CIT v. K. S. M Guruswamy Nadar and Sons.

149 ITR 127High Court1984#1472 most cited

What is CIT v. K. S. M Guruswamy Nadar and Sons. authority for?

Where separate additions are made for suppressed profit and unexplained cash credits under section 68, the assessee can explain that the suppressed profit accounts for the cash credit, allowing for telescoping of additions to prevent double taxation.

78

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2026.

Also referred to as

KSM Guruswamy Nadar & Sons · CIT v K. S. M Guruswamy Nadar · 149 ITR 127 · Section 68 · telescoping additions · unexplained cash credit · suppressed profit · rejection of books of account · double taxation · deemed income

Also reported as

19 Taxmann 533

Sections most often in play

Section 153ASection 143(3)Section 153CSection 132Section 69ASection 69CSection 44ADSection 115BBE

Issues it is cited on

section 153cofsection 245c(1)section 245hsection 114(e)section 134section 245csection 245d(4)section 153b(1)(b)section 245don money receiptsection 90asanction under section 151

Judgments citing CIT v. K. S. M Guruswamy Nadar and Sons.

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CHANDIGARH vs. SARAF THE JEWELLERS, PUNJAB

Appeal stand dismissed

ITA 1594/CHANDI/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh12 Mar 2026AY 2021-22

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Rajpal Yadav & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपीलसं. / Ita No.1232/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2021-22) Saraf The Jeweller Dcit / Acit (Central)-2 बनाम/ Sco 45, Pocket No.1 C.R. Building Nac Showroom, Manimajra Himalaya Marg, Vs. Chandigarh – 160101 Sector-17E, Chandigarh "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Adafs-2345-B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) & 2. आयकरअपीलसं. / Ita No.1594/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2021-22) Dcit / Acit (Central)-2 Saraf The Jeweller बनाम/ C.R. Building Sco 45, Pocket No.1 Himalaya Marg, Nac Showroom, Manimajra Vs. Sector-17E, Chandigarh Chandigarh – 160101 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Adafs-2345-B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) Assessee By : Sh. Sudhir Sehgal (Advocate) & Sh. Sahil Ratra (Advocate) – Ld. Ars Revenue By : Sh. Abhishek Pal Garg (Cit) & Dr. Ranjit Kaur (Addl. Cit) – Ld. Drs सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 12.02.2026 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement 12.03.2026 : आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench

For Appellant: Sh. Sudhir Sehgal (Advocate) and Sh. Sahil RatraFor Respondent: Sh. Abhishek Pal Garg (CIT) & Dr. Ranjit Kaur (Addl
Section 115BSection 143(3)Section 65BSection 69C

…1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, CHANDIGARH PHYSICAL HEARING BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, VICE PRESIDENT AND HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM 1. आयकरअपीलसं. / ITA No.1232/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2021-22) Saraf The Jeweller DCIT / ACIT (Central)-2 बनाम/ SCO 45, Pocket No.1 C.R. Building NAC Showroom, Manimajra Himalaya Marg, Vs. Chandigarh – 160101 Sector-17E, Chandigarh "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No. ADAFS-2345-B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) & 2. आयकरअपीलसं. / ITA No.1594/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2021-22) DCIT / ACIT (Central)-2 Sar…

SARAF THE JEWELLER, CHANDIGARH,CHANDIGARH vs. THE DCIT/ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE- 2, CHANDIGARH, CHANDIGARH

Appeal stand dismissed

ITA 1232/CHANDI/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh12 Mar 2026AY 2021-22

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Rajpal Yadav & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपीलसं. / Ita No.1232/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2021-22) Saraf The Jeweller Dcit / Acit (Central)-2 बनाम/ Sco 45, Pocket No.1 C.R. Building Nac Showroom, Manimajra Himalaya Marg, Vs. Chandigarh – 160101 Sector-17E, Chandigarh "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Adafs-2345-B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) & 2. आयकरअपीलसं. / Ita No.1594/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2021-22) Dcit / Acit (Central)-2 Saraf The Jeweller बनाम/ C.R. Building Sco 45, Pocket No.1 Himalaya Marg, Nac Showroom, Manimajra Vs. Sector-17E, Chandigarh Chandigarh – 160101 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Adafs-2345-B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) Assessee By : Sh. Sudhir Sehgal (Advocate) & Sh. Sahil Ratra (Advocate) – Ld. Ars Revenue By : Sh. Abhishek Pal Garg (Cit) & Dr. Ranjit Kaur (Addl. Cit) – Ld. Drs सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 12.02.2026 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement 12.03.2026 : आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench

