How many judgments cite CIT v. Banwari Lal Banshidhar?

162 judgments on BharatTax cite CIT v. Banwari Lal Banshidhar (229 ITR 229), spanning 2015 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does CIT v. Banwari Lal Banshidhar come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 145(3), Section 153A, Section 143(3), Section 144, Section 250, Section 68.

CIT v. Banwari Lal Banshidhar

229 ITR 229High Court1998#607 most cited

What is CIT v. Banwari Lal Banshidhar authority for?

When the Assessing Officer rejects the books of account and computes income by applying a net profit rate, a separate disallowance under section 40A(3) for cash payments cannot be made.

162

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. Banwari Lal Banshidhar · 229 ITR 229 · section 40A(3) · section 145(3) · rejection of books of account · net profit rate · cash payments · disallowance

Sections most often in play

Section 145(3)Section 153A Section 143(3)Section 144 Section 250 Section 68 Section 132(4)Section 40A(3)

Issues it is cited on

section 108 trade creditors onus of proof section 145(3)rejection of books of account section 10b section 40a(3)section 145 section 30 section 132(4a)on-money section 269

Judgments citing CIT v. Banwari Lal Banshidhar

ACIT, Chennai vs. Shri S. Moorthy, Chennai

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

ITA 3091/CHNY/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai10 Mar 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 3091/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri G. Chandrababu, Addl.CITFor Respondent: Shri D. Anand, Advocate

Section 131Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 68Section 69Section 69C

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘ए’ "यायपीठ, चे"ई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी वी दुगा" राव,"या"यक सद"य एवं "ी जी. मंजुनाथ, लेखा सद"य के सम" BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI G. MANJUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.: 3091/CHNY/2019 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13 The ACIT, Shri S. Moorthy, Non-Corporate Circle 7(1), No.25, Muthumari Amman Koil v. Chennai – 34. Street, Navalar Nagar, Anna Nagar West, Chennai – 600 040. PAN: AFBPM7143Q (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant by : Shri G. Chandrababu, Addl.CIT ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respon…

M/S Argent Construction, Mumbai vs. DCIT, Central Circle - 4(1), Mumbai

In the result all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 400/MUM/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Dec 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri M.Balaganesh, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 133ASection 153C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (VIRTUAL COURT), ‘A‘ BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI M.BALAGANESH, AM & SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, JM ITA No.400/Mum/2019 to 404/Mum/2019 (Assessment Year :2011-12 to 2015-16) M/s. Argent Constructions Vs. Dy. Commissioner of Plot No.32, Sindhi Society Income Tax CST Road, Chembur Central Circle 4(1) Mumbai – 400 071 Mumbai PAN/GIR No. AARFA9002B (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Assessee by Shri Rajeev Khandelwal Revenue by Shri Rajeev Harit (CIT DR) & Shri Michael Jerald (DR) Date of Hearing 15/09/2020 Date of Pronouncement 11/12/2020 आदेश / O R D E R PER M. BALAGANESH (A.M): These app…

ACIT, C-7, Ludhiana vs. M/S Ceigall India Ltd., Ludhiana

In the result appeal of the Department is partly allowed for statistical purposes and the Cross Objection of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 291/CHANDI/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh19 Nov 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: The Appeal Is Finally Heard Or Disposed Off.

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. C. Chandrakanta, CIT

Section 133ASection 145(3)Section 69C

…on on account of unexplained expenditure can be made and reliance is being placed on the following judgments:- i) CIT Vs Devi Prasad Vishwanath Prasad (1969) 721TR 194 (SC) ii) Indwell Constructions Vs CIT [232ITR 776] (AP) iii) CIT Vs Banwari Lai Banshidhar {229 ITR 229 (All). iv) Judgment of ITAT, Ahmedabad Bench in the case of Sh. Abdul Farid Khan vs ITO in ITA No. 1339/Ahd/2012 & CO No. 139/CAhd/2012. In the above said case, the rate of profit was applied and separate addition of indirect expenses were made to the tune of Rs. 11,96,547/- and it was held by the Hon 'ble Bench as under: - "6.2 Aggrieved by the…

Gonugunta Venkateswarlu, Kandukur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Ongole

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1796/HYD/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad03 Nov 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi(Through Virtual Conference)

For Appellant: Shri Subramanyam TFor Respondent: Shri K.A. Sai Prasad

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 40A(3)

