CIT v. Bhaichand H. Gandhi

141 ITR 67High Court1983#370 most cited

What is CIT v. Bhaichand H. Gandhi authority for?

Section 68 of the Income Tax Act cannot be invoked for additions of cash credits found solely in a bank passbook, as a passbook maintained by the bank is not considered a 'book of the assessee' for the purpose of this section, especially when the assessee does not maintain their own books of account.

237

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. Bhaichand H. Gandhi · 141 ITR 67 · section 68 · unexplained cash credit · bank passbook · books of account · assessee's books · applicability of Section 68 · no books of account · cash credit in bank account

Also reported as

11 Taxmann 5919 SOT 460

Sections most often in play

Section 68Section 143(3)Section 1961Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 115BBESection 131

Issues it is cited on

section 2(12a)addition under section 68addition u/s 68unexplained cash creditsection 68change of opinionsection 131genuineness of the transactionsection 145limited scrutinyagricultural incomesection 115bb

Judgments citing CIT v. Bhaichand H. Gandhi

ACIT-Central Circle -2(1), Nagpur vs. Shri Nandkumar Khattumal Harchandani, Nagpur

ITA 410/NAG/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur25 Feb 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Manoj G. MoryaniFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke
Section 10(38)Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI K.M. ROY, ACCOUNTANT, MEMBER ITA no.410/Nag./2019 (Assessment Year : 2014-15) Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax Appellant Central Circle-2(1), Nagpur v/s Shri Nandkumar Khatumal Harchandani Respondent 469, Poonam Villa, New Colony Nagpur 440 013 PAN – AATPH2594R Assessee by : Shri Manoj G. Moryani Revenue by : Shri Sandipkumar Salunke Date of Hearing – 21/01/2025 Date of Order – 25/02/2025 PER K.M. ROY, A.M. ORDER This appeal by the Revenue is directed against the impugned order dated 31/10/2019, passed by…

ACIT, CC- 18, New Delhi vs. Snerea Properties Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

Appeals of the Revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 5181/DEL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Feb 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar Us & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

Section 148

….2 The applicability of Section 68 of the Act by the AO was questioned placing reliance on the decision of Hon’ble Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of Smt. Santa Devi 171 ITR 532 and Hon’ble Mumbai High Court in the case of Bhaichand N. Gandhi [1983] 141 ITR 67. The Ld. AR contended that the Ld. CIT(A) had rightly held that the reopening of the cases was not proper as there was no proper satisfaction note recorded Snerea Properties P. Ltd. Shrey Properties P. ltd. under section 147 of the Act. Further, the AO did not provide proper opportunity of being heard during the reopened assessment proceedings.…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle -6(3), Mumbai vs. Sparkle Clean Tech Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai

In the result the appeal filed by the revenue is

ITA 959/MUM/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Feb 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Ms Padmavathy S & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan

Section 115BSection 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 68

…, which means for the previous year 2008-09, in terms of the definition under section 3 of the IT Act. Dr. Daniel is justified in submitting that this is not permissible 11. The view taken by this Court in CIT v. Bhaichand H. Gandhi [1982] 11 Taxman 59/[1983] 141 ITR 67 and by Rajasthan High Court in CIT v. Lakshman Swaroop Gupta & Brothers [1975] 100 ITR 222, supports the contentions raised by Dr. Daniel. Similarly, we find that in Bhor Industries Ltd. v. CIT [1961] 42 ITR 57 (SC), the Hon'ble Apex Court in the context of provisions of the Merged States (Taxation Concessions) Order (1949) has interpreted the exp…