For Appellant: Sh. Sudhir Sehgal (Advocate) and Sh. Sahil RatraFor Respondent: Sh. Abhishek Pal Garg (CIT) & Dr. Ranjit Kaur (Addl
Section 115BSection 143(3)Section 65BSection 69C

…1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, CHANDIGARH PHYSICAL HEARING BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, VICE PRESIDENT AND HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM 1. आयकरअपीलसं. / ITA No.1232/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2021-22) Saraf The Jeweller DCIT / ACIT (Central)-2 बनाम/ SCO 45, Pocket No.1 C.R. Building NAC Showroom, Manimajra Himalaya Marg, Vs. Chandigarh – 160101 Sector-17E, Chandigarh "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No. ADAFS-2345-B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) & 2. आयकरअपीलसं. / ITA No.1594/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2021-22) DCIT / ACIT (Central)-2 Sar…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), CHENNAI vs. PERIYASAMY ANBUNATHAN, KARUR

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue and the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes and the cross objections of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 1596/CHNY/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 Jan 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri S.R.Raghunatha

For Appellant: Mr.J.K. Reddy, CAFor Respondent: Ms.E. Pavuna Sundari, CIT
Section 131Section 132Section 132(4)Section 250

…949-50 1949 and 1950-51 51 respectively, and that the order of the Tribunal cannot be sustained." 38. The above view is noted to have been reiterated by Hon'ble jurisdictional Madras High Court in the case of CIT v. K. S. M Guruswamy Nadar and Sons, [1984] 149 ITR 127. In the decided case also, it was held that when there are two separate additions additions viz., one on account of suppression of profit and another on account of cash credit, then it is open to the assessee to explain that, the suppressed profits had been brought in as cash credits and has to be telescoped into the other. 39. Gainful referenc…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), CHENNAI, CHENNAI vs. PERIYASAMY ANBUNATHAN, KARUR

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue and the assessee are

ITA 1536/CHNY/2025[2017]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 Jan 2026
Section 131Section 132Section 132(4)Section 250

…s 1949-50 1949 and 1950-51 51 respectively, and that the order of the Tribunal cannot be sustained." 38. The above view is noted to have been reiterated by Hon'ble jurisdictional Madras High Court in the case of CIT v. K. S. M Guruswamy Nadar and Sons, [1984] 149 ITR 127. In the decided case also, it was held that when there are two separate additions additions viz., one on account of suppression of profit and another on account of cash credit, then it is open to the assessee to explain that, the suppressed profits had been brought in as cash credits and has to be telescoped into the other. 39. Gainful reference…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), CHENNAI, CHENNAI vs. PERIYASAMY ANBUNATHAN, KARUR

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue and the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes and the cross objections of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 1529/CHNY/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 Jan 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri S.R.Raghunatha

For Appellant: Mr.J.K. Reddy, CAFor Respondent: Ms.E. Pavuna Sundari, CIT
Section 131Section 132Section 132(4)Section 250

…949-50 1949 and 1950-51 51 respectively, and that the order of the Tribunal cannot be sustained." 38. The above view is noted to have been reiterated by Hon'ble jurisdictional Madras High Court in the case of CIT v. K. S. M Guruswamy Nadar and Sons, [1984] 149 ITR 127. In the decided case also, it was held that when there are two separate additions additions viz., one on account of suppression of profit and another on account of cash credit, then it is open to the assessee to explain that, the suppressed profits had been brought in as cash credits and has to be telescoped into the other. 39. Gainful referenc…

PERIYASAMY ANBUNATHAN,KARUR vs. DCIT, CC-1(4), CHENNAI

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue and the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes and the cross objections of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 1489/CHNY/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 Jan 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri S.R.Raghunatha

