CIT v. Ms. Mayawati

338 ITR 563High Court2011#1566 most cited

What is CIT v. Ms. Mayawati authority for?

Section 68 of the Income Tax Act cannot be invoked to make additions if the assessee does not maintain books of account. For this purpose, bank statements or passbooks are not considered 'books of account'.

73

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,314 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Ms. Mayawati · 338 ITR 563 · Section 68 · books of account not maintained · no addition under Section 68 · bank passbook not books of account · bank statement not books of account · individual assessee no books · cash credit addition · unexplained cash credit

Also reported as

12 Taxmann.com 306

Sections most often in play

Section 68Section 133(6)Section 148Section 147Section 131Section 143(3)Section 132Section 142(1)

Issues it is cited on

section 148bsection 106section 36(1)(ii)section 149(1)(a)bogus share capitalcreditworthiness of the creditorprice riggingsource of sourceaddition under section 68beneficial ownerretracted statementaddition u/s 68

Judgments citing CIT v. Ms. Mayawati

Samrat Finvestors Private Limited, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward 5(2) (Now DCIT, Cent.Cir. 4(2)), Kolkata

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 1035/KOL/2025[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 Oct 2025AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shrigeorge Mathan, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Soumitra Choudhury, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanat Kumar Raha, DR
Section 131Section 143(3)Section 263Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM AND SHRIGEORGE MATHAN, JM ITA No.1035 to 1038/KOL/2025 (Assessment Year:2012-13, 2014-15 to 2016-17) Samrat Finvestors Private ITO, Ward 5(2) Limited 110, Shantipally, Aayakar 20/1, Maharshi Debendra Road, Bhawan Poorva, Kolkata-700107, Vs. 2nd Floor, Room No.13A, West Bengal Kolkata-700007, West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN No. AADCS4698G Assessee by : Shri Soumitra Choudhury, AR Revenue by : Shri Sanat Kumar Raha, DR Date of hearing: 27.09.2025 Date of pronouncement: 16.10.2025 O R D E R Per Rajesh Kumar, AM: These a…

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Noida vs. M/S Rudra Buildwell Homes Pvt. Ltd, Delhi

ITA 602/DEL/2025[2016]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Aug 2025

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwalassessment Year: 2016-17 Vs. M/S. Rudra Buildwell Homes Dcit, Central Circle-I, Noida Pvt. Ltd., 53, Okhla Phase, Delhi Pan: Aafcr6959P (Appellant) (Respondent) With C.O. No.106/Del/2025 [Arising Out Of Ita No.602/Del/2025] Assessment Year: 2016-17 M/S. Rudra Buildwell Vs. Dcit, Central Circle-I, Homes Pvt. Ltd., Noida A-66, Sector-63, Noida Pan: Aafcr6959P (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Sh. Rohit Kapoor, Adv. Sh. Veersen Agarwal, Itp Department By Sh. Rajesh Chandra, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 12.08.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 29.08.2025 Order Per Satbeer Singh Godara, Jm This Revenue’S Appeal Ita No.602/Del/2025 & Assessee’S Cross Objection C.O. No. 106/Del/2025 For Assessment Year 2016-

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 148ASection 151Section 151(1)Section 151(2)

…. b. Services Pvt. Ltd. made the following observation: "It would be worthwhile to take note of the observation by Hon'ble Justice A. K. Sikri while delivering the judgment in CIT vs. Mayawati when His Lordship then was in Hon'ble Delhi High court reported in 338 ITR 563 (Del) observed that- "The capacity of any person does not mean how they earn monthly or annually but the term capacity is a wide term and that can be pursued by how wealthy he is. All the formalities, as per the law are made by the assessee and donors as well." Three criteria of Section 68 Section 68 speaks of three criterias of the Identity, gen…

Beekay Steel Industries Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Central Circle 2(3), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 346/KOL/2025[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata30 Jul 2025AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm Beekay Steel Industries Ltd. Dcit, Central Circle-2(3), C/O Subash Agarwal & Aaykar Bhavan Poorva, Associates, Advocates, Siddha 110, Shantipally, Vs. Gibson, 1, Gibson Lane, Suite Kolkata-700107, West Bengal 213, 2Nd Floor, Kolkata-700069 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aabcb3205A Assessee By : Shri Siddarth Agarwal, Ar Revenue By : Shri Raja Sengupta, Dr Date Of Hearing: 21.05.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 30.07.2025