Kalpana Mishra, Bhubaneswar vs. ITO, Ward 5(4), Bhubaneswar

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 491/CTK/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack28 Jan 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Manish Agarwalआयकर अपील संसंसंसं/Ita No.491/Ctk/2024 (िनधा"रण िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Year : 2016-2017) वष" Kalpana Mishra, Vs Ito Ward-5(4), Bhubaneswar Plot No.B-87/A, Chandaka Industrial Estate, Patia, Bhubaneswar-751024 Pan No. :Alfpm 2864 E (अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ" /Appellant) अपीलाथ" (""यथ" ""यथ" ""यथ" / Respondent) ""यथ" .. िनधा"रती िनधा"रती क" िनधा"रती िनधा"रती क" क" ओर क" ओर ओर सेसेसेसे /Assessee By ओर : Shri B.R.Pattnaik, Ca राज"व राज"व क" राज"व राज"व क" क" ओर क" ओर ओर सेसेसेसे /Revenue By ओर : Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 28/01/2025 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 28/01/2025 आदेश आदेश / O R D E R आदेश आदेश Per Bench : This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 07.03.2024, Passed By The Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi In Din & Order No.Itba/Nfac/S/250/2023- 24/1062168195(1) For The Assessment Year 2016-2017, On The Following Grounds :- 1. Hon'Ble Cit(Appeals), Nfac Has Erred In Law & On Facts In Confirming The Action Of The Learned Ao Even Though The Learned Ao Has Exceeded His Jurisdiction In A Limited Scrutiny Case Selected Under Cass Only To Examine Whether The Investment & Income Relating To Securities Transactions Are Duly Disclosed Or Not & Added A Sum Of Rs.44,00,000.00 U/S 68 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961, Without Obtaining Prior Administrative Approval Of The Concerned Pr. Cit/Cit As Prescribed In Circular F. No. 225/402/2018/Ita.Ii, Dated 28- 11-2018 & Instruction No.5/2016 [F.No.225/269/2015-

Section 68

…आयकर अपीलीय आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण अिधकरण, कटक कटक "यायपीठ "यायपीठ,कटक आयकर आयकर अपीलीय अपीलीय अिधकरण अिधकरण कटक कटक "यायपीठ "यायपीठ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CUTTACK BENCH CUTTACK BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील संसंसंसं/ITA No.491/CTK/2024 (िनधा"रण िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Year : 2016-2017) वष" Kalpana Mishra, Vs ITO Ward-5(4), Bhubaneswar Plot No.B-87/A, Chandaka Industrial Estate, Patia, Bhubaneswar-751024 PAN No. :ALFPM 2864 E (अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ" /Appellant) अपीलाथ" (""यथ" ""यथ" ""यथ" / Respondent) ""यथ" .. िन…

Smt. Vimladevi Parasmal Jain, Mumbai vs. ITO 17(3)(5), Mumbai

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 5047/MUM/2024[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jan 2025AY 2011-2012

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosainvs. Ito, 17(3)(5) Smt Vimladevi Parasmal Aayakar Bhavan Jain Mk Road, 1301, 13Th Floor, Cosmos Mumbai – 400020. Sunshain, Panjrapole 3Rd Gulalwadi – 400004. Pan/Gir No. Adipj7472L (Applicant) (Respondent)

Section 10(38)Section 148Section 250Section 68Section 69A

…ovisions of section 68 of the act are not applicable where the assessee has not maintained books of accounts and the same is not found credited in the books of accounts. For this proposition, I rely upon the following case laws: 1. Cit Vs Bhaichand N Gandhi, 141 ITR 67 (BOM) 2. Anand Ram Raitani Vs. CIT, 223 ITR 544 3. Smt Shanti Devi Vs. CIT, 171 ITR 532 4. Smt Manasi Mahendra Pitkar, ITA no. 4223 of 2015 5. ITO Vs. Kamal Kumar Mishra ITA No. 398/LKW/2012. 10. I also found that no amount Rs. 10,12,375/- has been found credited in the books of account, therefore, no addition could have been made under section 68…

Nilesh Popatlal Gada, Pune vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 2(4), Pune

In the result, appeal of the assessee is Partly Allowed

ITA 1538/PUN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune20 Dec 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: DR.DIPAK P. RIPOTE (Accountant Member), SHRI VINAY BHAMORE (Judicial Member)

Section 115BSection 250Section 68

…।आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण ”एस एम सी” "ायपीठ पुणेम"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCHES “SMC” :: PUNE BEFORE DR.DIPAK P. RIPOTE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VINAY BHAMORE, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.1538/PUN/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Nilesh Popatlal Gada, V The Income Tax Officer, 201, Sai Siddhi Congress s Ward-2(4), Pune. Bhavan, Shivaji Nagar, Pune – 411005. PAN: AHOPS1114Q Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee by Shri Neelesh Khandelwal – AR Revenue by Shri A.D.Kulkarni – Addl.CIT(DR) Date of hearing 18/11/2024 Date of pronouncement 20/12/2024 आदेश/ ORDER PER D…

Rajkumari Ashok Thakur, Palghar vs. CIT Appeal, Delhi

In the result appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 3589/MUM/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Dec 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosainvs. Nfac, Delhi Rajkumari Ashok Thakur Vaishali Deshi Bar Juna Palghar, Near St Depot, Maharashtra – 401404. Pan/Gir No. Akwpt9344C (Applicant) (Respondent)

