How many judgments cite CIT v. P. Mohanakala?

525 judgments on BharatTax cite CIT v. P. Mohanakala (291 ITR 278), spanning 2007 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does CIT v. P. Mohanakala come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 68, Section 143(3), Section 147, Section 115BBE, Section 69C, Section 133(6).

CIT v. P. Mohanakala

291 ITR 278Supreme Court of India2007#125 most cited

What is CIT v. P. Mohanakala authority for?

The Supreme Court emphasized that in the absence of concrete rebuttal by the assessee, circumstantial evidence holds significant weight, applying the doctrine of preponderance of probability, particularly when assessing undisclosed income or unexplained cash credits.

525

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 372,576 Indian tax judgments — from 2007 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. P. Mohanakala · 291 ITR 278 · Section 68 · Section 69A · Section 69C · unexplained cash credit · undisclosed income · circumstantial evidence · burden of proof · assessee rebuttal · preponderance of probability · genuineness of transaction

Also reported as

161 Taxmann 169210 CTR 20

Sections most often in play

Section 68 Section 143(3)Section 147 Section 115BBE Section 69C Section 133(6)Section 148 Section 69A

Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

creditworthiness of the creditor source of source addition under section 68 addition u/s 68 genuineness of the transaction share application money entry operator unexplained cash credit principal commissioner of income-tax income-tax officer section 131 section 69c

Judgments citing CIT v. P. Mohanakala

M/S Alimaan Charitable Trust, Mumbai vs. CIT ( Exemption), Mumbai

ITA 1689/MUM/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Jun 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () & Shri Ravish Sood () Ita No.1689 /Mum/2020 (Assessment Year: 2015-16) M/S Alimaan Charitable Commissioner Of Income Trust, 206, Rewa Chambers, Vs. Tax (Exemptions),R. No. New Marine Lines, 617, 6Th Floor, Piramal Mumbai – 400 020 Chambers, Lal Baug,Parel,Mumbai – 400 012 Pan No. Aaata2536P (Assessee ) (Revenue) Assessee By : Shri Firojandhyaruzina, Senior Advocate Revenue By : Shri Rajeev Harit, Cit D.R Date Of Hearing: 28/05/2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 21/06/2021

For Appellant: Shri FirojAndhyaruzina, Senior AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Rajeev Harit, CIT D.R

Section 12ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263

…oresaid contention the ld. D.R had relied on the certain judicial pronouncements, viz. (i). Naresh K. Pahuja Vs. ITAT (2015) 375 ITR 526 (Bom); (ii). CIT vs. Saravana Construction (P) Ltd. (2012) 72 DTR 258 (Kar); and (iii). CIT Vs. P. Mohankala & Ors. (2007) 291 ITR 278 (SC). It was further submitted by the ld. D.R that the reconciliation of the bank statements of the assessee with the internal ledger accounts was just a part of its internal auditing and the same would by no means prove the genuineness of the transactions in question. Adverting to the judicial pronouncements that were pressed into service by the…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-6(2)(2), Mumbai vs. Diligent Media Corporation Limited, Mumbai

In the result this appeal by the Revenue stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 4314/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Jun 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: The A. O. That The Transaction In Its Books Were True, Genuine & Justified." 3. The Appellant Prays That The Order Of The Cit (Appeals) On The Above Grounds Be Set Aside & That Of The Ao Be Restored." 4. "The Appellant Craves Leave To Amend Or Alter Any Ground Or To Submit Additional New Ground, Which May Be Necessary."

Section 68

…THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” Bench, Mumbai Shri Shamim Yahya (AM) & Shri Pavankumar Gadale (JM) I.T.A. No. 4314/Mum/2017 (Assessment Year 2012-13) Vs. M/s. Diligent Media ACIT, Circle-6(2)(2) Room No. 563 Corporation Ltd. 5th Floor 11th Floor, Tower 3 Aayakar Bhavan India Bulls Finance M.K. Road Centre, Senapati Bapat Mumbai-400 020. Marg, Elphinston Road (W), Mumbai-400 013. PAN : AACCD1338F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Shri Dalpat Shah Department by Shri Ajit Kumar Shrivastava Date of Hearing 07.04.2021 Date of Pronouncement 03.06.2021 O R D E R Per Shamim Yahya (AM) :- This is an appeal…

The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Visakhapatnam vs. Hirapanna Jewellers, Visakhapatnam