…uch circumstances, assessment cannot be reopened, he placed reliance on the following decisions: 1. Pr. CIT Vs. Smt. Santosh Jain, 296 ITR 324 (P&H). 2 Pr. CIT Vs. Jadau Jewellers and Manufacturers (P) Ltd., 409 ITR 85 (Raj.) 3. CIT Vs. Banwari Lal Bashidhar, 229 ITR 229 (All.) 6. The ld. DR, on the other hand, submitted that the AO during the assessment proceedings u/s 143(3) of the Act, accepted the returned income of the assessee, and it was only subsequently that the incumbent AO, on verification of the cash book filed by the assessee, found that the assessee has made cash payments and therefore disallowance…

The ITO, Sendhwa vs. Shri Dwarka Prasad Tayal, Sendhwa

In the result appeal of the assessee ITA No

ITA 334/IND/2018[11-12]Status: DisposedITAT Indore13 Oct 2020

Bench: Hon’Ble Kul Bharat & Hon’Ble Manish Boradassessment Year 2011-12

Section 142(1)(ii)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 80C

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, इंदौर "यायपीठ, इंदौर 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 2011-12 Shri Dwarka Prasad Tayal, 4, Jawahar Ganj, Sendhwa (M.P) PAN : AAOPT4070B : Appellant V/s Income Tax Officer Sendhwa (M.P) : Respondent Assessment Year 2011-12 Income Tax Officer Sendhwa (M.P) : Revenue V/s Shri Dwarka Prasad Tayal, 4, Jawahar Ganj, Sendhwa (M.P) PAN : AAOPT4070B : Respondent Revenue by Smt. Ashima Gupta Assessee by Shri S.N. Agrawal, CA Date of Hearing 09.09.2020 Date of Pronounceme…

Shri Dwarka Prasad Tayal, Sendhwa vs. The ITO, Khargon

In the result appeal of the assessee ITA No

ITA 284/IND/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Indore13 Oct 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Hon’Ble Kul Bharat & Hon’Ble Manish Boradassessment Year 2011-12

Section 142(1)(ii)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 80C

Shri Vikram Singh Shekhawat, Jaipur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle, Sikar

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

ITA 484/JPR/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur23 Jan 2020AY 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Shrawan Kumar Gupta, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri K.C. Gupta, JCIT DR

Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 154Section 234A

…t. The CIT(A) had rightly deleted separate addition made by the AO u/s 40A(3) of the Act. CIT vs. G.K. Contractor,19 DTR 305; CIT vs. PravinAnd Co. 274 ITR 534; Choudhary Bros in ITA No. 1177/JP/2010 vide order dated 31-05-2010; CIT vs. BanwariLal Banshidhar, 229 ITR 229(Raj.), relied on. In the case of ITO v/s Sadhwani Brothers held that AO having rejected the books of account and applied the net profit rate for the purpose computing the income, no disallowance can be made u/s 40A(3). In the case of ITO v/s Mr. Naresh H. Shah ITA No. 3187/M/2010 dt. 15.07.2011 in this case the AO after rejecting the books of acc…

Sri Amit Kundu, Bankura vs. ITO, Ward-3(4), Bankura

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1395/KOL/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata29 Nov 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy]

Section 250Section 40A(3)

…ditions are made on account of GP and working capital no further disallowance u/s. 40A(3) of the Act can be made. For this, Ld. Counsel for the assessee relied on the decision of Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Banwari Lal Bansidhar (1998) 229 ITR 229 (All) wherein the Hon’ble Allahabad high court has affirmed the decision of the Tribunal, that no disallowance could be made in view of the provisions of section 40A(3) read with rule 6DD(j) of the Income-tax Rules, 1962, as no deduction was allowed to and claimed by the assessee. When the gross profit rate was applied, that would take care of ev…

ACIT, Circle-49(1), Kolkata vs. Bablu Das, North 24 Parganas

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 965/KOL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 Nov 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Sainiassessment Year :2012-13

Section 133(6)Section 144Section 145(3)Section 40

…ecisions: a) Indwell Constructions vs CIT (1998) 232 ITR 776 (AP H.C) b) Dabros Industrial Co. Pvt. Ltd. vs CIT (1997) 108 ITR 424 (Calcutta H.C) ITA No.965/Kol/2018 A.Y. 2012-13 ACIT Cir-49(1), Kol. Vs. Bablu Das Page 4 c) Cir vs Banwarilal Bansidhar (1998) 229 ITR 229 (Allahabad H.C.) d) Cosmopolian Trading Corporation vs ITO, ITA No.298/JP/20 13 (ITAT Jaipur). e) CIT, Kolkata-XVII, vs Shri Arjun Bhowmick GA No. 2683 of 2014, (Calcutta H.C). f) ITO vs Kenaram Saha and Subhash Saha 301 ITR (AT) 17 (Special Bench, Kolkata ITAT In the judgements/decisions mentioned above it has been held that once the net profit…