For Appellant: Shri Siddarth Agarwal, ARFor Respondent: Shri Raja Sengupta, DR
Section 131Section 143(1)Section 68

…nnot be said that their creditworthiness is doubtful when their own funds are several times the investment made in the assessee company. In this regard, reliance is placed on the decision of the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in the case of CIT vs. M/s. Mayawati 338 ITR 563, wherein a bench comprising of Hon'ble Justice A.K. Sikri and Hon'ble Justice Suresh Kait (at their Lordships then were) held as under - "62. Further in the case of Mrs. Veena Jain, details of assets proved on record show that the total assets of Mrs. Veena Jain were of Rs. 1.34 crores & the liabilities wereonly of Rs. 2.11 lakhs. We have perused…

DCIT, Int.Tax.Circle, Gurgaon vs. Anil Kumar Goel, Gurugram

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 1103/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Prakash Chand Yadav & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Vikram Singh Sharma, Sr DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 271ASection 68

…sition that no additions can be made u/s 68 of the amount which was credited in the preceding previous years: i) Ivan Singh v. Asstt. CIT [2020] 116 taxmann.com 499/272 (Bom) ii) Baladin Ram Vs. CIT 11969) 7 ITR 427(SC) iii) CIT Vs. Ms. Mayawati reported in 338 ITR 563 [DEL] We therefore, do not find any valid reason to interfere with the well- reasoned findings of the ld. CIT(A). Accordingly, we uphold the order of the ld. CIT(A) and dismiss the ground no 1 to 5 raised by the Revenue on this count. Page 7 of 9 ITA No. 1103/DEL/2022 [A.Y 2017-18] The Dy. C.I.T Vs. Shri Anil Kumar Goel 13. In the result, th…

Sunita Sarda, New Delhi vs. ACIT Circle 71(1), New Delhi

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2215/DEL/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 May 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shris.Rifaur Rahmansunita Sarda, Vs. Acit, Circle 71 (1), 5/5761, Dev Nagar, Karol Bagh, New Delhi. New Delhi – 110 005. (Pan : Aanps7143M) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Ms. Vidhi Mangla, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Sanjay Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 12.03.2025 Date Of Order : 14.05.2025 O R D E R 1. This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax Appeals/National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi (Hereinafter Referred To ‘Ld. Cit (A)’) Dated 06.06.2023 For Assessment Year 2011-12. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are, Assessee Has Filed Her Return Of Income For The Year Under Consideration On 29.09.2011 Declaring Total Income Of Rs.4,42,000/-. The Department Has Received Information From Office Of Ddit (Inv.), Unit 6 (3), New Delhi On 06.03.2018 That The Assessee Has Taken Bogus Accommodation Entry Amounting To Rs.17,25,000/- During Fy 2010-11 By Trading In The Penny Scrip I.E. M/S. Global Capital

For Appellant: Ms. Vidhi Mangla, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 10Section 10(38)Section 115BSection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 148Section 68

…onal requirement, this Hon'ble Tribunal in the case of Babbal Bhatia v. ITO, ITA Nos. 5430 & 5432/DEI/2011, decided on 08.06.2018 has held in the Assessee's favor while relying on the judgment of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT v. Ms. Mayawati 338 ITR 563 [DEL], that where books of accounts are not maintained by the Assessee, the Revenue cannot make an addition u/s 68 of the Act. 15. Additionally, there is also no material placed on record by the Ld. AO vide the impugned Assessment order dated 13.12.2018 that the Appellant had given cash for conversion via accommodation entries into bogus LTCG as…

General Motors Technical Centre India Pvt Ltd, Gurugram vs. ACIT, Circle, 1(1), Gurugram

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2215/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Apr 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shris.Rifaur Rahmansunita Sarda, Vs. Acit, Circle 71 (1), 5/5761, Dev Nagar, Karol Bagh, New Delhi. New Delhi – 110 005. (Pan : Aanps7143M) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Ms. Vidhi Mangla, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Sanjay Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 12.03.2025 Date Of Order : 14.05.2025 O R D E R 1. This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax Appeals/National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi (Hereinafter Referred To ‘Ld. Cit (A)’) Dated 06.06.2023 For Assessment Year 2011-12. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are, Assessee Has Filed Her Return Of Income For The Year Under Consideration On 29.09.2011 Declaring Total Income Of Rs.4,42,000/-. The Department Has Received Information From Office Of Ddit (Inv.), Unit 6 (3), New Delhi On 06.03.2018 That The Assessee Has Taken Bogus Accommodation Entry Amounting To Rs.17,25,000/- During Fy 2010-11 By Trading In The Penny Scrip I.E. M/S. Global Capital