For Appellant: Mr.J.K. Reddy, CAFor Respondent: Ms.E. Pavuna Sundari, CIT
Section 131Section 132Section 132(4)Section 250

…949-50 1949 and 1950-51 51 respectively, and that the order of the Tribunal cannot be sustained." 38. The above view is noted to have been reiterated by Hon'ble jurisdictional Madras High Court in the case of CIT v. K. S. M Guruswamy Nadar and Sons, [1984] 149 ITR 127. In the decided case also, it was held that when there are two separate additions additions viz., one on account of suppression of profit and another on account of cash credit, then it is open to the assessee to explain that, the suppressed profits had been brought in as cash credits and has to be telescoped into the other. 39. Gainful referenc…

PERIASAMY ANBUNATHAN,KARUR vs. DCIT, CC-1(4), CHENNAI

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue and the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes and the cross objections of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 1488/CHNY/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 Jan 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri S.R.Raghunatha

For Appellant: Mr.J.K. Reddy, CAFor Respondent: Ms.E. Pavuna Sundari, CIT
Section 131Section 132Section 132(4)Section 250

…949-50 1949 and 1950-51 51 respectively, and that the order of the Tribunal cannot be sustained." 38. The above view is noted to have been reiterated by Hon'ble jurisdictional Madras High Court in the case of CIT v. K. S. M Guruswamy Nadar and Sons, [1984] 149 ITR 127. In the decided case also, it was held that when there are two separate additions additions viz., one on account of suppression of profit and another on account of cash credit, then it is open to the assessee to explain that, the suppressed profits had been brought in as cash credits and has to be telescoped into the other. 39. Gainful referenc…

SHRI HARSH KUMAR THAPAR,MEERUT vs. ITO, MEERUT

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

ITA 2751/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Dec 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumarassessment Year : 2010-11 Shri Harsh Kumar Thapar, Vs. Ito, A-92, Ganga Sagar Colony, Ward-1(3), Ganga Nagar, Meerut. Mawana Road, Meerut. Pan: Abmpt3630N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri S.K. Gupta, Ca Revenue By : Shri Om Parkash, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 28.10.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 23.12.2025

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Shri Om Parkash, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 68Section 6ASection 80C

…ct. 5.11 In any case without prejudice to above the telescoping of two additions on account of rejection of books of accounts and on account of unexplained cash credit u/s 68 needed by allowed in view of the following decisions: i. KSM Guruswami Nadar & Sons 149 ITR 127 (Mad.) ii. Jagatkumar Satishbhai Patel 45 taxmann.com 441 (Guj.) iii. Kunal Motors 180 CTR 166(Raj.) 5.12 It is also a case where additions were made u/s 68 when books of account are rejected meaning thereby that there are no books of account and therefore no addition can be made u/s 68 in absence of books of account. 5.13 Regarding ground No.6…

SUNIL KUMAR AGARWAL,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, CEN. CIR-2, JAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA no

ITA 513/JPR/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur14 Oct 2025AY 2016-17
For Appellant: Shri S. L. Poddar, AdvFor Respondent: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT, Sr-DR
Section 132Section 139Section 153ASection 234B

…of Rs. 16,950 as covered by added gross profit in the sum of Rs. 18,117 on the basis of the estimate." It is held by the Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income-tax v. K.S.M. Guruswamy Nadar & Sons [1984] 19 Taxman 533 (Madras)/[1984] 149 ITR 127 (Madras) [20-06-1983] as under:- "5. The Supreme Court, however, proceeded to say that: "Where there is an unexplained credit, it is open to the Income-tax Officer to hold that it is income of the assessee, and no further burden lies on the Income-tax Officer to show that that income is from any particular source. It is for the assessee to prove…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CHENNAI vs. MOHANLAL JEWELLERS PRIVATE LIMITED, CHENNAI

In the result, all the all the appeals filed by the assessee is is partly allowed

ITA 1396/CHNY/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Sept 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri S.R.Raghunatha

For Appellant: Mr. D. Anand, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. E. Pavuna Sundari, CIT
Section 132Section 153A

