CIT v. Jeskaran Bhuvalka

76 ITR 128High Court1970#18251 most cited
5

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 346,713 Indian tax judgments — from 2019 to 2025.

Sections most often in play

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148(2)Section 68

Issues it is cited on

section 5(2)(b)section 5(2)share capital and share premiumsource of sourcecreditworthiness of the creditorborrowed satisfactionsection 250(4)admission of additional evidencetangible materialshare application moneyrule 46areason to believe

Judgments citing CIT v. Jeskaran Bhuvalka

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. A & D Estates Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result we upheld the decision of the Ld

ITA 1729/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Jun 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Manish Agarwalassessment Year: 2012-13

Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 68

…ormation of the belief and are not extraneous or irrelevant to the purpose of the section as was held in the following cases Ganga Saran & Sons Pvt. Ltd. vs. ITO (1971) 82 ITR 29 (Cal). Y. Rajan vs. ITO (1970) 77 ITR 839 (AP) CIT vs. Jeskaran Bhuvalka (1970) 76 ITR 128, 140 (AP) Muni Lai Ram Dayal Vs. ITO (1970) 76 ITR 151, 156 (Orissa) Dilip Chand Agarwal Vs. ITO (1974) Tax LR 865 (Orissa). The belief of the AO. should not thus be a product or imagination or speculation The belief must be of an honest and reasonable person based upon reasonable grounds. His belief must not be based on mere suspicion. It is ope…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle - 1(4), Bengaluru vs. M/S Snowshine Realtors Pvt.Ltd., Bengaluru

In the result, the revenue appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 1443/BANG/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Oct 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariita Nos.1441 & 1442/Bang/2018 Assessment Year: 2009-10 & 2012-13 Acit Central Circle- M/S. Kansur Developers India Pvt. Ltd. 1(4) No.2650, Ground Floor Bengaluru Vs. 37Th B Cross, 28Th Main, 9Th Block Jayanagar Bangalore 560 009 Pan No : Aacck9866F Appellant Respondent C.O. Nos.103&104/Bang/2018 (Arising Out Of Ita Nos.1441 & 1442/Bang/2018) Assessment Years: 2009-10 & 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Dilip, Junior Standing Counsel forFor Respondent: Dept
Section 147

…position of law laid down in the following decisions, wherein it is held that. on mere suspicion no reopening is possible U/s.147 of the act, since the satisfaction is based on "reason to believe" and not "reason to suspect" i) CIT V. Jeskaran Bhuvalka (1970) 76 ITR 128 (AP) ii) N. Sundareswaram V. CIT (1972) 84 ITR 173 (Ker) iii) Smt.Hemlata Agarwal V. CIT (1967) 64 ITR 428 (All) iv) ITO V. Lakshmani Mewal Das (1976) 103 ITR 437 (SC) v) India Finance & Construction Co., (P) Ltd V. B.N.Panda, DCIT (1993) 200 ITR 710 (Born) 9. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in ignoring the ratio laid down b…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle - 1(4), Bengaluru vs. M/S Kansur Developers India Pvt. Ltd., Bengaluru

In the result, the revenue appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 1442/BANG/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Oct 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariita Nos.1441 & 1442/Bang/2018 Assessment Year: 2009-10 & 2012-13 Acit Central Circle- M/S. Kansur Developers India Pvt. Ltd. 1(4) No.2650, Ground Floor Bengaluru Vs. 37Th B Cross, 28Th Main, 9Th Block Jayanagar Bangalore 560 009 Pan No : Aacck9866F Appellant Respondent C.O. Nos.103&104/Bang/2018 (Arising Out Of Ita Nos.1441 & 1442/Bang/2018) Assessment Years: 2009-10 & 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Dilip, Junior Standing Counsel forFor Respondent: Dept
Section 147

…position of law laid down in the following decisions, wherein it is held that. on mere suspicion no reopening is possible U/s.147 of the act, since the satisfaction is based on "reason to believe" and not "reason to suspect" i) CIT V. Jeskaran Bhuvalka (1970) 76 ITR 128 (AP) ii) N. Sundareswaram V. CIT (1972) 84 ITR 173 (Ker) iii) Smt.Hemlata Agarwal V. CIT (1967) 64 ITR 428 (All) iv) ITO V. Lakshmani Mewal Das (1976) 103 ITR 437 (SC) v) India Finance & Construction Co., (P) Ltd V. B.N.Panda, DCIT (1993) 200 ITR 710 (Born) 9. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in ignoring the ratio laid down b…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-1-(4), Bengaluru vs. M/S Kansur Developers India Pvt. Ltd., Bengaluru

In the result, the revenue appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 1441/BANG/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Oct 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariita Nos.1441 & 1442/Bang/2018 Assessment Year: 2009-10 & 2012-13 Acit Central Circle- M/S. Kansur Developers India Pvt. Ltd. 1(4) No.2650, Ground Floor Bengaluru Vs. 37Th B Cross, 28Th Main, 9Th Block Jayanagar Bangalore 560 009 Pan No : Aacck9866F Appellant Respondent C.O. Nos.103&104/Bang/2018 (Arising Out Of Ita Nos.1441 & 1442/Bang/2018) Assessment Years: 2009-10 & 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Dilip, Junior Standing Counsel forFor Respondent: Dept
Section 147

…position of law laid down in the following decisions, wherein it is held that. on mere suspicion no reopening is possible U/s.147 of the act, since the satisfaction is based on "reason to believe" and not "reason to suspect" i) CIT V. Jeskaran Bhuvalka (1970) 76 ITR 128 (AP) ii) N. Sundareswaram V. CIT (1972) 84 ITR 173 (Ker) iii) Smt.Hemlata Agarwal V. CIT (1967) 64 ITR 428 (All) iv) ITO V. Lakshmani Mewal Das (1976) 103 ITR 437 (SC) v) India Finance & Construction Co., (P) Ltd V. B.N.Panda, DCIT (1993) 200 ITR 710 (Born) 9. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in ignoring the ratio laid down b…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle - 1(4), Bengaluru vs. M/S Jaico Realtors Pvt.Ltd., Bengaluru

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1444/BANG/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 May 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Arun Kumar Garodia & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaleassessment Year :2008-09 M/S. Jaico Realtors Pvt. Ltd., The Assistant Commissioner No. 2650, Ground Floor, Of Income Tax, 37Th B Cross, Vs. 28Th Main, 9Th Block, Central Circle – 1 (4), Bangalore. Jayanagar, Bangalore – 560 009. Pan: Aabcj8421G Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri C. Ramesh, CAFor Respondent: Shri T.N. Prakash, Addl. CIT (DR)
Section 147Section 68

…the positionof law laid down in the following decisions, wherein it is held that, on meresuspicion no reopening is possible U/s.147 of the act, since the satisfaction isbased on "reason to believe" and not 'reason to suspect" i) CIT V. Jeskaran huvalka (1970) 76 ITR 128 (AP) ii) N. Sundareswaram V. CIT (1972) 84 ITR 173 (Ker) iii) Smt. Hemlata Agarwal V. CIT (1967) 64 ITR 428 (All) iv) ITO V. Lakshmani Mewal Das (1976) 103 ITR 437 (SC) v) India Finance & Construction Co., (P) Ltd V. B.N.Panda, DCIT (1993) 200 ITR 710 (Bom) 8. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in ignoring the ratio laid down b…