CIT v. Golani Brothers

300 CTR 245High Court2018#10924 most cited
10

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2020 to 2025.

Also reported as

250 Taxmann 446

Sections most often in play

Section 131Section 142(1)Section 153ASection 69CSection 115-BBE(2)Section 115BBESection 132Section 132(4)

Issues it is cited on

section 215section 256(1)section 256short deduction of tdssection 80ia(4)section 220section 21deduction u/s 80iasection 220(2)eligible businessapplication of incomesection 201(1a)

Judgments citing CIT v. Golani Brothers

DCIT-C-6(2), MUMBAI vs. SAMIRA HABITATS INDIA LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, the cross-objection by the assessee for the assessment year 2012-13 is dismissed

ITA 5714/MUM/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 May 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiyashri Sandeep Singh Karhailita No.5714/Mum/2024 Assessment Year : 2011-12 Assessment Year : 2012-13 Assessment Year : 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh JoshiFor Respondent: Dr. Kishor Dhule, CIT-DR
Section 132(4)Section 250

…essment is far greater that interest payments. Thus, it is admitted that fact that the said expenses have been incurred out of alleged on-money / cash receipts. Hence considering the decision of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs Golani Brothers (300 CTR 245) wherein it has been held that once 'on money' was considered as revenue receipt, and addition to income was made, any expenditure out of such money could not be treated as unexplained expenditure doing so would amount to double addition.” Being aggrieved, the Revenue is in appeal before us. 23. Having considered the submissions of both sides a…

DCIT-C-6(2), MUMBAI vs. SAMIRA HABITATS, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue for the

ITA 5710/MUM/2024[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 May 2025AY 2009-10
For Appellant: Shri Rakesh JoshiFor Respondent: Dr. Kishor Dhule, CIT-DR
Section 132(4)Section 250

…ment is far greater that interest payments. Thus, it is admitted\nthat fact that the said expenses have been incurred out of alleged on-money\n/ cash receipts. Hence considering the decision of Hon'ble Bombay High Court\nin the case of CIT vs Golani Brothers (300 CTR 245) wherein it has been held\nthat once 'on money' was considered as revenue receipt, and addition to\nincome was made, any expenditure out of such money could not be treated as\nunexplained expenditure doing so would amount to double addition.”\nBeing aggrieved, the Revenue is in appeal before us.\n23. Having considered the submissions of both side…

DCIT-C-6(2), MUMBAI vs. SAMIRA HABITATS INDIA LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue for the

ITA 5709/MUM/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 May 2025AY 2011-12
For Appellant: Shri Rakesh JoshiFor Respondent: Dr. Kishor Dhule, CIT-DR
Section 132(4)Section 250

…ment is far greater that interest payments. Thus, it is admitted\nthat fact that the said expenses have been incurred out of alleged on-money\n/ cash receipts. Hence considering the decision of Hon'ble Bombay High Court\nin the case of CIT vs Golani Brothers (300 CTR 245) wherein it has been held\nthat once 'on money' was considered as revenue receipt, and addition to\nincome was made, any expenditure out of such money could not be treated as\nunexplained expenditure doing so would amount to double addition.”\nBeing aggrieved, the Revenue is in appeal before us.\n23. Having considered the submissions of both side…

DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, AURANGABAD, AURANGBAD vs. SHRI PANKAJ RATILAL MUGDIYA, AURANGABAD

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

ITA 958/PUN/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Pune24 Feb 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2021-22

For Appellant: Shri Jaiprakash BairagraFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Desai, Addl CIT DR
Section 115BSection 131Section 132ASection 143(2)Section 153ASection 69A

…d-19 period when the entire country was passing through lockdown. He also relied on the following decisions: i) CIT vs. Jawanmal Gemaji Gandhi (1985) 151 ITR 353 (Bom) ii) CIT vs. Tyaryamal Balchand (1987) 165 ITR 453 (Raj) iii) CIT vs. Golani Brothers (2018) 300 CTR 245 (Bom) iv) CIT vs. S. Nelliappan (1967) 66 ITR 722 (SC) v) CIT vs. K.S.M. Guruswamy Nadar & Sons (1984) 149 ITR 127 (Mad) vi) PCIT vs. M/s. Tata Medical Centre Trust vide IA No.GA/1/2023, order dated 26.09.2023 vii) M/s. Overseas Leathers vs. DCIT vide ITA No.962/Chny/2022, order dt 05.04.2023 viii) Shri Bhuwan Goyal vs. DCIT vide ITA No.1385/Chd/…