…ated by Hon'ble jurisdictional Madras High Court in the case of CIT v. K. S. M Guruswamy jurisdictional Madras High Court in the case of CIT v. K. S. M Guruswamy jurisdictional Madras High Court in the case of CIT v. K. S. M Guruswamy Nadar and Sons, [1984] 149 ITR 127. In the decided case also, it was Nadar and Sons, [1984] 149 ITR 127. In the decided case also, it was Nadar and Sons, [1984] 149 ITR 127. In the decided case also, it was held that when there are two separate additi held that when there are two separate additions viz., one on account of ons viz., one on account of suppression of profit and anoth…

OM PRAKASH GUPTA,SAWAI MADHOPUR vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE -1, JAIPUR

ITA 399/JPR/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur18 Sept 2025AY 2017-18
For Appellant: Shri Tarun Mittal, CA &For Respondent: Shri Rajesh Ojha, CIT-DR &
Section 115BSection 153ASection 69

…ot failed appeal on\nthis addition.\n• CIT vs. Tyaryamal Balchand [1987] 32 Taxman 64 (Rajasthan)/[1987] 165\nITR 453 (Rajasthan)/[1987] 62 CTR 216 (Rajasthan) [28-04-1986]\nX x x x\n• CIT vs. K.S.M Guruswamy Nadar & Sons [1984] 19 Taxman 533\n(Madras)/[1984] 149 ITR 127 (Madras) [20-06-1983]\nX x x x\n• S. Kuppuswami Mudaliar v. CIT [1964] 51 ITR 757 (Madras)[10-12-1962]\nX x x x\n• CIT vs. Jagatkumar Satishbhai Patel [2014] 45 taxmann.com 441\n(Gujarat)\nX x x x\n• PCIT vs. Aliasgar Anvarali Varteji [2018] 96 taxmann.com 231 (Gujarat)\n[17-07-2018]\nX x x x\nIn view of the above discussion into the facts of the…

THE DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1 , RAJKOT vs. SHRI SHAMJIBHAI SADHABHAI KANGAD, GANDHIDHAM-KUTCH

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue, in IT(SS) No

ITA 321/RJT/2022[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot31 Jul 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआ.(खो और ज).सं./It(Ss)A Nos.11 To 20/Rjt/2022 "नधा"रण वष"/ Assessment Years:2011-12 To 2020-21 बनाम/ Shri Shamjibhai Sadhabhai Deputy Commissioner Of Kangad Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Vs. Bbz-S-60, Zanda Chowk, “Amruta Estate”, 2Nd Floor, Gandhidham-370 201 M.G. Road, Rajkot-360001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.:Adepk 3471 E (अपीलाथ"/Assessee) (""यथ"/Respondent) आ.(खो और ज).सं./It(Ss)A Nos.21 To 23/Rjt/2022 "नधा"रण वष"/ Assessment Years:2014-15, 2016-17 &2017-18 बनाम/ Deputy Commissioner Of Income Shri Shamjibhai Sadhabhai Tax, Central Circle-1, “Amruta Kangad Vs. Estate”, 2Nd Floor, M.G. Road, Bbz-S-60, Zanda Chowk, Rajkot-360001 Gandhidham-370 201 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.:Aabca 8202 E (अपीलाथ"/Assessee) (""यथ"/Respondent) आ.(खो और ज).सं./It(Ss)A Nos.15/Rjt/2023 "नधा"रण वष"/ Assessment Year:2019-20 बनाम/ Deputy Commissioner Of Shri Hetab Shamjibhai Kangad Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Bbz-South-60, Zanda Chowk, Vs. “Amruta Estate”, 2Nd Floor, Gandhidham-370 201 M.G. Road, Rajkot-360001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.:Aqtpk 7484 M (अपीलाथ"/Assessee) (""यथ"/Respondent)