For Appellant: Ms. Vidhi Mangla, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 10Section 10(38)Section 115BSection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 148Section 68

…onal requirement, this Hon'ble Tribunal in the case of Babbal Bhatia v. ITO, ITA Nos. 5430 & 5432/DEI/2011, decided on 08.06.2018 has held in the Assessee's favor while relying on the judgment of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT v. Ms. Mayawati 338 ITR 563 [DEL], that where books of accounts are not maintained by the Assessee, the Revenue cannot make an addition u/s 68 of the Act. 15. Additionally, there is also no material placed on record by the Ld. AO vide the impugned Assessment order dated 13.12.2018 that the Appellant had given cash for conversion via accommodation entries into bogus LTCG as…

Inner Wheel Club of Delhi Mid Town, New Delhi vs. ACIT-CPC-Banglore, Banglore

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 1103/DEL/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Jan 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Prakash Chand Yadav & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Vikram Singh Sharma, Sr DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 271ASection 68

…sition that no additions can be made u/s 68 of the amount which was credited in the preceding previous years: i) Ivan Singh v. Asstt. CIT [2020] 116 taxmann.com 499/272 (Bom) ii) Baladin Ram Vs. CIT 11969) 7 ITR 427(SC) iii) CIT Vs. Ms. Mayawati reported in 338 ITR 563 [DEL] We therefore, do not find any valid reason to interfere with the well- reasoned findings of the ld. CIT(A). Accordingly, we uphold the order of the ld. CIT(A) and dismiss the ground no 1 to 5 raised by the Revenue on this count. Page 7 of 9 ITA No. 1103/DEL/2022 [A.Y 2017-18] The Dy. C.I.T Vs. Shri Anil Kumar Goel 13. In the result, th…

Deepak Srivastava, Haryana vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 30(5), Delhi

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

ITA 1328/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Dec 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasadआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.1328/Del/2024 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18 बनाम Sh. Deepak Srivastava, Income Tax Officer 1404, Tower-16, Orchid Petals, Vs. Ward-30(5), Sector-49, Gurgaon, Civic Centre, Haryana. Delhi. Pan No. अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 2Section 250Section 251Section 44ASection 68

…re any amount is found credited in the books as defined u/s 2(12A) of the Act maintained by the assessee. For the above proposition the Ld. Counsel places reliance on the decision of the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT Vs. M/s Mayawati (338 ITR 563) and the decision of the coordinate bench in the case of Smt. Babbal Bhatia Vs. ITO in ITA No.5430/Del/2011 dated 08.06.2018. The Ld. Counsel thus submits that a cash credit appearing in assessee’s passbook relevant to a particular previous year, in a case where the assessee does not maintain books of account does not attract the provisions of…

Archit Gupta, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Centralcircle-29, New Delhi

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2625/DEL/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Nov 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.

For Appellant: Shri Ruchesh Sinha, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Virendra Singh, Sr. DR
Section 132Section 147Section 151Section 250

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘A’: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER and SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S., JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.2625/DEL/2022 (Assessment Year: 2013-14) Archit Gupta, vs. ACIT, Central Circle-29, B-41, Kailash Colony, New Delhi New Delhi – 110 048. (PAN : AEUPG2360R) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : Shri Ruchesh Sinha, Advocate REVENUE BY : Shri Virendra Singh, Sr. DR. Date of Hearing : 24.10.2024 Date of Order : 06.11.2024 ORDER PER S.RIFAUR RAHMAN,AM: 1. These appeals are filed by the assessee against the separate orders of ld. Commissioner of Income-tax…

Archit Gupta, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle-29, New Delhi

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2624/DEL/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Nov 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.