SADBHAV ENGINEERING LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(3), AHMEDABAD, DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(3), AHMEDABAD

ITA 235/AHD/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad10 Jan 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumarsr. No. Appellant Respondent 1-7 It(Ss)A.No./ Asstt.Year 170 To 175 & 235/Ahd/2021 Asst. Year 2012- 13 To 2018-19 Sadbhav Engineering Ltd. Nr. Havmour Restaurant Navrangpura Ahmedbad. Dcit, Cent.Cir.1(3) Ahmedabad. 8-14 183 To 189/Ahd/2021 Asst. Year 2012- 14 To 2018-19 Pan : Aadcs 0852 Q Dcit, Cent.Cir.1(3) Ahmedabad. Sadbhav Engineering Ltd. Nr. Havmour Restaurant Navrangpura Ahmedabad. (Applicant) (Responent) Assessee By Shri Dhinal Shah, Ar Revenue By: Shri H. Phani Raju, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख /Date Of Hearing : 18/10/2024 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement: 10/01/2025 आदेश/Order Per Bench: The Above Cross-Appeals Of The Assessee & The Revenue Are Against The Consolidated Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals) 11, Ahmedabad All Dated 04.08.2021 Passed Under Section 250(6) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act" For Short) For The

For Respondent: Shri H. Phani Raju, CIT-DR
Section 115BSection 132Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 250(6)Section 69ASection 80I

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, अहमदाबाद न्यायपीठ 'A' अहमदाबाद। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SMT.ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER Sr. No. Appellant Respondent 1-7 IT(SS)A.No./ Asstt.Year 170 to 175 and 235/Ahd/2021 Asst. Year 2012- 13 to 2018-19 Sadbhav Engineering Ltd. Nr. Havmour Restaurant Navrangpura Ahmedbad. DCIT, Cent.Cir.1(3) Ahmedabad. 8-14 183 to 189/Ahd/2021 Asst. Year 2012- 14 to 2018-19 PAN : AADCS 0852 Q DCIT, Cent.Cir.1(3) Ahmedabad. Sadbhav Engineering Ltd. Nr. Havmour Restaurant Navrangpura Ahmedabad. (Applicant) (Responent) A…

ACIT CC 3(4) CEN RG 3, MUMBAI vs. PATEL ENGINEERING LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, cross objection filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2758/MUM/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Oct 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

Section 14ASection 199(2)Section 801A(4)Section 80I

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “J” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos. 2757 & 2758/MUM/2017 (A.Y. 2008-09 & 2009-10) ITA.No. 2933/MUM/2019 (A.Y. 2014-15) DCIT – Central Circle – 3(4) v. M/s. Patel Engineering Ltd., Central Range -3 Patel Estate Road Room No. 1915, 19th Floor Jogeswari (W) Air India Building, Nariman Point Mumbai - 400102 Mumbai – 400 021 PAN: AAACP2567L Appellant Respondent C.O. Nos. 259 &260/MUM/2018 [ARISING OUT OF ITA Nos. 2757 & 2758 /MUM/2017 (A.Y. 2008-09 & 2009-10)] M/s. Patel Engineering Ltd.…

ACIT CC 3(4) CEN RG 3, MUMBAI vs. PATEL ENGINEERING LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, cross objection filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2757/MUM/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Oct 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

Section 14ASection 199(2)Section 801A(4)Section 80I

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “J” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos. 2757 & 2758/MUM/2017 (A.Y. 2008-09 & 2009-10) ITA.No. 2933/MUM/2019 (A.Y. 2014-15) DCIT – Central Circle – 3(4) v. M/s. Patel Engineering Ltd., Central Range -3 Patel Estate Road Room No. 1915, 19th Floor Jogeswari (W) Air India Building, Nariman Point Mumbai - 400102 Mumbai – 400 021 PAN: AAACP2567L Appellant Respondent C.O. Nos. 259 &260/MUM/2018 [ARISING OUT OF ITA Nos. 2757 & 2758 /MUM/2017 (A.Y. 2008-09 & 2009-10)] M/s. Patel Engineering Ltd.…

