CIT v. Bithal Das Modi

276 ITR 517High Court2005#7810 most cited

What is CIT v. Bithal Das Modi authority for?

Decisions of the jurisdictional High Court have binding precedent on lower authorities, and deviations from such precedents are not permissible.

14

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,314 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2025.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Bithal Das Modi · 276 ITR 517 · binding precedent · jurisdictional high court · deviation from precedent · assessment authorities · Allahabad High Court · rule of consistency

Sections most often in play

Section 1961Section 10Section 11Section 12Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 2(24)

Issues it is cited on

rule of consistencysection 2(24)escapement of incomeunexplained moneysection 10notice under section 148reassessment proceedingsincome from other sourcessection 69asection 69section 68section 11

Judgments citing CIT v. Bithal Das Modi

Yogi Satyam, Allahabad vs. ITO, Ward-1(5), Allahabad

The appeals are partly allowed

ITA 9/ALLD/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad31 Oct 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Nikhil Choudhary

For Appellant: Dr. Pawan Jaiswal and Shri AjitFor Respondent: Shri A. K. Singh, D.R
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…the facts and circumstances of the case for the year under consideration vis-à-vis earlier assessment year. 14. BECAUSE the CIT(A) failed to appreciate the judgment of the Hon'ble Allahabad High Court in the case of CIT vs. Bithal Das Modi reported in [2005] 276 ITR 517 inspite of the fact that the case of the appellant is on a better footing as she has furnished meticulous details about the persons coming from abroad in his submissions which has been duly acknowledged and appreciated by authorities below, addition sustained on this ground is wholly arbitrary and unjustified and the same deserves to be deleted.…

Yogi Satyam, Allahabad vs. ITO, Ward- 1(5), Allahabad

The appeals are partly allowed

ITA 8/ALLD/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad31 Oct 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Nikhil Choudhary

For Appellant: Dr. Pawan Jaiswal and Shri AjitFor Respondent: Shri A. K. Singh, D.R
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…the facts and circumstances of the case for the year under consideration vis-à-vis earlier assessment year. 14. BECAUSE the CIT(A) failed to appreciate the judgment of the Hon'ble Allahabad High Court in the case of CIT vs. Bithal Das Modi reported in [2005] 276 ITR 517 inspite of the fact that the case of the appellant is on a better footing as she has furnished meticulous details about the persons coming from abroad in his submissions which has been duly acknowledged and appreciated by authorities below, addition sustained on this ground is wholly arbitrary and unjustified and the same deserves to be deleted.…

Yogi Satyam, Allahabad vs. ITO, Ward- 1(5), Allahabad

The appeals are partly allowed

ITA 7/ALLD/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad31 Oct 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Nikhil Choudhary

For Appellant: Dr. Pawan Jaiswal and Shri AjitFor Respondent: Shri A. K. Singh, D.R
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…the facts and circumstances of the case for the year under consideration vis-à-vis earlier assessment year. 14. BECAUSE the CIT(A) failed to appreciate the judgment of the Hon'ble Allahabad High Court in the case of CIT vs. Bithal Das Modi reported in [2005] 276 ITR 517 inspite of the fact that the case of the appellant is on a better footing as she has furnished meticulous details about the persons coming from abroad in his submissions which has been duly acknowledged and appreciated by authorities below, addition sustained on this ground is wholly arbitrary and unjustified and the same deserves to be deleted.…

Yogi Satyam, Allahabad vs. ITO, Ward- 1 (5), Allahabad

The appeals are partly allowed

ITA 6/ALLD/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad31 Oct 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Nikhil Choudhary

For Appellant: Dr. Pawan Jaiswal and Shri AjitFor Respondent: Shri A. K. Singh, D.R
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…the facts and circumstances of the case for the year under consideration vis-à-vis earlier assessment year. 14. BECAUSE the CIT(A) failed to appreciate the judgment of the Hon'ble Allahabad High Court in the case of CIT vs. Bithal Das Modi reported in [2005] 276 ITR 517 inspite of the fact that the case of the appellant is on a better footing as she has furnished meticulous details about the persons coming from abroad in his submissions which has been duly acknowledged and appreciated by authorities below, addition sustained on this ground is wholly arbitrary and unjustified and the same deserves to be deleted.…

Sanjana, Allahabad vs. ITO, Ward-1(5), Allahabad

The appeals are partly allowed

ITA 54/ALLD/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad31 Oct 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Nikhil Choudhary

