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 367,154 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

Smt Smt Dheeraj Devi Kothari, Rajnandgaon vs. The Income Tax Officer-1, Rajnandgaon

The appeal of the assessee is allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 15/BIL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur21 Feb 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Jamlappa D Battullआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 15/Rpr/2016 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12 Smt. Dheeraj Devi Kothari, Near Prakash Medicos, Balgovind Chowk, Rajnandgaon (C.G) Pan : Aezpk9549K .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer-1, Rajnandgaon (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri G.S. Agarwal, ARFor Respondent: Shri G.N Singh, DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 68

…ks of the assessee' maintained for the previous year, cannot be brought to tax by invoking the provisions of Section 68. That our aforesaid view is fortified by the judgment of the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of CIT Vs. Bhaichand'N. Gandhi (1983) 141 ITR 67 (Bombay) 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 of trustee and beneficiary. Applying this principle, the pass book supplied…

Shri. Tarsem Goyal, Sirsa vs. Pr.CIT, Rohtak

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 157/CHANDI/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh19 Jan 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Vikram Singh Yadavआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.149/Chd/2021 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year :2016-17 Sh. Rajeev Goyal Pr. Commissioner Of Income बनाम M/S R.K. Associates, Tax, Rohtak B.G. Complex Near Ganesh Dharam Kanta, Sirsa -125055, Haryana "थायीलेखासं./Pan No: Aibpg7289A अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 143(3)Section 263

…se of CIT vs. Mayawati reported in 338 ITR 563 ITA Nos. 149 to 152, 154 & 157-c-2021 Rajeev Goyal & others 30 ii) 171 ITR 532 (P&H) Shanta Devi vs. CIT iii) 291 ITR 232 (Mad) CIT vs. Taj Borewells iv) 298 ITR 1 (SC) K.C.C. Software Ltd. vs. DIT (Inv.) v) 141 ITR 67 (Bom) CIT vs. Bhaichand H. Gandhi 5.4 It was also submitted that where two views are possible and the AO has taken a view with which the Ld. Pr. CIT does not agree, the said order cannot be treated as an erroneous order prejudicial to the interests of the revenue unless the view taken by the AO is unsustainable in law. Reliance was placed on f…

Sh. Parshotam Goyal, Sirsa vs. Pr.CIT, Rohtak

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 154/CHANDI/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh19 Jan 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Vikram Singh Yadavआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.149/Chd/2021 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year :2016-17 Sh. Rajeev Goyal Pr. Commissioner Of Income बनाम M/S R.K. Associates, Tax, Rohtak B.G. Complex Near Ganesh Dharam Kanta, Sirsa -125055, Haryana "थायीलेखासं./Pan No: Aibpg7289A अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 143(3)Section 263

…se of CIT vs. Mayawati reported in 338 ITR 563 ITA Nos. 149 to 152, 154 & 157-c-2021 Rajeev Goyal & others 30 ii) 171 ITR 532 (P&H) Shanta Devi vs. CIT iii) 291 ITR 232 (Mad) CIT vs. Taj Borewells iv) 298 ITR 1 (SC) K.C.C. Software Ltd. vs. DIT (Inv.) v) 141 ITR 67 (Bom) CIT vs. Bhaichand H. Gandhi 5.4 It was also submitted that where two views are possible and the AO has taken a view with which the Ld. Pr. CIT does not agree, the said order cannot be treated as an erroneous order prejudicial to the interests of the revenue unless the view taken by the AO is unsustainable in law. Reliance was placed on f…

Priyanka, Sirsa vs. Pr.CIT, Rohtak

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 152/CHANDI/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh19 Jan 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Vikram Singh Yadavआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.149/Chd/2021 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year :2016-17 Sh. Rajeev Goyal Pr. Commissioner Of Income बनाम M/S R.K. Associates, Tax, Rohtak B.G. Complex Near Ganesh Dharam Kanta, Sirsa -125055, Haryana "थायीलेखासं./Pan No: Aibpg7289A अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 143(3)Section 263