M/S. Royal Tech. Enterprises, Meerut vs. ITO, Meerut

ITA 4369/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Nov 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri O. P. Meena

Section 133(3)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 234BSection 234CSection 250(4)Section 68

…profit rate of 8% then no addition can be made u/s 68 of the Act on account of unexplained creditors. In respect of this contention, the Ld. AR relied upon the decision of the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in case of CIT vs. Banwari Lal Banshidhar (1998) 229 ITR 229 wherein it was held that when the gross profit rate is applied, that would take care of everything and there was no need for the Assessing Officer to make scrutiny of the amount incurred on the purchases made by the assessee. 6. The Ld. DR submitted that the CIT(A) as well as the Assessing Officer was right in applying the NP rate at 8% of gross…

M/S. Royal Tech. Enterprises, Meerut vs. JCIT, Meerut

ITA 4370/DEL/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Nov 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri O. P. Meena

Section 133(3)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 234BSection 234CSection 250(4)Section 68

Shri Sanjiv Walia, Bathinda vs. The Income Tax Officer, Bathinda

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 355/ASR/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar31 May 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arorai.T.A. No. 355/Asr/2014 Assessment Year: 2009-10

For Appellant: Sh. P. N. Arora (Adv.)For Respondent: Sh. Charan Dass (D.R.)

Section 144Section 69A

…ance on case law. The same stand perused. It has already been explained that the contention is not applicable in the facts and circumstances of the case. The decision in Aggarwal Engg. Co. (supra) is based on the decision in CIT v. Banwarilal Bansidhar [1998] 229 ITR 229 (All), which is in respect of disallowance of expenditure debited in accounts, which stand rejected for want of reliability. The addition in the instant case, on the other hand, is qua unexplained deposits in the assessee’s bank account, not forming part of his 7 Sanjeev Walia v. ITO accounts. The proposition is, even otherwise, as clarified wi…

The ACIT, Circle-1(2), Baroda vs. Iwi Cryogenic Vaporization System (I) Pvt. Ltd., Baroda

In the result, appeal filed by the Assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1508/AHD/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 Apr 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Waseem Ahmed)

For Appellant: Shri Lalit P. Jain, Sr. D.RFor Respondent: Shri Mukund Bakshi, A.R

…ed by application of N.A. rate as it was held that once net profit rate was applied, no further addition was called for in respect of unaccounted purchases and introduction of cash in the facts and circumstances of the case. 4. In CIT vs. Banwarilal Bansidhar 229 ITR 229 (All.), the disallowance u/s. 40A (3) was found to be unjustified where income was estimated at a G. P. rate by rejecting the books of accounts of the assessee. 5. In ACIT vs. Renu Mukherjee 15 DTR 205 (Del.), the arbitrary additions and disallowances without any basis were unjustified where assessment was made by application of net profit. 6. In…

The Income Tax Officer, Amritsar vs. Sh. Shiv Raj Singh Bawa, Amritsar

In the result, the Revenue’s appeal is allowed and the assessee’s CO, dismissed

ITA 407/ASR/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar30 Jan 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arora & Sh. N. K. Choudhryi.T.A. No. 407/Asr/2016 Assessment Year: 2012-13

For Appellant: Sh. Charan Dass (D.R.)For Respondent: Sh. Tarun Bansal (Adv.)

Section 143(3)Section 40A(3)

…being (AY 2012-13) ITO v. Shiv Raj Singh Bawa inconsistent with that by the Apex Court as well as the jurisdictional High Court cited supra. The decision in CIT v. Santosh Jain [2008] 296 ITR 324 (P&H), rendered following CIT v. Banwari Lal Bansidhar [1998] 229 ITR 229 (All), also relied upon, is on a different footing. The income having been estimated on rejection of accounts, there was no specific deduction qua the impugned expenditure for section 40A(3) to apply. The same has no application to the instant case. 3.3 The assessee has taken an alternate argument as well, i.e., even granting application of sect…

I.T.O WD - 1(1), Kolkata vs. M/S Sanwaria Steel Pvt Ltd., Howrah

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2131/KOL/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata30 Nov 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Vice-(Kz) & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

