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

Sanman Trade Impex Limited, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax- Central Circle 4(4), Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are dismissed dismissed whereas appeals of the assessee are partly allowed appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 3470/MUM/2023[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jul 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail ()

For Appellant: Dr. Kishor Dhule, CIT-DRFor Respondent: Mr. Rakesh Joshi

Section 143(3)Section 69C

…wer is "Yes" then accept the credit otherwise not." transaction. If the answer is "Yes" then accept the credit otherwise not." transaction. If the answer is "Yes" then accept the credit otherwise not." 14.3.2. In the case of CIT vs Mohanakala, 161 Taxman 169, 291 ITR 278, 14.3.2. In the case of CIT vs Mohanakala, 161 Taxman 169, 291 ITR 278, 14.3.2. In the case of CIT vs Mohanakala, 161 Taxman 169, 291 ITR 278, the Hon'ble Apex Court held as under: the Hon'ble Apex Court held as under: "May be the money came by way of bank cheques and p "May be the money came by way of bank cheques and paid through the aid throug…

Jade Granites Industries, Ahmedabad vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1)(1), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 81/AHD/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad15 Jul 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench, Ahmedabad Which Has Arisen From The Appellate Order Dated 23-11-2023 In Din & Order No. Itba/Nfac/S/250/2023-24/1058173176(1)

For Appellant: Shri Mehul K. Patel, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Jain, Sr. D.R

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 68

…w a cash credit in the name of a partner and no satisfactory explanation is offered, the amount of the cash credit can be deemed to be the income of the assessee firm by invoking the provisions of section 68. In the case of CIT vs Mohankala, 161 1 Таxтan 169, 291 ITR 278, the Hon'ble Apex Court held that May be the money came by way of bank cheques and paid through the process of banking transaction but that itself is of no consequence" In the case of CIT vs Saravana Construction P Lid., 208 Taxman 188(Mag.) (Doj: 14.03.2012), (cross-appeal of both Assessee and Revenue) the Karnataka HC has held as under 10. The…

The ITO, Ward-1(2)(1), Vadodara vs. M/S. Meet Enterprises, Vadodara

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1772/AHD/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad05 Jul 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 143(3)Section 68

…mary onus cast or the explanation and evidence submitted by the assessee, are not found satisfactory by the AO then the sum credited in the books shall be deemed as income of the assessee. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of CIT vs. P. Mohanakala reported in 291 ITR 278 while dealing with scope of provision of section 68 of the Act held that "the opinion of the AO that the explanation furnished by the assessee as not satisfactory is required to be based on proper appreciation of materials and other attending circumstances available on record. The opinion of the Assessing Officer is required to be formed objectiv…

Shobha Tomar, Jaipur vs. DCIT, C.C.1, Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 373/JPR/2024[A.Y. 2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur01 Jul 2024

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri G. M. Mehta, CAFor Respondent: Shri Anoop Singh, Addl. CIT

Section 115BSection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 44ASection 68

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”B” JAIPUR Mk0 ,l- lhrky{eh] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh jkBksM deys'k t;UrHkkbZ] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 373/JP/2024 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years : 2017-18 cuke Shobha Tomar DCIT, Vs. B-4, Govind Marg, Adarsh C.C.1, Jaipur Nagar, Jaipur LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AALPT 4876 A vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Shri G. M. Mehta, CA jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by : Shri Anoop Singh, Ad…

Jitendra Udaylal Jain, Maharashtra vs. National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi

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

ITA 4543/MUM/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Jun 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri Girish Agrawal

Section 10(38)Section 143(1)Section 234ASection 271(1)(c)Section 68Section 69C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, “F” BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA. No. 4543/MUM/2023 (A.Y.2011-12) ITO-26(1)(4), Jitendra Udaylal Jain, Vs 3 rd floor, 6 th Tower, Shop No.1, Muncipal Bldg, . Vashi Railywaystation, RA Kidwai Road, Wadala, Complex, Vashi, Mumbai -400037. Navi Mumbai-400703. PAN/GIR No. AABPJ5480E (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) Assessee by Shri Vimal Punmiya.AR Revenue by Ms.Rajeshwari Menon.Sr.DR सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date of Hearing 28.05.2024 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date of Pronouncement 25.06.2024 ORDER PER PAVAN KUMAR…

