CIT v. R. Nalini Devi ITTA 232 of 2013 (A. P)

294 ITR 49Supreme Court of India2007#261 most cited

What is CIT v. R. Nalini Devi ITTA 232 of 2013 (A. P) authority for?

Additions to income cannot be made solely based on uncorroborated third-party statements, documents, or loose sheets seized during a search, and such evidence requires the assessee to be provided with an opportunity for cross-examination.

299

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,005 Indian tax judgments — from 2014 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. R. Nalini Devi · 294 ITR 49 · uncorroborated third party statement · loose sheets · seized documents · cross-examination · evidentiary value · section 132 · section 153A · section 153C · addition without corroboration

Sections most often in play

Section 153ASection 132Section 153CSection 143(3)Section 68Section 292CSection 131Section 132(4)

Issues it is cited on

section 292csection 158bb(1)dumb documentssection 69bsection 132(4a)section 292section 131(1a)section 34loose paperssection 29section 153c(1)section 158bb

Judgments citing CIT v. R. Nalini Devi ITTA 232 of 2013 (A. P)

Bannariamman Educational Trust, Coimbatore vs. ACIT Central Circle 3(2), Chennai

ITA 3311/CHNY/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai14 Aug 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.3310 To 3314/Chny/2024 िनधारणवष/Assessment Years: 2017-18 To 2021-22 M/S.Bannari Amman- Educational Trust, 1212, Trichy Road, Coimbatore-641 018. V. The Acit, Central Circle-3(2), Chennai. [Pan: Aaatb 1235 C] (अपीलाथ/Appellant) (यथ/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.3353 & 3354 To 3358/Chny/2024 िनधारणवष/Assessment Years: 2015-16 & 2017-18 To 2021-22 & Cross-Objection No.42/Chny/2025 (In Ita No.3353/Chny/2024) िनधारणवष/Assessment Year: 2015-16 The Acit, Central Circle-3(2), Chennai. V. M/S.Bannari Amman- Educational Trust, 1212, Trichy Road, Coimbatore-641 018. [Pan: Aaatb 1235 C] (अपीलाथ/Appellant) (यथ/Respondent/Cross Objector) Assessee By : Mr.Vikram Vijayaraghavan, Advocate (Virtual)/Ld.Ar Department By : Mr.Shiva Srinivasan, Cit/Dr सुनवाईकतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 27.06.2025 घोषणाकतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 14.08.2025

For Appellant: Mr.Vikram VijayaraghavanFor Respondent: Mr.Shiva Srinivasan, CIT/DR
Section 12ASection 132Section 133ASection 143(2)Section 153CSection 250

…o the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT ITA Nos.3310 to 3314/Chny/2024 (AYs 2017-18 to 2021-22) ITA Nos.3353 & 3354 to 3358/Chny/2024 (AYs 2015-16 & 2017-18 to 2021-22) M/s.Bannari Amman Educational Trust :: 34 :: Vs. P.V. Kalayanasundaram (294 ITR 49) wherein at Para 5, it was observed that, the notings on the loose pieces of paper may be a cause for suspicion but the same cannot be relied upon, unless there is corroboration by corresponding entry in regular accounts of both the parties to the transaction. 8.5 Having taken note of the above position of law, we now again revert back to the fact…

Raghav Kumar Dhoot, Jaipur vs. DCIT Central Circle 1, Jaipur

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

ITA 491/JPR/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur06 Aug 2025AY 2018-19
For Appellant: Shri C.M. Agarwal, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Ojha, CIT- DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 292BSection 68

…ngemermer (P) Ltd., 1. 3. Reliance on third-party records, absent corroborative evidence directly implicating the appellant, constitutes an impermissible and arbitrary exercise of jurisdiction. The Hon'ble Supreme Court, in CIT v. P.V. Kalyanasundaram (2007) 294 ITR 49, enunciated that reliance upon evidence gathered from third-party sources must meet rigorous evidentiary thresholds. The Court unequivocally held that third-party evidence cannot be invoked in a capricious manner for assessments, particularly in the absence of direct involvement or corroboration. In the instant case, the indiscriminate reliance up…

Rangamani Krishnan, Chennai vs. ACIT, Central Circle-1(2), Chennai

In the result all the five appeals filed by the assessee for the A

ITA 457/CHNY/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 Jul 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Hon’Ble & Shri S.R.Raghunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपीलसं./Ita Nos.: 453, 454, 455, 456 & 457/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2016-17, 2017-18, 2018-19 & 2019-20 & Sa Nos.41, 42, 43, 44 & 45/Chny/2025 [In Ita Nos. 453, 454, 455, 456 & 457/Chny/2025]