In the result, appeal of the revenue as well as the cross objection of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 253/VIZ/2020[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam12 May 2021AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri N.K.Choudhry, Hon’Ble & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.253/Viz/2020 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2017-18) Asst.Commissioner Of Vs. M/S Hirapanna Jewellers Income Tax, D.No.48-19-5, Opp:Apsrtc Central Circle-1 Commercial Complex, Visakhapatnam Dwaraka Nagar Visakhapatnam [Pan : Aaifh2606M] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) Cross Objection No.02/Viz/2021 (Arising Out Of I.T.A. No.253/Viz/2020) (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2017-18) M/S Hirapanna Jewellers Vs. Asst.Commissioner Of D.No.48-19-5, Opp:Apsrtc Income Tax, Commercial Complex, Dwaraka Nagar Central Circle-1 Visakhapatnam Visakhapatnam [Pan : Aaifh2606M]

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N. Hari, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri D.K. Sonowal, CIT DR

Section 133ASection 68

…ted on sales. In the instant case, the AO had accepted the sales and no unexplained cash credits were found, thus, the case law relied upon by the Ld.DR is also distinguishable on the facts of the case. The Ld.DR relied on the decision of CIT Vs P.MohanaKala, 161 Taxmann 169, CIT vs Devi Prasad Vishwanath Prasad 72 ITR 194(SC) both the cases refer to the sums found credited in the books of account but not offered as income, whereas in the instant case the assessee admitted the same as sales and offered for 16 I.T.A. No.253/Viz/2020 and CO No.02/Viz/2021, A.Y.2017-18 M/s Hirapanna Jewellers, Visakhapatnam taxatio…

Bishwa Nath Kharakia, Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward-34(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1487/KOL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 Apr 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap(Kz)] [Through Virtual Court] I.T.A. No. 1487/Kol/2019 Assessment Year: 2010-11 Bishwa Nath Kharakia......................................……………………………………………………Appellant 39, Strand Road, Room – 68, Kolkata – 700 001. [Pan: Afopk 1288 D] Vs Ito, Ward – 34(1), Kolkata...................……………………………………………….............Respondent Appearances By: Shri S.M. Surana, Advocate Appearing On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri Jayanta Khanra, Jcit, Sr. Dr Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : April 19, 2021 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : April 23, 2021 Order This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-10, Kolkata Dated 26.04.2019 & The Grounds Raised By The Assessee Therein Read As Under: “I. That The Ld. Cit (Appeals) Erred In Confirming The Action Of The Learned Income Tax Officer In Making An Addition Of Rs. 8,30,797/-, As Alleged Cash Credit, In Place Of Treating The Same As Long Term Capital Gain Earned By The Appellant On Sale Of Shares Exempt U/S 10(38) Of The I.T. Act, 1961. The Learned Cit(A) Has Confirmed The Said Addition On The Alleged Ground That The Transactions Looked To Him As Unnatural & Suspicious In Nature. He Should Have Appreciated That The Shares Were In The Demat Account Of The Appellant For More Than 4 (Four) Years & There Was No Specific Adverse Information Against The Appellant From Dit (Inv.) Ii. That The Learned Cit (Appeals) Erred In Confirming An Addition Of Rs. 4154/- U/S 69C Of The I.T. Act As Alleged

Section 10(38)Section 143(1)Section 147Section 147iSection 148Section 68Section 69C

…e matter has to be considered by applying the fest of human probabilities. The same view was also expressed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sumati Dayal Vs. CIT [1995] 214 ITR 801 (SC). The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. P Mohankala [291 ITR 278] held that the money came by cheque and was paid through the process of banking transactions was not by itself of any consequences. In view of the above, I have reason to believe that the assessee had availed of bogus entry of Rs.8,53,125/- by way of transacting in shares and thus income to that extant had escaped assessment in terms of clause (b…

M/S Ginni Goldlimited, New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

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

ITA 673/DEL/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Apr 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year : 2009-10

For Appellant: Sh. Hiren Mehta, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Jagdish Singh, Sr. DR

Section 36(1)(iii)Section 37(1)

…ary powers in disposing of an appeal. "The scope of his power is conterminous with that of the Income-tax Officer. He can do what the Income-tax Officer can do and also direct him to do what he has failed to do". 41. As we can see, CIT v. P. Mohanakala [2007] 291 ITR 278 (SC) deals with the powers of the High Court in interfering with the findings of fact—and concurrent findings, at that by re- appreciating the evidence. The Supreme Court has held in the negative. The Supreme Court in Jute Corporation of India Ltd. v. CIT [1991] 187 ITR 688 (SC) has stated that the declaration of law is clear that the power of th…

The United Provinces Sugar Company Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward - 12(2), Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1956/KOL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata01 Apr 2021AY 2013-14