Priyanka Surana, Jaipur vs. ITO Ward 5(1), Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assesee is allowed

ITA 102/JPR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur28 May 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Sharwan Kumar Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Smt. Monisha Choudhary, Addl. CIT-DR

Section 115BSection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 68

…ed with cash credit under section 68. (d) The AO has made addition by invoking the provision of section 68. The precondition for invoking section 68 is that there has to be credit of amount in the books maintained by the assessee. [CIT vs P. Mohanakala (2007) 291 ITR 278 (SC)]. (e) The section is applicable only when a sum is found credited in the books of the assessee [Rakesh Kalia v. CIT, (2006) 286 ITR 357 (Dei.)]. In the case of assessee neither any sum has been credited in the books of accounts or in the bank account even for a single day throughout the year which is evident from the peak analysis of bank a…

ITO, Ward-1, Narnaul vs. Ashok Kumar Gupta, Narnaul

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

ITA 944/DEL/2020[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 May 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Dr.B.R.R.Kumar

Section 144Section 44ASection 69

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI “A” BENCH: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER & Dr.B.R.R.KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos.943 & 944/Del/2020 [Assessment Years : 2008-09 & 2009-10] ITO, vs Ashok Kumar Gupta, Ward-1, Narnaul, S/o-Shri Ram Avtar Gupta, Haryana H. No. 118/4, Ward- 19, Mohalla - Devsthan, Mahendragarh, Haryana. PAN-AUVPK5435A APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by Shri A.K.Sinha, CIT. DR Respondent by None Date of Hearing 25.04.2024 Date of Pronouncement 17.05.2024 ORDER PER KUL BHARAT, JM : These two appeals filed by the Revenue are directed against the common order passed by L…

ITO, Ward-1, Narnaul vs. Ashok Kumar Gupta, Narnaul

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

ITA 943/DEL/2020[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 May 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Dr.B.R.R.Kumar

Section 144Section 44ASection 69

ITO-13(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Sethia Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is allowed

ITA 2739/MUM/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 May 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya, Hon'Ble & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Hon'Bleito-13(2)(1) V. Sethia Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd 701, Central Plaza 147, 1St Floor, Aayakar Bhavan Daftari Road, Malad (East) M. K. Marg, Mumbai Mumbai, Maharashtra -400097 Maharashtra-400020 Pan: Aalcs9354B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented By : Jaiprakash Bairaga & Rupa Nanda Department Represented By : Dr. Kishor Dhule

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 68

…to rebut the same, the said evidence being unrebutted can be used against him by holding that it is a receipt of an income nature. While considering the explanation of the assessee, the department cannot, however, act unreasonably” ii. In CIT v. P. Mohankala, 291 ITR 278, this Court held that: “A bare reading of section 68 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, suggests that (i) there has to be credit of amounts in the books maintained by the assessee ; (ii) such credit has to be a sum of money during the previous year ; and (iii) either (a) the assessee offers no explanation about the nature and source of such credits fou…

Quest Online, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-49(1), Kolkata.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1046/KOL/2023[2020-21`]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 May 2024

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Rajesh Kumari.T.A. No.1046/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2020-21 Quest Online…………………………………...............................……….……Appellant Block-A, 3Rd Floor, Room No.24, 1, Chandni Chowk Street, Princep Street, Kolkata – 700072. [Pan:Aaafq4820G] Vs. Ito, Ward-49(1),Kolkata.............…..….…..….........……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri S. M. Surana, Advocate & Sunil Surana, Ca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri S. Datta, Cit, Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : May 02, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : May 03, 2024 Order Per Rajesh Kumar: The Present Appeal Filed By The Assessee For The Assessment Year 2020-21Against The Order Dated 08.09.2023 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. The Only Issue Raised In The Various Grounds Of Appeals Is Against The Confirmation Of Addition By Cit(A) Of Rs.14,82,41,932/- As Made By The Assessing Officer U/S 68 Of The Act R.W.S. 115Bbe Of The Act. 3. The Facts In Brief Are That The Assessee Filed Return Of Income On 09.01.2021 Declaring Total Income From Business & Profession At Rs.36,73,790/-. The Case Was Selected For Complete Scrutiny Under Cass & Statutory Notices Were Duly Issued & Served Upon The Assessee. During The Assessment Proceedings, The Various Documents & Evidences Were Called For By The Assessing Officer From The Assessee