Section 153A

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, राजकोट "यायपीठ, राजकोट। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT BEFORE DR. ARJUN LAL SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI DINESH MOHAN SINHA, JUDICIAL MEMBER आ.(खो और ज).सं./IT(SS)A Nos.11 to 20/RJT/2022 "नधा"रण वष"/ Assessment Years:2011-12 to 2020-21 बनाम/ Shri Shamjibhai Sadhabhai Deputy Commissioner of Kangad Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Vs. BBZ-S-60, Zanda Chowk, “Amruta Estate”, 2nd Floor, Gandhidham-370 201 M.G. Road, Rajkot-360001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No.:ADEPK 3471 E (अपीलाथ"/Assessee) (""यथ"/Respondent) आ.(खो और ज).सं./IT(SS)A Nos.21 to 23/RJT/2022 "नधा…

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

…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/2019, order dated 28.09.2020 ix) DCIT vs. Tapesh Tyagi vide ITA No.1344/Del/2021, order dated 27.10.2023 x) Jayashr…

VINOD KUMAR GUPTA (D) THROUGH LR'S SMT. MADHU GUPTA, SMT. MADHU GUPTA, SH. ANUJ GUPTA, SH. ASHISH GUPTA,MUMBAI vs. ITO, WARD- 52(5), NEW DELHI

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

ITA 2751/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Jan 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumarassessment Year : 2010-11 Shri Harsh Kumar Thapar, Vs. Ito, A-92, Ganga Sagar Colony, Ward-1(3), Ganga Nagar, Meerut. Mawana Road, Meerut. Pan: Abmpt3630N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri S.K. Gupta, Ca Revenue By : Shri Om Parkash, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 28.10.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 23.12.2025

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Shri Om Parkash, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 68Section 6ASection 80C

…ct. 5.11 In any case without prejudice to above the telescoping of two additions on account of rejection of books of accounts and on account of unexplained cash credit u/s 68 needed by allowed in view of the following decisions: i. KSM Guruswami Nadar & Sons 149 ITR 127 (Mad.) ii. Jagatkumar Satishbhai Patel 45 taxmann.com 441 (Guj.) iii. Kunal Motors 180 CTR 166(Raj.) 5.12 It is also a case where additions were made u/s 68 when books of account are rejected meaning thereby that there are no books of account and therefore no addition can be made u/s 68 in absence of books of account. 5.13 Regarding ground No.6…

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 1, TRICHY, TRICHY vs. AHAMED BROTHERS , TRICHY

In the result, the appeals of the revenue and cross objections of the assessee are decided as under:-

ITA 934/CHNY/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai15 Jan 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Ss Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.934/Chny/2024, निर्ाारण वर्ा /Assessment Years: 2018-19 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.935/Chny/2024, निर्ाारण वर्ा /Assessment Years: 2019-2020 आयकर अपील सं./ Co72/Chny/2024, निर्ाारण वर्ा /Assessment Years: 2019-2020

For Appellant: Shri T.Vasudevan, Advocate
Section 133ASection 69A

…of suppressed sales evident from variations in stock of Rs. 45,54,017/-. The Ld. CIT(A) relying upon the decision of Hon’ble Jurisdictional High court in the case of KSM Gurusamy Nadar and Sons Page - 17 - of 27 ITA No.934 & 935 & CO-72 /Chny/2024 :- 18 -: 19 Taxmann 533 holding that where there is an addition on account of suppression of profits, it is open to assessee to claim telescoping of unproved cash, proceeded to accord benefit to the assessee of telescoping and held that cash of Rs.12,14,508/- forms part of suppressed sales of Rs.45,54,017/-. 4.1 Before us the Ld. DR argued that the telescoping done b…

M/S. SBS BROTHERS,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(4),, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1895/CHNY/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai15 Jan 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Ss Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1895/Chny/2024 निर्ाारण वर्ा /Assessment Years: 2018-19 M/S.Sbs Brothers, Deputy Commissioner Of Income No.44/55, Strotten Muthiah Street, Tax Sowcarpet, Central Circle-3(4), Chennai-79 Chennai [Pan: Aahfs6119B]

For Appellant: Shri D.Anand, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms.R.Anita, Add.CIT
Section 133ASection 145(3)Section 250Section 69Section 69A