…se of CIT vs. Mayawati reported in 338 ITR 563 ITA Nos. 149 to 152, 154 & 157-c-2021 Rajeev Goyal & others 30 ii) 171 ITR 532 (P&H) Shanta Devi vs. CIT iii) 291 ITR 232 (Mad) CIT vs. Taj Borewells iv) 298 ITR 1 (SC) K.C.C. Software Ltd. vs. DIT (Inv.) v) 141 ITR 67 (Bom) CIT vs. Bhaichand H. Gandhi 5.4 It was also submitted that where two views are possible and the AO has taken a view with which the Ld. Pr. CIT does not agree, the said order cannot be treated as an erroneous order prejudicial to the interests of the revenue unless the view taken by the AO is unsustainable in law. Reliance was placed on f…

Priya Goyal, Sirsa vs. Pr.CIT, Rohtak

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 151/CHANDI/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh19 Jan 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Vikram Singh Yadavआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.149/Chd/2021 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year :2016-17 Sh. Rajeev Goyal Pr. Commissioner Of Income बनाम M/S R.K. Associates, Tax, Rohtak B.G. Complex Near Ganesh Dharam Kanta, Sirsa -125055, Haryana "थायीलेखासं./Pan No: Aibpg7289A अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 143(3)Section 263

…se of CIT vs. Mayawati reported in 338 ITR 563 ITA Nos. 149 to 152, 154 & 157-c-2021 Rajeev Goyal & others 30 ii) 171 ITR 532 (P&H) Shanta Devi vs. CIT iii) 291 ITR 232 (Mad) CIT vs. Taj Borewells iv) 298 ITR 1 (SC) K.C.C. Software Ltd. vs. DIT (Inv.) v) 141 ITR 67 (Bom) CIT vs. Bhaichand H. Gandhi 5.4 It was also submitted that where two views are possible and the AO has taken a view with which the Ld. Pr. CIT does not agree, the said order cannot be treated as an erroneous order prejudicial to the interests of the revenue unless the view taken by the AO is unsustainable in law. Reliance was placed on f…

M/S Pardeep Ispat(P) Ltd., Sirsa vs. Pr.CIT, Rohtak

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 150/CHANDI/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh19 Jan 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Vikram Singh Yadavआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.149/Chd/2021 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year :2016-17 Sh. Rajeev Goyal Pr. Commissioner Of Income बनाम M/S R.K. Associates, Tax, Rohtak B.G. Complex Near Ganesh Dharam Kanta, Sirsa -125055, Haryana "थायीलेखासं./Pan No: Aibpg7289A अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 143(3)Section 263

…se of CIT vs. Mayawati reported in 338 ITR 563 ITA Nos. 149 to 152, 154 & 157-c-2021 Rajeev Goyal & others 30 ii) 171 ITR 532 (P&H) Shanta Devi vs. CIT iii) 291 ITR 232 (Mad) CIT vs. Taj Borewells iv) 298 ITR 1 (SC) K.C.C. Software Ltd. vs. DIT (Inv.) v) 141 ITR 67 (Bom) CIT vs. Bhaichand H. Gandhi 5.4 It was also submitted that where two views are possible and the AO has taken a view with which the Ld. Pr. CIT does not agree, the said order cannot be treated as an erroneous order prejudicial to the interests of the revenue unless the view taken by the AO is unsustainable in law. Reliance was placed on f…

Shri Rajeev Goyal, Sirsa vs. Pr.CIT, Rohtak

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 149/CHANDI/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh19 Jan 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Vikram Singh Yadavआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.149/Chd/2021 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year :2016-17 Sh. Rajeev Goyal Pr. Commissioner Of Income बनाम M/S R.K. Associates, Tax, Rohtak B.G. Complex Near Ganesh Dharam Kanta, Sirsa -125055, Haryana "थायीलेखासं./Pan No: Aibpg7289A अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 143(3)Section 263