Section 115BSection 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 68

…said evidence being unrebutted, can be used against him by holding that it was a receipt of an income nature. While considering the explanation of the assessee the Department cannot, however, act unreasonably.” ii. In CIT v. P. Mohankala [2007] 161 Taxman 169/291 ITR 278 this court held that: “A bare reading of Section 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, suggests that (i) there has to be credit of amounts in the books maintained by an assessee; (ii) such credit has to be of a sum during the previous year; and (iii) either (a) the assessee offer no explanation about the nature and source of such credit found in the bo…

Namrata Alpit Patel, Vadodara vs. The ITO, Ward-1(3)(2), Vadodara

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

ITA 607/AHD/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad10 Apr 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Royआयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos. 606-607/Ahd/2023 धििाधरणवरध/Asstt. Year: (2013-2014 & 2014-2015) Namrata Alpit Patel, Income Tax Officer, 110-, Yoginagar Township, Opp. Vs. Ward-1(3)(2), Prabhuta Marriage Hall, Chhani Vadodara. Baroda-391740

For Appellant: Shri Jigar Adhiyaru, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Alpesh Parmar, Sr. D.R

Section 143(3)Section 68

…the AO is mere presumption and surmises. As such, no material brought on record which may remotely suggest that cash deposited in the bank of the loan parties belongs to the assessee. 11.2 The Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of CIT vs. P. Mohanakala reported in 291 ITR 278 while dealing with scope of provision of the section 68 of the Act held that “the opinion of the AO that the explanation furnished by the assessee as not satisfactory is required to be based on proper appreciation of material and other attending circumstances available on record. The opinion of the Assessing Officer is required to be formed objec…

Namrata Alpit Patel, Vadodara vs. The ITO, Ward-1(3)(2), Vadodara

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

ITA 606/AHD/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad10 Apr 2024AY 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Jigar Adhiyaru, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Alpesh Parmar, Sr. D.R

Section 143(3)Section 68

Spectrum Foods Limited, Jaipur vs. Income Tax Officer, Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 38/JPR/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur08 Apr 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Sh. S. L. Poddar, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Anup Singh (Addl. CIT)

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”B” JAIPUR Mk0 ,l- lhrky{eh] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh jkBksM deys'k t;UrHkkbZ] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 38/JP/2024 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years : 2010-11 cuke M/s Spectrum Foods Limited The Income Tax Officer, Vs. L-5, B-II, Surya House, Krishna Jaipur Marg, C-Scheme, Jaipur LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AADCS 3704 R vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Sh. S. L. Poddar, Adv. jktLo dh…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax -23(1), Mumbai vs. Kalpsaru Diamonds, Mumbai

In the result, the grounds raised by the assessee as well as In the result, the grounds raised by the assessee as well as Revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3400/MUM/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Mar 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Rahul Chaudhary () Assessment Years: 2012-13 Kalpsaru Diamonds, Acit 23(2), Jw 8040/250, Bharat Diamond Piramal Chambers, Vs. Bourse, Bkc, Bandra East, Mumbai-400013. Mumbai-400051. Pan No. Aaafk 6960 H Appellant Respondent Assessment Years: 2012-13 Dy. Cit-23(1), Kalpsaru Diamonds, Room No. 511, Fifth Floor, Jw 8040/250, Bharat Diamond Piramal Chambers, Parel, Vs. Bourse, Bkc, Bandra East, Lalbaugh-400012. Mumbai-400051. Pan No. Aaafk 6960 H Appellant Respondent

For Respondent: Mr. Ajay Singh

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 69C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “E” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) AND SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (JUDICIAL MEMBER) Assessment Years: 2012-13 Kalpsaru Diamonds, ACIT 23(2), JW 8040/250, Bharat Diamond Piramal Chambers, Vs. Bourse, BKC, Bandra East, Mumbai-400013. Mumbai-400051. PAN NO. AAAFK 6960 H Appellant Respondent Assessment Years: 2012-13 Dy. CIT-23(1), Kalpsaru Diamonds, Room No. 511, Fifth floor, JW 8040/250, Bharat Diamond Piramal Chambers, Parel, Vs. Bourse, BKC, Bandra East, Lalbaugh-400012. Mumbai-400051. PAN NO. AAAFK 6960 H Appellant Respondent : Mr. Ajay Singh A…