For Appellant: Dr. Pawan Jaiswal and Shri AjitFor Respondent: Shri A. K. Singh, D.R
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…the facts and circumstances of the case for the year under consideration vis-à-vis earlier assessment year. 14. BECAUSE the CIT(A) failed to appreciate the judgment of the Hon'ble Allahabad High Court in the case of CIT vs. Bithal Das Modi reported in [2005] 276 ITR 517 inspite of the fact that the case of the appellant is on a better footing as she has furnished meticulous details about the persons coming from abroad in his submissions which has been duly acknowledged and appreciated by authorities below, addition sustained on this ground is wholly arbitrary and unjustified and the same deserves to be deleted.…

Sanjana, Allahabad vs. ITO, Ward- 1 (5), Allahabad

The appeals are partly allowed

ITA 53/ALLD/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad31 Oct 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Nikhil Choudhary

For Appellant: Dr. Pawan Jaiswal and Shri AjitFor Respondent: Shri A. K. Singh, D.R
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…the facts and circumstances of the case for the year under consideration vis-à-vis earlier assessment year. 14. BECAUSE the CIT(A) failed to appreciate the judgment of the Hon'ble Allahabad High Court in the case of CIT vs. Bithal Das Modi reported in [2005] 276 ITR 517 inspite of the fact that the case of the appellant is on a better footing as she has furnished meticulous details about the persons coming from abroad in his submissions which has been duly acknowledged and appreciated by authorities below, addition sustained on this ground is wholly arbitrary and unjustified and the same deserves to be deleted.…

Sanjana, Allahabad vs. ITO, Ward- 1 (5), Allahabad

The appeals are partly allowed

ITA 52/ALLD/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad31 Oct 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Nikhil Choudhary

For Appellant: Dr. Pawan Jaiswal and Shri AjitFor Respondent: Shri A. K. Singh, D.R
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…the facts and circumstances of the case for the year under consideration vis-à-vis earlier assessment year. 14. BECAUSE the CIT(A) failed to appreciate the judgment of the Hon'ble Allahabad High Court in the case of CIT vs. Bithal Das Modi reported in [2005] 276 ITR 517 inspite of the fact that the case of the appellant is on a better footing as she has furnished meticulous details about the persons coming from abroad in his submissions which has been duly acknowledged and appreciated by authorities below, addition sustained on this ground is wholly arbitrary and unjustified and the same deserves to be deleted.…

Sanjana, Allahabad vs. ITO, Ward- 1(5), Allahabad

The appeals are partly allowed

ITA 51/ALLD/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad31 Oct 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Nikhil Choudhary

For Appellant: Dr. Pawan Jaiswal and Shri AjitFor Respondent: Shri A. K. Singh, D.R
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…the facts and circumstances of the case for the year under consideration vis-à-vis earlier assessment year. 14. BECAUSE the CIT(A) failed to appreciate the judgment of the Hon'ble Allahabad High Court in the case of CIT vs. Bithal Das Modi reported in [2005] 276 ITR 517 inspite of the fact that the case of the appellant is on a better footing as she has furnished meticulous details about the persons coming from abroad in his submissions which has been duly acknowledged and appreciated by authorities below, addition sustained on this ground is wholly arbitrary and unjustified and the same deserves to be deleted.…

Sanjana, Allahabad vs. ITO, Ward-1(5), Allahabad

The appeals are partly allowed

ITA 50/ALLD/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad31 Oct 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Nikhil Choudhary

For Appellant: Dr. Pawan Jaiswal and Shri AjitFor Respondent: Shri A. K. Singh, D.R
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…the facts and circumstances of the case for the year under consideration vis-à-vis earlier assessment year. 14. BECAUSE the CIT(A) failed to appreciate the judgment of the Hon'ble Allahabad High Court in the case of CIT vs. Bithal Das Modi reported in [2005] 276 ITR 517 inspite of the fact that the case of the appellant is on a better footing as she has furnished meticulous details about the persons coming from abroad in his submissions which has been duly acknowledged and appreciated by authorities below, addition sustained on this ground is wholly arbitrary and unjustified and the same deserves to be deleted.…

Yogi Satyam, Allahabad vs. ITO, Ward- 1 (5), Allahabad

The appeals are partly allowed

ITA 5/ALLD/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad31 Oct 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Nikhil Choudhary

For Appellant: Dr. Pawan Jaiswal and Shri AjitFor Respondent: Shri A. K. Singh, D.R
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…the facts and circumstances of the case for the year under consideration vis-à-vis earlier assessment year. 14. BECAUSE the CIT(A) failed to appreciate the judgment of the Hon'ble Allahabad High Court in the case of CIT vs. Bithal Das Modi reported in [2005] 276 ITR 517 inspite of the fact that the case of the appellant is on a better footing as she has furnished meticulous details about the persons coming from abroad in his submissions which has been duly acknowledged and appreciated by authorities below, addition sustained on this ground is wholly arbitrary and unjustified and the same deserves to be deleted.…