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 250

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA ‘C’ BENCH, KOLKATA (Before Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Hon’ble Accountant Member & Sri Aby T. Varkey, Hon’ble Judicial Member) Assessment Year: 2013-14 The United Provinces Sugar Company Ltd............................................………………….............Appellant 1st Floor, Chartered Bank Building 4, Netaji Subhash Road Kolkata – 700 001 [PAN : AAACT 4947 L] Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-12(2), Kolkata.....................……………...................………..…......Respondent Appearances by: Shri S.M. Surana Advocate & Shri P.K. Sanghai, C.A., appeared on behalf of the assessee.…

Rasal Builders & Developers Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur vs. ITO, Jaipur

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

ITA 287/JPR/2017[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur02 Mar 2021AY 2005-06

Bench: Us. 2 M/S Rasal Builders & Developers Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Ito

For Appellant: Shri Dilip Shivpuri (Adv.)For Respondent: Smt. Monisha Choudhari (Addl.CIT) a

Section 143(3)Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 40A(3)

…bank balance as on 31.03.2005 shows sufficient fund. It has been further submitted that in case of any doubt, the AO should have issued summon under section 131 to the creditors. Reliance has been placed on the following decisions:- CIT vs. P Mahan Kal (2007) 291 ITR 278 (SC) CIT vs. Hanuman Agarwal (1985) 151 ITR 150 (Pat.) 8. The ld. D/R on the other hand has tried to justify the orders of the lower authorities that none of the three requirements of section 68 i.e. identity, creditworthiness of the creditor and genuineness of transaction has been established by the assessee. 9. Considering the above submissio…

DCIT CC 8(1), Mumbai vs. M/S Jainam Investments, Mumbai

In the result, appeals filed by the revenue are hereby dismissed

ITA 4474/MUM/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Feb 2021AY 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri Suchek Anchaliya (AR)For Respondent: Shri Rahul Raman (DR)

Section 143(1)Section 148Section 68

…al tests which have to be established to discharge the burden under section 68 of the Act: Identity of the creditor - Creditworthiness of the creditor, and Genuineness of the transaction, 6.3.18 The Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of CIT y. P. Mohanakala [2007] 291 ITR 278/161 Taxman 169 held that the expression “assessee offers no explanation" means where the assessee offers no proper, reasonable and acceptable explanation as regards the sum found credited in the books maintained by the assessee. It further held that the opinion of the AO for not accepting the explanation offered by the assessee as not satisfactor…

Vinod L. Gadhiya, Mumbai vs. DCIT CC5(3), Mumbai

ITA 2785/MUM/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jan 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Amarjit Singh

Section 153A

…ce cannot be placed on documents and the same are to be examined in the light of surrounding circumstances and human probabilities. (i) C1T vs. Durga Prasad More, 82 ITR 540 (SC) (ii) Sumati Dayal. vs. CIT, 214 ITR 801 (SC) (iii) CIT vs. P, Mohankala, (2007) 291 ITR 278 (SC) 14 ITA Nos.2785 to 2788/Mum/2019 & ors. Shri Vinod L. Gadhiya & ors. Here it will be pertinent to note the observation of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sumati Dayal v. CIT, 214 ITR 801 (SC) made in the context of sale and purchase transactions of prize winning lottery tickets which are very much applicable to the facts of the cas…

ITO 5 (2)(2), Mumbai vs. M/S Karteek Ferromet Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1461/MUM/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Jan 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri N.K. Pradhan, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Department by Ms. Smita Verma

Section 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 147

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (VIRTUAL COURT) “SMC” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI C.N. PRASAD, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI N.K. PRADHAN, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 1460 & 1461/MUM/2019 (A.Y. 2011-12 & A.Y. 2009-10) Income Tax Officer – 5(2)(2) v. M/s. Karteek Ferromet Pvt. Ltd., Room No. 567, 5th Floor 2nd Floor, Plot No. 162 Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Fanjawala Building Mumbai – 400020 M.G. Mahimtura Marg Kumbharwada, Giarguaum Mumbai - 400004 PAN: AADCK4241K (Appellant) (Respondent) None Assessee by : Department by Ms. Smita Verma Date of Hearing : 12.01.2021 Date of Pronouncement : 12.01.2021 O…

ITO 5 (2)(2), Mumbai vs. M/S Karteek Ferromet Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1460/MUM/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Jan 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri N.K. Pradhan, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Department by Ms. Smita Verma