Section 145Section 40Section 43BSection 68Section 69

…it rate. To arrive at this conclusion, he relied on the decision of the Hon’ble Andhra Pradesh High Court in the case of Indwell Constructions –vs.- CIT [232 ITR 776] and that of the Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in the case of CIT –vs.- Banwarilal Banshidhar [229 ITR 229]. Aggrieved by the order of the ld. CIT(Appeals), the Revenue has preferred this appeal before the Tribunal. 4. We have heard the arguments of both the sides and also perused the relevant material available on record. It is observed that the books of account of the assessee were rejected by the Assessing Officer and the income of the assessee wa…

Shri Om Parkash Legal Heiar Smt Pushpa Verma, Jalandhar vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-1(3), Jalandhar

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 756/ASR/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar31 Oct 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arorai.T.A. No. 756/Asr/2017 Assessment Year: 2014-15

For Appellant: Sh. Ashray Sarna (C.A.)For Respondent: Sh. Charan Dass (D.R.)

Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 41(1)Section 41(1)(a)Section 68

…n in Aggarwal Engineering Co. (supra) is, again, misplaced. The purchase/s, not liable to be separately disallowed, as held 12 Om Parkash v. ITO by the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court therein, following the decision in CIT vs. Banwarilal Banshidhar [1998] 229 ITR 229 (All), is on a different footing than an addition qua the liability in respect of the said purchase/s on account of any benefit by way of remission or cessation thereof arising to the assessee – a matter of fact, in the subsequent year. As afore-explained, it is only where the purchase is genuine or its genuineness not in doubt and, accordingly,…

Shri Rakesh Kumar Chaudhary, Durgapur vs. ACIT, Cir-Durgapur, Durgapur

ITA 422/KOL/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Aug 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Saini

Section 143(3)Section 40A(3)Section 68

…g grounds seek to revive labour charges, expenditure claim section 40A(3) disallowance (supra) no more carry merit as the above rejection of books followed by gross profit estimation takes care of all other aspects as per CIT vs. Banawri Lal Banshidhar (1998) 229 ITR 229 (All). The Revenue’s appeal ITA No.1810/Kol/2016 fails. 13. The assessee’s next endeavour in his appeal is to reduce his revenue receipts to the extent of ₹155,68,733/-. He takes us to page 10 of the paper book indicating the following component therein:- Date Name of Payment source Cheque Net credit in Remarks clients bank account No. 02.04.08 S…

ACIT, Cir-1, Durgapur vs. Shri Rakesh Kumar Chowdhury, Durgapur

ITA 1810/KOL/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Aug 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Saini

Section 143(3)Section 40A(3)Section 68

Shri Dinesh Kumar Chaudhary, Garoth vs. The ITO, Mandsaur

In the result Ground No.3 of the assessee is

ITA 757/IND/2016[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Indore30 Jul 2018AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradassessment Year:2003-04 Dinesh Kumar Choudhary, Ito, Prop. Abhinav Traders Mandsaur बनाम/ C/O P. Mogra& Associates, Ca Vs. 203, M.D. Tower Near Janjirwalla Square Garoth (Appellant) (Revenue) P.A. No.Aaxpc8055G Appellant By S/Shri S.N. Agrawal & Pankaj Mogra Ca’S Revenue By Shrir.P. Morya, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 29.06.2018 Date Of Pronouncement: 02.08.2018

Section 133ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)

…ITR 246 has held that when net profit rate applied in that case no separate addition can be made to the income of the appellant on account unexplained cash and purchases. The Hon'ble Allahbad High Court in the case of CIT vsBanwariLalBansidhar as reported in 229 ITR 229 has also expressed similar view. 20.3 That in view of the above, when the appellant has shown income as per provision of section 44AF of the Income Tax Act. The Assessing officer was not justified in adding the entire amount of purchases to the income of the appellant. That as per the Provision of Section 44AF are Comprehensive and no other addi…

Jay Bharat Construction, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir-33, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 883/KOL/2015[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 May 2018AY 2009-2010

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri A.T.Varkey, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A No.883 /Kol/2015 Assessment Year : 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri Miraj D.Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Saurabh Kumar, Addl. CIT, Sr.Dr

Section 143(3)Section 144Section 201Section 40

…nce there cannot be any separate addition under the head ‘income from business’. Reliance in this regard has been rightly placed by the ld AR on the following decisions:- a) Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in the case of CIT vs Banwari Lal Banshidhar reported in 229 ITR 229 (All) ; b) Hon’ble Andhrapradesh High Court in the case of Indwell Constructions vs CIT reported in 232 ITR 776 (AP) The operative portion of these judgements are not reproduced herein for the sake of brevity. Hence we direct the ld AO to delete the disallowance made in the sum of Rs 49,32,165/- u/s 40(a)(ia) of the Act. Accordingly, the grounds…