Vrp Landbase Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO Ward 17(1), New Delhi

ITA 2726/DEL/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Mar 2023AY 2011-12
Section 144Section 68

…erprises (P.) 7. Ltd., [2018] 100 taxmann.com 99 (Delhi) Commissioner of Income-tax, Delhi-VI Vs. Tulip Finance Ltd., [2009] 178 8. Taxman 182 (Delhi) PCIT Vs. Dutta Automobiles (P.) Ltd, [2017] 81 taxmann.com 107 (Calcutta) 9. CIT Vs Bhital Das Modi, [2005] 276 ITR 517 (Allahabad), [2005] 193 CTR 10. 574 (Allahabad) Rental income in the case of real estate to be assessed as Income from House Property Commissioner of Wealth-tax Vs. Atma Ram Properties (P.) Ltd., [2017] 86 11. taxmann.com 89 (Delhi) Principal Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. E City Real Estate (P.) Ltd, [2018] 12. 100 taxmann.com 94 (SC) Power of I…

The Assisatant Commissioenr of Income-Tax, Hoshiarpur vs. Sh. Maninder Singh Cheema, Hoshiarpur

In the result, the Revenue’s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 719/ASR/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar31 Jul 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arora & Sh. N. K. Choudhryi.T.A. No. 719/Asr/2013 Assessment Year: 2007-08

For Appellant: Sh. Rajeev K. Gubgotra (D.R.)For Respondent: Sh. Surinder Mahajan, (C.A.)
Section 131Section 143(3)Section 68Section 69

…proved, the other considers them as not, i.e., on the parameters of section 68, (also) stated before us as not applicable to a trade credit - and which is what the earnest money essentially is, relying on the following decisions: CIT v. Bhital Das Modi [2005] 276 ITR 517 (All) CIT v. Pancham Dass Jain [2006] 156 Taxman 507 (All) ITO v. Lachhman Das Makhija [2009] 116 ITD 47 (Agra) (TM). 4.2 Even as observed by the Bench during hearing, whether in the given facts and circumstances, i.e., the explanation offered, and the materials led in support, could the ‘depositors’ be said to have deposited the earnest money,…

ITO, Ward - 3(4), Kolkata vs. M/S. Chitravali Sales (P) Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed and cross objection of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1258/KOL/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Aug 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh, Am & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm]

For Appellant: Shri Subash Agarwal, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Niraj Kumar, CIT, DR
Section 133(6)Section 143(3)(ii)Section 68

…n support of this proposition :- (a) Decision of Third Member of Agra Tribunal in the case of ITO vs Laxman das Makhija reported in (2009) 116 ITD 47 (TM ) (b) Decision of Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in the case of CIT vs Bhital Das Modi reported in (2005) 276 ITR 517 (All) (c ) Decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs Tulip Finance Ltd reported in (2009) 178 Taxman 182 (Del) (d ) Decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs Chemi Kleen India (P) Ltd reported in (1990) 181 ITR 198 (Del) (e ) Decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs S.D. Investment & Trading…

Smt. Madhu, Meerut vs. ITO, Meerut

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee stands allowed

ITA 872/DEL/2015[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Dec 2015AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Sh. V.K. Goel, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. P. Dam Kanunjna, Sr. DR
Section 133(6)Section 68

…Jaipur, [2014] 50 taxmann.com 336 (Jaipur –Trib) TM iiii) Commissioner of Income Tax vs. M. Venkateshwara Rao, [2015] 57 taxmann.com 373 (Andhra Pradesh and Telangana) iv) Anil Rice Mill vs. CIT (2005) 149 Taxman. 313 (All.) v) CIT vs. Bhital Das Modi (2005) 276 ITR 517 (All.) vi) Khandelwal Constructions vs. CIT (1997) 227 ITR 900 (Guj) vii) CIT vs. P. V. Bhoopathy (2006) 283 ITR 365 (Mad.) viii) Asst. CIT vs. Kumar Ice (1999) 237 ITR (AT) 117 (Pat). 3 ix) CIT vs. Real Time Marketing P Ltd. (2008) 306 ITR 35 (Del) x) Asstt. CIT vs. Radhey Shyam Bansal (2000) 112 Taxman 246 (ITAT) Rajkot xi) Ami Chand Jain vs.…

CIT v. Bithal Das Modi (276 ITR 517) — Cited in 14 Judgments | BharatTax