DCIT CENT. CIR. -5(3) (ERSTWHILE DCIT CENT. CIR. -36), MUMBAI vs. SUMER BUILDERS, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed as indicated above and appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 5130/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Jan 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri M. Balaganesh, Hon'Blem/S. Sumer Builders V. Dy. Commissioner Of Income-Tax Central Circle – 5(3) 201, Commerce House {Erstwhile Dcit, Central Circle – 36} 140, Nm Road, Fort Room No. 1906, 19Th Floor Mumbai – 400 023 Air India Building, Nariman Point Mumbai – 400 021 Pan: Aaafs2829R

For Appellant: Shri Nishit GandhiFor Respondent: Shri A. Mohan
Section 36(1)(iii)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “F” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI C.N. PRASAD, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI M. BALAGANESH, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER M/s. Sumer Builders v. Dy. Commissioner of Income-tax Central Circle – 5(3) 201, Commerce House {Erstwhile DCIT, Central Circle – 36} 140, NM Road, Fort Room No. 1906, 19th Floor Mumbai – 400 023 Air India Building, Nariman Point Mumbai – 400 021 PAN: AAAFS2829R (Appellant) (Respondent) Dy. Commissioner of Income-tax v. M/s. Sumer Builders Central Circle – 5(3) 201, Commerce House {Erstwhile DCIT, Central Circle – 36} 140, NM Road, Fort Room No. 1906, 19th Floo…

SUMER BUILDERS,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CEN CIR 5(3), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed as indicated above and appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 4915/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Jan 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri M. Balaganesh, Hon'Blem/S. Sumer Builders V. Dy. Commissioner Of Income-Tax Central Circle – 5(3) 201, Commerce House {Erstwhile Dcit, Central Circle – 36} 140, Nm Road, Fort Room No. 1906, 19Th Floor Mumbai – 400 023 Air India Building, Nariman Point Mumbai – 400 021 Pan: Aaafs2829R

For Appellant: Shri Nishit GandhiFor Respondent: Shri A. Mohan
Section 36(1)(iii)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “F” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI C.N. PRASAD, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI M. BALAGANESH, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER M/s. Sumer Builders v. Dy. Commissioner of Income-tax Central Circle – 5(3) 201, Commerce House {Erstwhile DCIT, Central Circle – 36} 140, NM Road, Fort Room No. 1906, 19th Floor Mumbai – 400 023 Air India Building, Nariman Point Mumbai – 400 021 PAN: AAAFS2829R (Appellant) (Respondent) Dy. Commissioner of Income-tax v. M/s. Sumer Builders Central Circle – 5(3) 201, Commerce House {Erstwhile DCIT, Central Circle – 36} 140, NM Road, Fort Room No. 1906, 19th Floo…

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S HIND INDUSTRIES LTD.,, NEW DELHI

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 3535/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Mar 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N. K. Billaiya & Ms Suchitra Kambledcit Vs Hind Industries Ltd. Circle 11(1) A-1, Phase-1, Okhla New Delhi Industrial Area New Delhi (Appellant) Aaach0870N (Respondent)

Section 133(6)Section 14ASection 40A(3)Section 69C

…ssessee explains the source of payment and there is no dispute about the source of payment, then Section 69C of IT Act is not applicable. The Ld. AR relied upon the following decisions: i) Sajni Jewellers vs. DCIT 241 ITR 383 (Guj) ii) CIT vs. Golani Brothers 300 CTR 245 (Bom) 6 The Ld. AR further submitted that production of parties cannot be a ground for disallowance of all purchases when sales made of such parties were not disputed as held in case of Ganesh Das Piaralal Jain vs. ITO (2017) 82 taxmann.com 354 (Chandigarh Trib). The Ld. AR submitted that if the contention of the Assessing Officer is accepted an…

CIT v. Golani Brothers (300 CTR 245) — Cited in 10 Judgments | BharatTax