For Appellant: Shri Ruchesh Sinha, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Virendra Singh, Sr. DR
Section 132Section 147Section 151Section 250

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘A’: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER and SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S., JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.2625/DEL/2022 (Assessment Year: 2013-14) Archit Gupta, vs. ACIT, Central Circle-29, B-41, Kailash Colony, New Delhi New Delhi – 110 048. (PAN : AEUPG2360R) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : Shri Ruchesh Sinha, Advocate REVENUE BY : Shri Virendra Singh, Sr. DR. Date of Hearing : 24.10.2024 Date of Order : 06.11.2024 ORDER PER S.RIFAUR RAHMAN,AM: 1. These appeals are filed by the assessee against the separate orders of ld. Commissioner of Income-tax…

Satyanarayan Holdings Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-5(2), Kolkata

ITA 444/KOL/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Sept 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A. No.444/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2012-13

Section 143(1)Section 249Section 250Section 253Section 3Section 5

…t be said that their creditworthiness is doubtful when their own funds are several times the investment made in the assessee company. In this regard, reliance is placed on the observation of the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in the case of CIT vs. M/s. Mayawati 338 ITR 563, wherein a bench comprising of Hon'ble Justice A.K. Sikri and Hon'ble Justice Suresh Kait wherein Hon'ble Justice A.K. Sikri as his Lordships then were held as under:- "62. Further in the case of Mrs. Veena Jain, details of assets proved on record show that the total assets of Mrs. Veena Jain were of Rs. 1.34 crores and the liabilities were only…

Champion Builder Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-1(3), Gurgaon

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are partly

ITA 462/DEL/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Aug 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasadआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A Nos.462 & 463/Del/2024 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years: 2015-16 & 2016-17

Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 68

…is bound to accept the same as genuine when the identity and genuineness by account payee cheque has been established. o The creditworthiness of a transaction is to be determined not by the profits but by the company’s capital and reserve CIT vs. Mayawati in 338 ITR 563 (Del) and the company Tuberose Agencies Pvt. Ltd was having capital including reserves of Rs.4.74 crores as on 31.3.2015 (Page 84 of PB) and revenue from operations of Rs.23,90,673/- (Page 82 of PB). o CIT(A) reliance on NRA Iron & Steel decision is not relevant to the facts of the case because there the issue was of share capital and the shareho…

Bhavanji Jugaji Thakor, Ahmedabad vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(3)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 974/AHD/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad08 Aug 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaassessment Year: 2016-17

Section 127Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 68

…uch books of accounts have been maintained and hence there is no legal scope to invoke the provisions of Section 68 of the Act. The Ld. AR relied upon the following decisions:- 1. CIT vs. Bhaichand H. Gandhi (1983) 141 ITR 0067 2. CIT vs. Ms. Mayawati (2011) 338 ITR 563 (Del) 3. Smt. Madhu Raitani vs. ACIT (2011) 45 SOT 231 (Gauhati) 4. Mehul V. Vyas vs. ITO (2017) 80 taxmann.com 311 (Mumbai -Tribunal) 5. Babbal Bhatia vs. ITO (ITA No.5430 & 5432/Del/2011) 6. Narendra Chandubhai vs. ITO (ITA No.103/Ahd/2019) 5.2 The Ld. AR further submitted that Section 68 of the Act comes into picture where any sum is found cr…

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-4(4), Mumbai vs. Iris Computers Limited, Delhi

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is accordingly dismissed

ITA 3918/MUM/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 May 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri. Prashant Maharshi & Shri. Raj Kumar Chauhandy. Commissioner Of Income Tax Vs. Iris Computers Limited, Central Circle-4(4), Mumbai Delhi. Room No. 1918, Air India Building, A-155, Road No. 4, New Nariman Point – 400 021. Delhi, Mahipalpur – 110037. Pan: Aaaci9670H (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 250

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “C”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI. PRASHANT MAHARSHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI. RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. IRIS Computers Limited, Central Circle-4(4), Mumbai Delhi. Room No. 1918, Air India Building, A-155, Road No. 4, New Nariman Point – 400 021. Delhi, Mahipalpur – 110037. PAN: AAACI9670H (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented by : Shri. Anil Gupta Department Represented by : Shri. Ms. Madhu Malti Ghosh CIT D.R. Date of conclusion of Hearing : 25.04.2024 Date of Pronouncement : 27.05.2024 O R D E R PER RAJ KUMAR CHAU…

Udayan Grover, Mumbai vs. National Faceless Appeal Centre(NFAC), Delhi

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2880/MUM/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Feb 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Bleudayan Grover V. National Faceless Appeal Centre Panch Mahal Delhi Panch Sristhi Complex {Acit – 26(3), Bkc, Mumbai} Powai, Mumbai - 400072 Pan: Aclpg0572G (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented By : Shri Vimal Punmiya Department Represented By : Ms. Kavitha Kaushik