Section 234Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 44ASection 68

…ooks of accounts under section 44AA for agriculturist in order to claim exemption under section 10 (1) as was held in the case of I C Pahuja [167 Taxmann.com 41 Delhi) 07 iii. The appellant also relied upon the judgement in the case of Bhaichand Bhai Gandhi [141 ITR 67 Bombay HC] in which it is held that no addition can be made under section 68 in respect of cash deposited into bank account by the assessee will not liable to maintain books of accounts. iv. It was also submitted that suspicion however strong cannot replace the solid evidence to treat the income from grass trading as income from other sources.It…

Deepak Srivastava, Haryana vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 30(5), Delhi

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

ITA 1328/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Dec 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasadआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.1328/Del/2024 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18 बनाम Sh. Deepak Srivastava, Income Tax Officer 1404, Tower-16, Orchid Petals, Vs. Ward-30(5), Sector-49, Gurgaon, Civic Centre, Haryana. Delhi. Pan No. अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 2Section 250Section 251Section 44ASection 68

…see cannot be held to be 'books' of the assessee. The account of the assessee in the books of the bank is different from the books of the assessee. 20. Our view is fortified by the judgment of the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of Bhaichand N Gandhi 141 ITR 67 wherein the Hon'ble High Court has held as under: "As the Tribunal has pointed out, it is fairly well settled that when moneys are deposited in a bank, the relationship that is constituted between the banker and the customer is one of debtor and creditor and not 11 I.T.A. No. 1328/Del/2024 of trustee and beneficiary. Applying this principle, the…

Shri Santosh Harichand Katrela, Beed vs. Income-Tax Officer, Ward -1, Beed

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 339/PUN/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune12 Dec 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.339/Pun/2021 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18 Shri Santosh Harichand Vs. Ito, Ward-1, Beed. Katrela, Audut Campus, Jalna Road, Gujrathi Colony Beed, Beed- 431122. Pan : Akgpk6862N Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Smt. Deepa Khare Revenue By : Shri Arvind Desai Date Of Hearing : 13.11.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 12.12.2024 आदेश / Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 18.03.2021 Passed By Ld. Cit(A)/Nfac For The Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. Registry Has Pointed Out That The Appeal Is Filed With Delay Of 99 Days. In The Light Of The Fact That Due To Covid-19 Pandemic The Period Of Limitation Has Already Been Extended By Hon’Ble Supreme

For Appellant: Smt. Deepa KhareFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Desai
Section 115BSection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 68Section 69Section 69A

…vs. M/s. Manasa Medicals, ITA No.552/Bang/2022 order dated 31.10.2022. (g) Parasmani (Trust) vs. ITO, ITA No.201/Del/2020 order dated 14.11.2022. (h) Smt. Sekar Jayalakshmi vs. ITO, ITA No.20/Chny/2021 order dated 21.12.2022. (i) CIT vs. Bhaichand N. Gandhi, 141 ITR 67 (Bombay). 6 7. It was accordingly requested before the Bench to set-aside the order passed by Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC and delete the addition of Rs.4,74,000/- made by the Assessing Officer and confirmed by the Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC. 8. Ld. DR appearing from the side of the Revenue relied on the orders passed by the subordinate authorities and requested to conf…

Sri Rajani Gold, Vijayawada vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Vijayawada

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 162/VIZ/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam11 Oct 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.No.162/Viz/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2017-18) Sri Rajani Gold V. Asst. Cit – Circle – 1(1) D.No. 11-49-336B Central Revenue Building Sivalayam Street, I Town Mg Road – 520001 Vijayawada – 520001 Vijayawada, Andhra Pradesh Andhra Pradesh [Pan: Aacfs6675E] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

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

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, धिशाखापटणम पीठ, धिशाखापटणम IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL VISAKHAPATNAM BENCH, VISAKHAPATNAM श्री दुव्वूरु आरएल रेड्डी, न्याधयक सदस्य एिं श्री एस बालाकृष्णन, लेखा सदस्य के समक्ष BEFORE SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI S BALAKRISHNAN, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.No.162/VIZ/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2017-18) Sri Rajani Gold v. Asst. CIT – Circle – 1(1) D.No. 11-49-336B Central Revenue Building Sivalayam Street, I Town MG Road – 520001 Vijayawada – 520001 Vijayawada, Andhra Pradesh Andhra Pradesh [PAN: AACFS6675E] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत…