…ing the present year was attributable to the additional income disclosed. The Ld. Counsel placing reliance upon the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in Paradised Holidays 325 ITR 13 and of Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of KSM Gurusamy Nadar & Sons 149 ITR 127 argued that when no defects are pointed in the books by the Ld. AO and the same are accepted, no additions can be made to the returned income. The Ld. Counsel contested invocation of section 69A and 69B on the premise that the same was non-maintainable. The Ld. Counsel also contested that the reliance by Ld. First Appellate Authority on the sworn…

M/S. SBS AGENCIES,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(4), CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1894/CHNY/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai15 Jan 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Ss Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1894/Chny/2024 निर्ाारण वर्ा /Assessment Years: 2018-19 M/S.Sbs Agencies, Deputy Commissioner Of Income No.18, Audiappa Naicken Street, Tax Sowcarpet, Central Circle-3(4), Chennai-600 079. Chennai [Pan: Aalfs9107M] (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Assessee By : Shri D.Anand, Advocate प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Revenue By : Ms.R.Anita, Add.Cit सुिवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 21.11.2024 घोर्णा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 15.01.2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amitabh Shukla, A.M :

For Appellant: Shri D.Anand, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms.R.Anita, Add.CIT
Section 133ASection 145(3)Section 250Section 69A

…ing the present year was attributable to the additional income disclosed. The Ld. Counsel placing reliance upon the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in Paradised Holidays 325 ITR 13 and of Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of KSM Gurusamy Nadar & Sons 149 ITR 127 argued that when no defects are pointed in the books by the Ld. AO and the same are accepted, no additions can be made to the returned income. The Ld. Counsel contested invocation of section 69A and 69B on the premise that the same was non-maintainable. The Ld. Counsel also contested that the reliance by Ld. First Appellate Authority on the sworn…

DY. CIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), CHENNAI vs. NATESAN SABESAN, CHENNAI

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue for AY 2018

ITA 974/CHNY/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Dec 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

For Respondent: Mr. R. Clement Ramesh
Section 132

…he above view is noted to have been reiterated by Hon'ble The above view is noted to have been reiterated by Hon'ble jurisdictional Madras High Co jurisdictional Madras High Court in the case of CIT v. K. S. M CIT v. K. S. M Guruswamy Nadar and Sons, [1984] 149 ITR 127 Guruswamy Nadar and Sons, [1984] 149 ITR 127. In the decided . In the decided case also, it was held that when there are two separate additions viz., one case also, it was held that when there are two separate additions viz., one case also, it was held that when there are two separate additions viz., one on account of suppression of profit and…

DY. CIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), CHENNAI vs. NATESAN SABESAN, CHENNAI

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue for AY 2018

ITA 973/CHNY/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Dec 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

For Respondent: Mr. R. Clement Ramesh
Section 132

…he above view is noted to have been reiterated by Hon'ble The above view is noted to have been reiterated by Hon'ble jurisdictional Madras High Co jurisdictional Madras High Court in the case of CIT v. K. S. M CIT v. K. S. M Guruswamy Nadar and Sons, [1984] 149 ITR 127 Guruswamy Nadar and Sons, [1984] 149 ITR 127. In the decided . In the decided case also, it was held that when there are two separate additions viz., one case also, it was held that when there are two separate additions viz., one case also, it was held that when there are two separate additions viz., one on account of suppression of profit and…

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, THANE, THANE vs. SUJATA PRAMOD DALVI, VIRAR EAST

In the result assessee’sground no

ITA 3521/MUM/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Oct 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Mr. Mani Jain & Prateek JainFor Respondent: Smt.Madhu Malti Ghosh (CIT
Section 131Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 153DSection 250Section 44ASection 69Section 69ASection 69C

…ch of ITAT-Mumbai inRubberwala Housing & Infrastructure Ltd. Vs. DCIT, Centralin ITA No. 3448/Mum/2023 date of pronouncement07.06.2024. “6.3 Similar view was expressed by Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case of CIT v. K. S. M Guruswamy Nadar and Sons, [1984] 149 ITR 127. In the decided case, it was held that when there are two separate additions viz., one on account of suppression of profit and another on account of cash credit, then it is open to the assessee to explain that, the suppressed profits had been brought in as cash credits and has to be telescoped into the other. 6.4 Gainful reference may also be mad…

Showing 1–20 of 78 · Page 1 of 4