…se of CIT vs. Mayawati reported in 338 ITR 563 ITA Nos. 149 to 152, 154 & 157-c-2021 Rajeev Goyal & others 30 ii) 171 ITR 532 (P&H) Shanta Devi vs. CIT iii) 291 ITR 232 (Mad) CIT vs. Taj Borewells iv) 298 ITR 1 (SC) K.C.C. Software Ltd. vs. DIT (Inv.) v) 141 ITR 67 (Bom) CIT vs. Bhaichand H. Gandhi 5.4 It was also submitted that where two views are possible and the AO has taken a view with which the Ld. Pr. CIT does not agree, the said order cannot be treated as an erroneous order prejudicial to the interests of the revenue unless the view taken by the AO is unsustainable in law. Reliance was placed on f…

M. Badri Narayanan, Chennai vs. ITO, Ncw - 1 (5), Chennai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2236/CHNY/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai12 Jan 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.No.2236/Chny/2019 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17) Mr. M. Badri Narayanan Vs Income Tax Officer, 6, Vinayaka Apartments, Raja Street Non-Corporate Ward-1(5), T.Nagar, Chennai-600 017. Chennai-34. Pan: Bghpb 0458 H (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr. G.Johnson, Addl.CITFor Respondent: 10.01.2022
Section 68

…Assessing Officer erred in adding Rs.11,09,900/- unexplained cash credit is duly reflected in bank statement and necessary explanation has been given to learned assessing officer during the assessment, also in the case of re: CIT, Poona V. Bhaichand H. Gandhi 141 ITR 67 (Bom) - it was held that the pass book supplied by the bank to the assessee cannot be regarded as the book of the assessee, that is, a book maintained by the assessee or under his instructions. Therefore a cash credit for the previous year shown in the assessee’s bank statement does not fall within the ambit of Section 68 of Income Tax Act, 1961.…

Nirav Rameshbhai Shah, Ahmedabad vs. The ITO, Ward-5(1)(4), Ahmedabad

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1122/AHD/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad10 Jan 2022AY 2011-12
For Appellant: Shri Sagar Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri S.S. Shukla, Sr. D.R
Section 144Section 147Section 250(6)Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD “SMC” BENCH (Conducted Through Virtual Court) Before: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice President And Mrs. Annapurna Gupta, Accountant Member Assessment Year 2011-12 Shri Nirav Rameshchandra The ITO, Shah, Subham Apartment, Ward-5(1)(4), Block-B, Flat N-2, Vs Ahmedabad Ground Floor, (Respondent) Nr. Jain Hind High School, Maninagar, Ahmedabad PAN: AOAPS1225B (Appellant) Revenue by: Shri S.S. Shukla, Sr. D.R. Assessee by: Shri Sagar Shah, A.R. Date of hearing : 22-12-2021 Date of pronouncement : 10-01-2022 आदेश/ORDER PER : ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:- The pr…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle - 2 (3), Bengaluru vs. Shri C J Vishwantha, Chickamangaluru

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1891/BANG/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Nov 2021AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri Guruswamy H, ITPFor Respondent: Shri Sumer Singh Meena, CIT-OSD-DR
Section 131Section 132Section 153A

…a receipt is sought to be taxed as income, the burden lies on the Department to prove that it is within the taxing provision. 29. The assessee placed reliance on the decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT v. Bhai Chand.H. Gandhi (1983) 141 ITR 67 (BOM), wherein it has been held that the Bank credits do not constitute income of the Appellant and provision of section 68 of the Act is not applicable since the Bank Pass Book does not constitute as the Books of the Assessee. The Ld. AO has made an addition of Rs. 2,06,72,127/- being the deposits found credited in the State Bank of Mysore amount…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-2(3), Bangalore vs. Shri C J Vishwanth, Chikkamangaluru