Dinesh Kumar Soni, Jaipur vs. DCIT Cen Cir 1 Jaipur, Jaipur

In the result appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 863/JPR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur27 Sept 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Pawan Kumar Garg (C.A.)For Respondent: Smt. Monisha Choudhary (Addl.CIT) a
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 44ASection 68Section 69C

…previous year. Thus the very sine qua non for making of an addition u/s 68 of the Act presupposes a credit of the amount in the books of the assessee. Our view is fortified by the judgement of the Hon’ble High Court of Bombay in the case of Bhaichand N Gandhi 141 ITR 67 wherein the Hon’ble High Court had held as under: “As the tribunal has pointed out, it is fairly well settled that when moneys are deposited in a bank, the relationship that is constituted between the banker and the customer is one of debtor and creditor and not of trustee and beneficiary. Applying this principle, the pass book supplied by the ban…

Shri Gurtejpal Singh Somal, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 20(3)(4), Mumbai

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3087/MUM/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Sept 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya, Hon’Ble & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Ms. Sanjukta SamantaraFor Respondent: Shri P. Sudhakar Naik, Sr. DR
Section 68

…2011 GURPREET 600000.00 SOMAL 24-02-2011 TRF TO FD 2000000.00 01-03-2011 BY CASH 400000.00 TOTAL 2500000.00 2900000.00 I.T.A. No. 3087/Mum/2024 Shri Gurtejpal Singh Somal 3 6. The Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court of Bombay in the case of Bhaichand N. Gandhi 141 ITR 67 was seized with the following substantial question of law:- "(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that a cash credit for theprevious year shown in the assessee's bank pass book issued to him by the bank but not shown in the cash book maintained by him for that year does not fall with…

Mahesh Subhash Shukla, Navi Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer (It) 4(2)(1), Mumbai

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3919/MUM/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Sept 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya, Hon’Ble & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri Kirit ShethFor Respondent: Shri P. Sudhakar Naik, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 68

…The emphasis is on the sum found credited in the books therefore, if the assessee has not maintained any books of account, then the provisions of Section 68 are not applicable. The Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court of Bombay in the case of Bhaichand N. Gandhi 141 ITR 67 was seized with the following substantial question of law:- "(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that a cash credit for the previous year shown in the assessee's bank pass book issued to him by the bank but not shown in the cash book maintained by him for that year does not fall wi…

Jagmandri Finvest Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 9(2)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 2934/MUM/2024[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Sept 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Sandeep Singh Karhailsmt Renu Jauhriassessment Year : 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri S G GoyalFor Respondent: Shri R R Makwana (Sr. DR)
Section 151Section 250Section 68

…mann.com 48/[2015] 228 Taxman 471 (Mag.)(All.) 3.2 On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A) failed to appreciate that bank statement is not books of the assessee as envisaged in the ruling of CIT v. Bhaichand H. Gandhi [1983] 141 ITR 67 (Bom.) Ground No 4- On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A) failed to appreciate that the assessee is an accommodation entry provider and hence the judgement of PCIT v. Alag Securities Pvt Ltd (ITA. 1512/2017) passed by the jurisdictional Hon'ble Bombay High Court, is squarely applicable and only 0.15% of INR 4,5…

Kishorsingh Pratapsinghji Rathod, Mumbai vs. ITO 20(2)-3, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3643/MUM/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Aug 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Ashish VermaFor Respondent: Shri P.D. Chougule, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 156Section 249(2)(c)Section 68

…CICI Bank u/s.68 without appreciating that the appellant had not made any credit in the books of accounts in respect of said Cash deposits and therefore the addition u/s.68 was uncalled as laid down by Honourable High Court in case of BHAICHAND GANDHI, [1983] 141 ITR 67 (Bombay). 6. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC erred in confirming the addition Rs.6,68,500/- made by the Ld. AO in respect of Cash Deposits in Bank of India without appreciating that the actual Cash deposit was only Rs.1,50,000/- and the source of the same was duly explained…

Kalyanasundaram Suresh, Chennai vs. ACIT Non Corporate Circle 2, Chennai

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

ITA 297/CHNY/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Aug 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.297/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2013-14 Shri Kalyanasundaram Suresh, Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of Old No. 12-A, New No. 24, Income Tax, Swarnamangalam East Road, West Non Corporate Circle 2, Cit Nagar, Nandanam, Chennai. Chennai 600 035. [Pan: Aobps4696F] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri K. Ravi Kannan, Advocate & Shri Varun Ranganathan, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri R.V. Aroon Prasad, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 23.07.2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 28.08.2024 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 28.12.2018 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Chennai For The Assessment Year 2013-14. 2. The Ld. Ar Shri K. Ravi Kannan, Advocate Drew Our Attention To The Additional Grounds Of Appeal Filed On 10.12.2023 & Submits That The Said 3 Grounds Of Appeal May Be Taken Up First The Ld. Dr Shri R.V.