Kalpsaru Diamonds, Mumbai vs. ACIT 23(2), Mumbai

In the result, the grounds raised by the assessee as well as In the result, the grounds raised by the assessee as well as Revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3223/MUM/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Mar 2024AY 2012-13

For Respondent: Mr. Ajay Singh

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 69C

The DCIT Circle-4(1)(1), Ahmedabad vs. West Side Cars Pvt. Ltd, Ahmedabad

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

ITA 1398/AHD/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad20 Mar 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Tr Senthil Kumarआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No. 1398/Ahd/2019 धििाधरणवरध/Asstt. Year: 2015-2016 The D.C.I.T, West Side Cars Pvt.Ltd., Circle-4(1)(1), Vs. A/1-4, Solitaire Corporate Park, Ahmedabad. Nr. Divya Bhaskar, Makarba, S.G Highway, Ahmedabad.

For Appellant: Shri Tushar Hemani,Sr.AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ashok Kumar Suthar, Sr. DR

Section 68

…mary onus cast or the explanation and evidence submitted by the assessee was not found satisfactory by the AO, then the sum credited in the books shall be deemed as income of the assessee. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of CIT vs. P. Mohanakala reported in 291 ITR 278 while dealing with scope of provision of the section 68 of the Act held that “the opinion of the AO that the explanation furnished by the assessee as not satisfactory is required to be based on proper appreciation of material and other attending circumstances available on record. The opinion of the Assessing Officer is required to be formed objec…

Sheetal Rupesh Salva, Mumbai vs. ITO, Ward-20(3)(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 95/MUM/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Mar 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Br Baskaran, Am & Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.95/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2013-14) Sheetal Rupesh Savla बिधम/ Ito Ward-20(3)(3) 601 Dev In Apartments, 6Th Floor, Piramal Vs. Adenwala Road, Plot-511, Chamber, Parel, Mumbai- Matunga, Mumbai-400019. 400012. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Adhpk2176R (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Dharen V. Gandhi (Adv) Shri Dinesh Shah Revenue By: Shri Nayanjoti Nath (Sr. Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 07/02/2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 18/03/2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench This Is An Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)/Nfac, Delhi Dated 09.12.2022 For The Assessment Year 2013-14. 2. The Main Grievance Of The Assessee Is Against The Action Of The Ld. Cit(A) Upholding The Action Of The Ao By Making An Addition Of Rs.3,20,97,772/- U/S 68 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred “The Act” Which According To The Assessee Ought To Have Been Held To Be Exempt U/S 10(38) Of The Act.

For Appellant: Shri Dharen V. Gandhi (Adv)For Respondent: Shri Nayanjoti Nath (Sr. AR)

Section 10(38)Section 147Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “G” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI BR BASKARAN, AM AND SHRI ABY T. VARKEY, JM आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.95/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2013-14) Sheetal Rupesh Savla बिधम/ ITO Ward-20(3)(3) 601 Dev IN Apartments, 6th Floor, Piramal Vs. Adenwala Road, Plot-511, Chamber, Parel, Mumbai- Matunga, Mumbai-400019. 400012. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. : ADHPK2176R (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee by: Shri Dharen V. Gandhi (Adv) Shri Dinesh Shah Revenue by: Shri Nayanjoti Nath (Sr. AR) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of Hearing: 07/02/2024 घोषणा क…

Sheetal Rupesh Salva, Mumbai vs. ITO, Ward-20(3)(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 94/MUM/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Mar 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Br Baskaran, Am & Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.94/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Sheetal Rupesh Savla बिधम/ Ito Ward-20(3)(3) 601 Dev In Apartments, 6Th Floor, Piramal Vs. Adenwala Road, Plot-511, Chamber, Parel, Mumbai- Matunga, Mumbai-400019. 400012. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Adhpk2176R (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Dharen V. Gandhi (Adv) Shri Dinesh Shah Revenue By: Shri Nayanjoti Nath (Sr. Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 07/02/2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 18/03/2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench This Is An Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)/Nfac, Delhi Dated 07.12.2022 For The Assessment Year 2012-13. 2. The Main Grievance Of The Assessee Is Against The Action Of The Ld. Cit(A) Upholding The Action Of The Ao By Making An Addition Of Rs.73,11,760/- U/S 68 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred “The Act” Which According To The Assessee Ought To Have Been Held To Be Exempt U/S 10(38) Of The Act.