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1893/BANG/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Nov 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri Guruswamy H, ITPFor Respondent: Shri Sumer Singh Meena, CIT-OSD-DR
Section 131Section 132Section 153A

…a receipt is sought to be taxed as income, the burden lies on the Department to prove that it is within the taxing provision. 29. The assessee placed reliance on the decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT v. Bhai Chand.H. Gandhi (1983) 141 ITR 67 (BOM), wherein it has been held that the Bank credits do not constitute income of the Appellant and provision of section 68 of the Act is not applicable since the Bank Pass Book does not constitute as the Books of the Assessee. The Ld. AO has made an addition of Rs. 2,06,72,127/- being the deposits found credited in the State Bank of Mysore amount…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-2(3), Bangalore vs. Shri C J Vishwanth, Chickamangalur

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1892/BANG/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Nov 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri Guruswamy H, ITPFor Respondent: Shri Sumer Singh Meena, CIT-OSD-DR
Section 131Section 132Section 153A

…a receipt is sought to be taxed as income, the burden lies on the Department to prove that it is within the taxing provision. 29. The assessee placed reliance on the decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT v. Bhai Chand.H. Gandhi (1983) 141 ITR 67 (BOM), wherein it has been held that the Bank credits do not constitute income of the Appellant and provision of section 68 of the Act is not applicable since the Bank Pass Book does not constitute as the Books of the Assessee. The Ld. AO has made an addition of Rs. 2,06,72,127/- being the deposits found credited in the State Bank of Mysore amount…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-2(3), Bangalore vs. Shri C J Vishwanath, Chikkamagaluru

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1896/BANG/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Nov 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri Guruswamy H, ITPFor Respondent: Shri Sumer Singh Meena, CIT-OSD-DR
Section 131Section 132Section 153A

…a receipt is sought to be taxed as income, the burden lies on the Department to prove that it is within the taxing provision. 29. The assessee placed reliance on the decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT v. Bhai Chand.H. Gandhi (1983) 141 ITR 67 (BOM), wherein it has been held that the Bank credits do not constitute income of the Appellant and provision of section 68 of the Act is not applicable since the Bank Pass Book does not constitute as the Books of the Assessee. The Ld. AO has made an addition of Rs. 2,06,72,127/- being the deposits found credited in the State Bank of Mysore amount…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-2(3), Bangalore vs. Shri C J Vishwanth, Chikkamagaluru

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1895/BANG/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Nov 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri Guruswamy H, ITPFor Respondent: Shri Sumer Singh Meena, CIT-OSD-DR
Section 131Section 132Section 153A

…a receipt is sought to be taxed as income, the burden lies on the Department to prove that it is within the taxing provision. 29. The assessee placed reliance on the decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT v. Bhai Chand.H. Gandhi (1983) 141 ITR 67 (BOM), wherein it has been held that the Bank credits do not constitute income of the Appellant and provision of section 68 of the Act is not applicable since the Bank Pass Book does not constitute as the Books of the Assessee. The Ld. AO has made an addition of Rs. 2,06,72,127/- being the deposits found credited in the State Bank of Mysore amount…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-2(3), Bangalore vs. Shri C J Vishwanth, Chikkamagaluru

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1894/BANG/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Nov 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri Guruswamy H, ITPFor Respondent: Shri Sumer Singh Meena, CIT-OSD-DR
Section 131Section 132Section 153A

…a receipt is sought to be taxed as income, the burden lies on the Department to prove that it is within the taxing provision. 29. The assessee placed reliance on the decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT v. Bhai Chand.H. Gandhi (1983) 141 ITR 67 (BOM), wherein it has been held that the Bank credits do not constitute income of the Appellant and provision of section 68 of the Act is not applicable since the Bank Pass Book does not constitute as the Books of the Assessee. The Ld. AO has made an addition of Rs. 2,06,72,127/- being the deposits found credited in the State Bank of Mysore amount…