For Appellant: Shri K. Ravi Kannan, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri R.V. Aroon Prasad, Addl. CIT
Section 127Section 143(2)Section 5

…f account of the assessee. The AO cannot treat the bank account statement as books of the assessee, as the same does not constitute books of the assessee. The assessee relied on the judgment of the Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Bhaichand H. Gandhi (141 ITR 67) for the proposition 11.15 The ld. A.R drew our attention to the definition of books of accounts in sec.2(12A) of the Act also supports that bank pass book cannot be treated as books of accounts. 11.16 He has also placed reliance on the order of the Tribunal, Mumbai Bench in the case of Smt. Mansai Mahendra Pitkar vs. ITO (73 taxmann.com 68) (Mumb…

Jisna John, Kallur vs. Income Tax Officer, New Delhi

Appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 899/DEL/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Aug 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Kul Bharatassessment Year: 2012-13

Section 144Section 147Section 249(4)Section 249(4)(b)Section 250Section 68Section 69A

…s.69A of the IT Act, stating that, the assessee has failed to offer any explanation for the bank credit in Union Bank of India, Trichur. The AO has brought in, this amount from the Pass Book maintained by Union Bank. In the case of CIT vs. Bhaichand N. Gandhi 141 ITR 67., the Bombay High Court analysed the provisions of section 68. It took note of the decision of 3 the Supreme Court in the case of Baladin Ram vs. CIT 71 ITR 427, where the court had held that it was only when an amount was found credited in the books of an assessee that the section would be attracted. 7. PRAYER The Commissioner of Income-tax (App…

Anjana Chaudhury, Guwahati vs. ACIT, Cir. (1), Kolkata

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

ITA 881/KOL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata12 Aug 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Sri Sonjoy Sarma & Sri Sanjay Awasthi

Section 115BSection 144Section 234Section 68

…or in digital form or as print-outs of data stored in such electronic form or in digital form or in] a floppy, disc, tape or any other form of electro-magnetic data storage device;” 3.1. While through the case of CIT vs. Bhaichand N. Gandhi reported in [1983] 141 ITR 67 (Bombay), it is understood that a bank pass book would not pass muster as "books of account" but it is felt that this case pre-dates the insertion of definition of books as per Section 2(12A) of the Act and hence, it needs to be clearly pin-pointed whether at all the preliminary requirement u/s 68 of the Act regarding the presence of books is fulf…

Bhavanji Jugaji Thakor, Ahmedabad vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(3)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 974/AHD/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad08 Aug 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaassessment Year: 2016-17

Section 127Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 68

…ITA No.974/Ahd/2023 Assessment Year: 2016-17 Page 1 of 4 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD “A” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE Ms. SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI NARENDRA PRASAD SINHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2016-17 Bhavanji Jugaji Thakor, Income Tax Officer, 104, Anvaya Tower, Ward – 3(3)(1), Near Torrent Power Substation, Ahmedabad. Vejalpur, Vs. Ahmedabad – 380 051. [PAN – AKEPT 0862 H] (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Shri Mahesh Chhajed, AR Revenue by Shri J.L. Bhatia, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 04.06.2024 Date of Pronouncement 08.08.2024 O R D E R PER SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDIC…

Jaspreet Kaur, Delhi vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 45 (2), Delhi

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 13/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Aug 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

Section 143(3)Section 44ASection 69A

…so however, he did not decide this issue. The Ld. Counsel placed reliance on the decision of the Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of Salem Shree Ramavilas Chit Company(W.P.No.1732 of 2020 date of 3 Jaspreet Kaur order 04.02.2020) and Bhaichand H. Gandhi 141 ITR 67 (Bom.). Further, the Ld. Counsel submitted that the bank account was not books of account of the appellant/assessee; hence, addition made under section 69A of the Act deserved deletion once the same have been offered as sales in the ITR. The Ld. Counsel, placing reliance on the decision of Coordinate Bench in the case of Ramesh Kochar, ITA No. 171…