For Appellant: Shri Dharen V. Gandhi (Adv)For Respondent: Shri Nayanjoti Nath (Sr. AR)

Section 10(38)Section 147Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “G” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI BR BASKARAN, AM AND SHRI ABY T. VARKEY, JM आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.94/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Sheetal Rupesh Savla बिधम/ ITO Ward-20(3)(3) 601 Dev IN Apartments, 6th Floor, Piramal Vs. Adenwala Road, Plot-511, Chamber, Parel, Mumbai- Matunga, Mumbai-400019. 400012. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. : ADHPK2176R (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee by: Shri Dharen V. Gandhi (Adv) Shri Dinesh Shah Revenue by: Shri Nayanjoti Nath (Sr. AR) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of Hearing: 07/02/2024 घोषणा क…

Sheetal Rupesh Salva, Mumbai vs. ITO, Ward-20(3)(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 93/MUM/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Mar 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Br Baskaran, Am & Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.93/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Sheetal Rupesh Savla बिधम/ Ito Ward-20(3)(3) 601 Dev In Apartments, 6Th Floor, Piramal Vs. Adenwala Road, Plot-511, Chamber, Parel, Mumbai- Matunga, Mumbai-400019. 400012. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Adhpk2176R (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Dharen V. Gandhi (Adv) Shri Dinesh Shah Revenue By: Shri Nayanjoti Nath (Sr. Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 07/02/2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 18/03/2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench This Is An Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)/Nfac, Delhi Dated 05.12.2022 For The Assessment Year 2011-12. 2. The Main Grievance Of The Assessee Is Against The Action Of The Ld. Cit(A) Upholding The Action Of The Ao Making An Addition Of Rs.3,17,12,750/- U/S 68 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”) Which According To The Assessee Ought To Have Been Held To Be Exempt U/S 10(38) Of The Act.

For Appellant: Shri Dharen V. Gandhi (Adv)For Respondent: Shri Nayanjoti Nath (Sr. AR)

Section 10(38)Section 147Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “G” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI BR BASKARAN, AM AND SHRI ABY T. VARKEY, JM आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.93/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Sheetal Rupesh Savla बिधम/ ITO Ward-20(3)(3) 601 Dev IN Apartments, 6th Floor, Piramal Vs. Adenwala Road, Plot-511, Chamber, Parel, Mumbai- Matunga, Mumbai-400019. 400012. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. : ADHPK2176R (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee by: Shri Dharen V. Gandhi (Adv) Shri Dinesh Shah Revenue by: Shri Nayanjoti Nath (Sr. AR) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of Hearing: 07/02/2024 घोषणा क…

Jagadish Kumar P.V (Legal Heir of Late Rema Padmaja Bai), Trivandrum vs. ACIT Circle 2(1), Trivandrum

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is partly allowed and partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 376/COCH/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin11 Mar 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Dr. S. Seethalakshmijagadish Kumar P.V. Asst. Cit, Circle - 2(1) (L/H Of Rema Padmaja Bai) Thiruvananthapuram Sree, T.C. 50/899(1), Kalady Vs. Hsra A-56, Karamana P.O. Thiruvananthapuram [Pan:Aempp5283J] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Raja Kannan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R

Section 143(3)Section 69

…e, on a challenge in appeal, could only be as to whether the AO ought to have been, on the basis of the said materials and explanations before him, reasonably speaking, satisfied, or not so. As explained by the Hon'ble Apex Court in CIT v. P. Mohankala [2007] 291 ITR 278 (SC), and which in fact represents settled law, is that the expression “the assessee offers no explanation” means the assessee offers no proper, reasonable and acceptable explanation as regards the sums found credited in the books maintained by him. Couple this requirement of law with the fact that it is only the assessee on whom the burden to sa…