Section 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 147

ACIT 9(2)(2), Mumbai vs. Citygold Farming P.Ltd, Mumbai

ITA 1728/MUM/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Jan 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaleacit – 9(2)(2) Citygold Farming P. Ltd., बनाम/ Room No. 665A, 6Th Floor 6Th Floor, Akruti Trade Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, Mk Road Centre, Road No. 7, Marol, Mumbai. Midc, Andheri (East), Mumbai- 400093 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aafca8865R .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Manjunathaswamy, DR and Shri Vijaykumar SubramanyamFor Respondent: Shri Vijay Mehta, CA and Shri

Section 131(1)Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…he person behind the shareholder company. As can be seen from the above KYC forms, they are duly signed by the director of the company and also name of the authorised director is mentioned on the form. • 2.21 The Ld AO relied upon CIT vs. P. Mohanakala (2007) 291 ITR 278 (SC) wherein it was held that: "25. The doubtful nature of the transaction and the manner in which the sums were found credited in the books of accounts maintained by the assessee have been duly taken into consideration by the authorities below. ITA No.1728 /Mum/2018 Citygold Farming P. Ltd., Mumbai. The transactions though apparent were held t…

DCIT 13(1)(2), Mumbai vs. Pipal Tree Ventures P.Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, this appeal by the revenue stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2490/MUM/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Jan 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am & Shri Ram Lal Negi, Jm Dy. Cit, Circle – 13(1)(2), M/S. Pipal Tree Ventures Pvt. Ltd. 2Nd Floor, Room No. 218, 108/109, Mehta Industrial Estate, Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, M. K. Road, I.B. Patel Road, Next To Swati Mumbai-400 020 Studio, Goregaon, Mumbai -400 063 Pan/Gir No. Aaecp 4464 E (Appellant) : (Respondent) : Shri Uodal Raj Singh Appellant By Respondent By : Shri Krish Desai Date Of Hearing : 20.10.2020 Date Of Pronouncement : 01.01.2021 O R D E R Per Shamim Yahya, A. M.:

For Respondent: Shri Krish Desai

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 68

…hereinabove are required to be appreciated and understood in the light of the law declared by this court in Sumati Dayal (1995) Supp 2SCC 453." 5.14 Reliance is also placed on the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs P Mohankala 291 ITR 278. In this case the Hon'ble Apex Court has held that "the money may have been received by bank cheques and was paid through the process of banking transaction but that itself has no evidence. The Apex Court also held that Section 68 of the Act itself provides where any sum is found creciited in the books of 4 Dy. CIT vs. M/s. Pipal Tree Ventures Pv…

Dy CIT CC 2 (2), Mumbai vs. Smt. Kalpana Mukesh Ruia, Mumbai

The appeal stands dismissed

ITA 6962/MUM/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Dec 2020AY 2012-13

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 68

…148) • ACIT Vs. Som Nath Mani (100 TTJ 917) • Govinda Rajulu Mudaliar Vs. CIT (34 ITR 807) • Sreelekha Banerjiee & Others Vs. CIT (49 ITR 112) • Kalekhan Mohameed Hanif Vs. CIT (50 ITR 1) • CIT Vs. Biju Patnaik (160 ITR 674) • CIT Vs. P. Mohanakala & Others (291 ITR 278) 8. Thereafter he referred to Hon'ble Bombay High Court decision in the case of Sanjay Bimalchand Jai Vs. Pr. CIT. Finally he held that long term capital gain claimed by the assessee is non-genuine and held that the same was unexplained cash credit u/s. 68 of the Act. Thereafter the Assessing Officer noted that from the statement of various shar…

Kalpna Mukesh Ruia, Mumbai vs. DCIT CC 2 (2), Mumbai

The appeal stands dismissed

ITA 6519/MUM/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Dec 2020AY 2012-13

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 68

Copore Industries Pvt Ltd, New Delhi vs. ACIT Circle-6(2), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 340/DEL/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Dec 2020AY 2016-17

Bench: Sh. H. S. Sidhudr. B. R. R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: Sh. Suresh K. Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Jagdish Singh, Sr. DR

Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘B’, NEW DELHI Before Sh. H. S. Sidhu, Judicial Member Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Accountant Member (Through Video Conferencing) ITA No. 340/Del/2020 : Asstt. Year : 2016-17 Copore Industries Pvt. Ltd., Vs ACIT, C-44, West Jyoti Nagar, North Circle-6(2), West Delhi, New Delhi New Delhi (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AAHCA0578R Assessee by : Sh. Suresh K. Gupta, CA Revenue by : Sh. Jagdish Singh, Sr. DR Date of Hearing: 24.11.2020 Date of Pronouncement: 22.12.2020 ORDER Per Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Accountant Member: The present appeal has been filed by the assessee against…