Hyvolt Electricals, Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle-55(1), New Delhi

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 5175/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Nov 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri G. S. Pannu & Ms Suchitra Kamble

Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 68

…r has relied only on Bank Pass book of the Partners of the Assesee and not of the Assessee. 6. That the Learned Assessing Officer has failed to note that ank Pass book is not books of account for the purpose of Section 68. In CIT, Poona v. Bhaichand H. Gandhi 141 ITR 67 (Bom.) it was held that the pass book supplied by the bank to the assessee cannot be regarded as the book of the assessee, that is, a book maintained by the assessee or under his instructions. 7. That on the above grounds, the assessee prays for justice not to add Rs.2,27,49,500/- U/s 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and Rs.27,86,940/- as Interest e…

Alok Gupta, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle-1(3)(1) (Internaqtional Taxation), New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessees are allowed and the Stay applications filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 4338/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Nov 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Shri Prabhat Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Shri E.V. Bhaskar, Sr. DR
Section 147Section 148Section 151

…tion that if any books of accounts are maintained by the assessee, then such money etc. should not be recorded in such books of accounts. 6.17 The appellant has relied on the decision of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Bhaichand Gandhi [2013] 141 ITR 67/30 taxmann.com 220. However, I find that the aforesaid decision is in respect of provisions of section 68 of the act whereas the present case involves addition under section 69A of the act. The appellant is found to be the owner of money which has been withdrawn from the bank account as per the facts of the case. The appellant has claimed the natu…

Mr. Neeraj Paliwal, Rajsamand vs. ITO, Ward-2, Rajsamand

In the result, all these appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 9/JODH/2021[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur01 Nov 2021AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav

Section 144Section 147Section 253(3)Section 68

…,13,000/- in the bank accounts of the assessee by invoking Section 68 has to fail, for the very reason that as per the judgment of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Bhaichand N. Gandhi 13 ITA 07 to 11/Jodh/2021 Neeraj Paliwal Vs ITO (1983) 141 ITR 67 (Bombay), a bank pass book or bank statement cannot be considered to be a 'book' maintained by the assessee for any previous year for the purpose of Section 68 of the Act. Therefore, on this count itself the impugned addition made and sustained deserves to be deleted and we direct to delete the same" We also draw strength from the decision of the…

Mr. Neeraj Paliwal, Rajsamand vs. ITO, Ward-2, Rajsamand

In the result, all these appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 8/JODH/2021[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur01 Nov 2021AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav

Section 144Section 147Section 253(3)Section 68

…,13,000/- in the bank accounts of the assessee by invoking Section 68 has to fail, for the very reason that as per the judgment of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Bhaichand N. Gandhi 13 ITA 07 to 11/Jodh/2021 Neeraj Paliwal Vs ITO (1983) 141 ITR 67 (Bombay), a bank pass book or bank statement cannot be considered to be a 'book' maintained by the assessee for any previous year for the purpose of Section 68 of the Act. Therefore, on this count itself the impugned addition made and sustained deserves to be deleted and we direct to delete the same" We also draw strength from the decision of the…

Mr. Neeraj Paliwal, Rajsamand vs. ITO, Ward-2, Rajsamand

In the result, all these appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 7/JODH/2021[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur01 Nov 2021AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav

Section 144Section 147Section 253(3)Section 68

…,13,000/- in the bank accounts of the assessee by invoking Section 68 has to fail, for the very reason that as per the judgment of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Bhaichand N. Gandhi 13 ITA 07 to 11/Jodh/2021 Neeraj Paliwal Vs ITO (1983) 141 ITR 67 (Bombay), a bank pass book or bank statement cannot be considered to be a 'book' maintained by the assessee for any previous year for the purpose of Section 68 of the Act. Therefore, on this count itself the impugned addition made and sustained deserves to be deleted and we direct to delete the same" We also draw strength from the decision of the…