374, (iii) ITO vs. Om Silk Mills, 55 taxmann.com 295 (Guj.), (iv) CIT vs. Balchand Ajitkumar, 263 ITR 610 (MP), (v) DCIT, CC-3, Surat vs. Mehul T. Desai, (2019) 101 taxmann.com 234 (Surat – Trib.), (vi) ITO vs. Sai Kripa Construction, (2007) 13 SOT 459 (Mum.) and (vii) Eagel Seeds and Biotech Ltd. vs. ACIT, 100 ITD 301 (Indore – Trib.). Therefore, we are of the considered view that the CIT(A) has rightly adopted the NP rate instead of the GP rate app…

Showing 1–20 of 212 · Page 1 of 11

...