Section 10(38)Section 131Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 57Section 68

…of the test of ‘Human Probabilities’ to prove that the apparent was not real. Sumati Dayal Vs CIT [1995] 214 ITR 801(SC)  CIT Vs. Durga Prasad More [1971] 82 ITR 540 (SC)  CIT Vs. P. Mohana Kala & others [2007] 291 ITR 278 (SC)  CIT Vs. Ms. Mayawati [2011] 338 ITR 563 (Del.)   Sarita Aggarwal Vs. ITO [2015] 373 ITR 586 (Del.) 7.17 Further, in support of circumstantial evidence taking precedence over direct evidence, I would like to place reliance on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme court in the case of Collector of Customs Vs. Bhoormul [1974] SCC (2) 544 7.18 Accordingly, after applying the ‘Theory of Human P…

Clayton Charles Pinto, Mumbai vs. Int Tax Ward 3(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 102/MUM/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Jun 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Bleclayton Charles Pinto Mumbai. V. Int Tax Ward 3(3)(1) Mumbai. Air India Building, Mumbai- 400021 303 Palm Beach Apartments, 31 J P Road, Andheri West Mumbai- 400061

Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)

…01 (Delhi- Trib.)  Anand Ram Raitoni v. CIT (1997) 223 ITR 544 (Gauhati High Court)  ITO v. Kamal Kumar Mishra (2013) 143 ITD 0686 (Lucknow Tribunal)  Babbal Bhatia v. ITO (2018) (Delhi ITAT)  Baladin Ram v. CIT (1969) 71 ITR 427 (SC)  CIT v. Ms Mayavati 338 ITR 563 (Delhi High Court)  Smt Mansi Mahendra Pitkar 160 ITD 605 (Mumbai Trib)  Smt Madhu Raitani 10 ITR(T) 91 (Gauhati) (TM) Page No. | 9 CLAYTON CHARLES PINTO vi) Without prejudice to above, the facts of the given case are well covered by the decision of the Delhi High Court in the case of Jaya Aggrawal v. ITO (2018) 92 Taxmann 108 where it is held…

Mr. P. Narasimha Rao, Mangaluru vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle-1(1) & Tps, Mangaluru

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

ITA 840/BANG/2022[201-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore26 May 2023

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2012 – 13

For Appellant: Smt. Sheetal, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sankar Ganesh K., D.R
Section 132Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 44A

…. So pass book supplied by the bank to the assessee in the present case could not be regarded as a book of the assessee and hence section 68 is not applicable." v. The Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court of Delhi in the case of CIT Vs. Ms. Mayawati reported in 338 ITR 563 [DEL] has held as under: "As the ITAT has come to the conclusion that Section 68 has no applicability to the facts of the present case as the assessee is not maintaining any books of accounts. If that be so Section 68 does not apply in this case for the simple reason cheque received from Mr.Pankaj Jain has been deposited in her bank account in th…

Pujala Mahesh Babu, Hyderabad vs. Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(3), Hyderabad

In the result, all the four appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed and the only appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 135/HYD/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad26 Sept 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri K. Narasimha Charyappeal In Ita No Assessee Revenue A.Y 132/Hyd/2018 Shri Pujala Mahesh A.C.I.T. Central 2012-13 Babu, Hyderabad Circle-2(3) Hyderabad Pan:Aeppp5729L 133/Hyd/2019 -Do- -Do- 2013-14 134/Hyd/2019 -Do- -Do- 2014-15 135/Hyd/2019 -Do- -Do- 2015-16 126/Hyd/2019 A.C.I.T. Central Shri Pujala Mahesh 2013-14 Circle-2(3) Babu, Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan:Aeppp5729L Assessee By: Shri S. Rama Rao, Advocate Revenue By: Shri Solgy Jose T. Kottaram,Dr

For Appellant: Shri S. Rama Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Solgy Jose T. Kottaram,DR
Section 132Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 153ASection 234A(3)