ITO 31(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Sh. Ramavadh Ramdhari Yadav, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2634/MUM/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Oct 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Bleincome Tax Officer – 31(3)(1) V. Shri Ramavadh Ramdhari Yadav 307, 3Rd Floor Pratyakshakar Bhavan, C-13 Room No. 408, 4Th Floor Shiv Sagar Industrial Estate Bandra Kurla Complex Kotkar Road, Goregoan (E) Bandra (E), Mumbai - 400 051 Mumbai - 400063

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Amrita Singh

Section 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 147

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “SMC”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI C.N. PRASAD, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER Income Tax Officer – 31(3)(1) v. Shri Ramavadh Ramdhari Yadav 307, 3rd Floor Pratyakshakar Bhavan, C-13 Room No. 408, 4th Floor Shiv Sagar Industrial Estate Bandra Kurla Complex Kotkar Road, Goregoan (E) Bandra (E), Mumbai - 400 051 Mumbai - 400063 PAN: AAAPY2044G (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : None Department by : Amrita Singh Date of Hearing : 20.10.2020 Date of Pronouncement : 23.10.2020 O R D E R PER C.N. PRASAD (JM) 1. This appeal is filed by the Revenue against the order of the Learn…

Vodafone India Limited, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 7(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1835/MUM/2018[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Aug 2020AY 2006-07

For Appellant: Shri P.J. Pardiwala and Shri Nitesh JoshiFor Respondent: Shri Parag Vyas (Special Counsel of Deptt)

Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 220(2)Section 263Section 271(1)(c)Section 68

…3), Mumbai required to be formed objectively with reference to the material available on record. Application of mind is the sine qua non for forming the opinion. Reference in this regard is placed Hon‟ble Apex court judgment in the case of CIT v P.Mohanakala (291 ITR 278), wherein the Hon‟ble Apex Court held as under “14. The question is what is the true nature and scope of section 68 of the Act? When and in what circumstances section 68 of the Act would come into play? That a bare reading of section 68 suggests that there has to be credit of amounts in the books maintained by an assessees; such credit has to be…

Asst CIT 9(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Bygging India P.Ltd, Mumbai

ITA 1482/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Jul 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Amarjit Singhassessment Year: 2010-11 Acit 9(2)(1), M/S. Bygging India Pvt. Room No.204, Ltd., 2Nd Floor, 9, R.N.A. Arcade, Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, Lokhandwala Complex, M.K. Road, Andheri West, Mumbai - 400020 Mumbai – 400053 Pan: Aaacb0642E (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee By : Shri Satish R. Mody, A.R. Revenue By : Ms. Kavita P. Kaushik, D.R. Date Of Hearing : 19.03.2020 Date Of Pronouncement : 15.07.2020 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Satish R. Mody, A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Kavita P. Kaushik, D.R

Section 115JSection 131(1)(d)Section 142(1)Section 143(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH “B”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2010-11 ACIT 9(2)(1), M/s. Bygging India Pvt. Room No.204, Ltd., 2nd Floor, 9, R.N.A. Arcade, Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, Lokhandwala Complex, M.K. Road, Andheri West, Mumbai - 400020 Mumbai – 400053 PAN: AAACB0642E (Appellant) (Respondent) Present for: Assessee by : Shri Satish R. Mody, A.R. Revenue by : Ms. Kavita P. Kaushik, D.R. Date of Hearing : 19.03.2020 Date of Pronouncement : 15.07.2020 O R D E R Per Rajesh Kumar, Accountant Member: The present appe…

M/S Garware Synthetics Limited, Mira Road vs. Asst CIT Circle-15 (1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 6832/MUM/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jun 2020AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri G. Manjunatha & Shri Ravish Soodgarware Synthetics Limited Vs. Acit,Circle-15(1)(2) Manish Textile Ind. Premises Aaykar Bhawan Opp. Golden Chemicals M.K.Road Penkar Pada, Post Mira Mumbai-400 020 Thane-401 104 Pan/Gir No.Aaacg4208M (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

Section 133(6)Section 68

…v CIT 241 ITR 497 (Kerala). The legislature had laid down that in the absence of satisfactory explanation the unexplained cash credit may be charged u/s 68 of the Act. This view is fortified by the ratio laid down in Hon’ble Apex Court in P. Mohankala (2007) (291 ITR 278 (SC). The law is well settled, the onus of proving the source of a sum, found to be received/transacted, it is open to the Revenue to hold that it is income of the appellant and no further burden lies on the revenue to show that income is from any other particular source. It is necessary for the appellant to prove not only identity of the credito…