…ITA Nos 132 133 126 134 and 135 Puja Mahesh Babu Hyderabad आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, हैदराबाद पीठ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad ‘ A ‘ Bench, Hyderabad Before Shri R.K. Panda, Accountant Member AND Shri K. Narasimha Chary, Judicial Member Appeal in ITA No Assessee Revenue A.Y 132/Hyd/2018 Shri Pujala Mahesh A.C.I.T. Central 2012-13 Babu, Hyderabad Circle-2(3) Hyderabad PAN:AEPPP5729L 133/Hyd/2019 -do- -do- 2013-14 134/Hyd/2019 -do- -do- 2014-15 135/Hyd/2019 -do- -do- 2015-16 126/Hyd/2019 A.C.I.T. Central Shri Pujala Mahesh 2013-14 Circle-2(3) Babu, Hyderabad Hyderabad PAN:AEPPP5729L Assessee by: Shri…

Pujala Mahesh Babu, Hyderabad vs. Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(3), Hyderabad

In the result, all the four appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed and the only appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 134/HYD/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad26 Sept 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri K. Narasimha Charyappeal In Ita No Assessee Revenue A.Y 132/Hyd/2018 Shri Pujala Mahesh A.C.I.T. Central 2012-13 Babu, Hyderabad Circle-2(3) Hyderabad Pan:Aeppp5729L 133/Hyd/2019 -Do- -Do- 2013-14 134/Hyd/2019 -Do- -Do- 2014-15 135/Hyd/2019 -Do- -Do- 2015-16 126/Hyd/2019 A.C.I.T. Central Shri Pujala Mahesh 2013-14 Circle-2(3) Babu, Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan:Aeppp5729L Assessee By: Shri S. Rama Rao, Advocate Revenue By: Shri Solgy Jose T. Kottaram,Dr

For Appellant: Shri S. Rama Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Solgy Jose T. Kottaram,DR
Section 132Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 153ASection 234A(3)

…ITA Nos 132 133 126 134 and 135 Puja Mahesh Babu Hyderabad आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, हैदराबाद पीठ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad ‘ A ‘ Bench, Hyderabad Before Shri R.K. Panda, Accountant Member AND Shri K. Narasimha Chary, Judicial Member Appeal in ITA No Assessee Revenue A.Y 132/Hyd/2018 Shri Pujala Mahesh A.C.I.T. Central 2012-13 Babu, Hyderabad Circle-2(3) Hyderabad PAN:AEPPP5729L 133/Hyd/2019 -do- -do- 2013-14 134/Hyd/2019 -do- -do- 2014-15 135/Hyd/2019 -do- -do- 2015-16 126/Hyd/2019 A.C.I.T. Central Shri Pujala Mahesh 2013-14 Circle-2(3) Babu, Hyderabad Hyderabad PAN:AEPPP5729L Assessee by: Shri…

Pujala Mahesh Babu, Hyderabad vs. Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(3), Hyderabad

In the result, all the four appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed and the only appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 133/HYD/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad26 Sept 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri K. Narasimha Charyappeal In Ita No Assessee Revenue A.Y 132/Hyd/2018 Shri Pujala Mahesh A.C.I.T. Central 2012-13 Babu, Hyderabad Circle-2(3) Hyderabad Pan:Aeppp5729L 133/Hyd/2019 -Do- -Do- 2013-14 134/Hyd/2019 -Do- -Do- 2014-15 135/Hyd/2019 -Do- -Do- 2015-16 126/Hyd/2019 A.C.I.T. Central Shri Pujala Mahesh 2013-14 Circle-2(3) Babu, Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan:Aeppp5729L Assessee By: Shri S. Rama Rao, Advocate Revenue By: Shri Solgy Jose T. Kottaram,Dr

For Appellant: Shri S. Rama Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Solgy Jose T. Kottaram,DR
Section 132Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 153ASection 234A(3)

…ITA Nos 132 133 126 134 and 135 Puja Mahesh Babu Hyderabad आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, हैदराबाद पीठ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad ‘ A ‘ Bench, Hyderabad Before Shri R.K. Panda, Accountant Member AND Shri K. Narasimha Chary, Judicial Member Appeal in ITA No Assessee Revenue A.Y 132/Hyd/2018 Shri Pujala Mahesh A.C.I.T. Central 2012-13 Babu, Hyderabad Circle-2(3) Hyderabad PAN:AEPPP5729L 133/Hyd/2019 -do- -do- 2013-14 134/Hyd/2019 -do- -do- 2014-15 135/Hyd/2019 -do- -do- 2015-16 126/Hyd/2019 A.C.I.T. Central Shri Pujala Mahesh 2013-14 Circle-2(3) Babu, Hyderabad Hyderabad PAN:AEPPP5729L Assessee by: Shri…