For Appellant: Shri D. Anand, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. E. Pavuna Sundari, CIT
Section 131Section 142Section 142(1)Section 250Section 69

…ntents. In the above context, the ld.AR relied on the following decisions CIT v. S.M. Aggarwal [(2007) 293 ITR 43 (Del)]: “The entries in third party documents cannot be presumed to be true without corroborative evidence.” CIT v. P.V. Kalyanasundaram [(2007) 294 ITR 49 (Mad)]: “Where there is no confirmation of the transaction or corroboration from either side, mere notings in seized material are insufficient to sustain addition.” Layer Exports Pvt. Ltd. v. ACIT [(2021) 129 taxmann.com 324 (ITAT Mumbai)] “Pen drive entries not supported by confirmation from the assessee or the person from whom it was seized are…

Rangamani Krishnan, Chennai vs. ACIT, Central Circle-1(2), Chennai

In the result all the five appeals filed by the assessee for the A

ITA 456/CHNY/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 Jul 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Hon’Ble & Shri S.R.Raghunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपीलसं./Ita Nos.: 453, 454, 455, 456 & 457/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2016-17, 2017-18, 2018-19 & 2019-20 & Sa Nos.41, 42, 43, 44 & 45/Chny/2025 [In Ita Nos. 453, 454, 455, 456 & 457/Chny/2025]

For Appellant: Shri D. Anand, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. E. Pavuna Sundari, CIT
Section 131Section 142Section 142(1)Section 250Section 69

…ntents. In the above context, the ld.AR relied on the following decisions CIT v. S.M. Aggarwal [(2007) 293 ITR 43 (Del)]: “The entries in third party documents cannot be presumed to be true without corroborative evidence.” CIT v. P.V. Kalyanasundaram [(2007) 294 ITR 49 (Mad)]: “Where there is no confirmation of the transaction or corroboration from either side, mere notings in seized material are insufficient to sustain addition.” Layer Exports Pvt. Ltd. v. ACIT [(2021) 129 taxmann.com 324 (ITAT Mumbai)] “Pen drive entries not supported by confirmation from the assessee or the person from whom it was seized are…

Rangamani Krishnan, Chennai vs. ACIT, Central Circle-1(2), Chennai

In the result all the five appeals filed by the assessee for the A

ITA 455/CHNY/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Hon’Ble & Shri S.R.Raghunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपीलसं./Ita Nos.: 453, 454, 455, 456 & 457/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2016-17, 2017-18, 2018-19 & 2019-20 & Sa Nos.41, 42, 43, 44 & 45/Chny/2025 [In Ita Nos. 453, 454, 455, 456 & 457/Chny/2025]

For Appellant: Shri D. Anand, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. E. Pavuna Sundari, CIT
Section 131Section 142Section 142(1)Section 250Section 69

…ntents. In the above context, the ld.AR relied on the following decisions CIT v. S.M. Aggarwal [(2007) 293 ITR 43 (Del)]: “The entries in third party documents cannot be presumed to be true without corroborative evidence.” CIT v. P.V. Kalyanasundaram [(2007) 294 ITR 49 (Mad)]: “Where there is no confirmation of the transaction or corroboration from either side, mere notings in seized material are insufficient to sustain addition.” Layer Exports Pvt. Ltd. v. ACIT [(2021) 129 taxmann.com 324 (ITAT Mumbai)] “Pen drive entries not supported by confirmation from the assessee or the person from whom it was seized are…

Rangamani Krishnan, Chennai vs. ACIT, Central Circle-1(2), Chennai

In the result all the five appeals filed by the assessee for the A

ITA 454/CHNY/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 Jul 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Hon’Ble & Shri S.R.Raghunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपीलसं./Ita Nos.: 453, 454, 455, 456 & 457/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2016-17, 2017-18, 2018-19 & 2019-20 & Sa Nos.41, 42, 43, 44 & 45/Chny/2025 [In Ita Nos. 453, 454, 455, 456 & 457/Chny/2025]

For Appellant: Shri D. Anand, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. E. Pavuna Sundari, CIT
Section 131Section 142Section 142(1)Section 250Section 69

…ntents. In the above context, the ld.AR relied on the following decisions CIT v. S.M. Aggarwal [(2007) 293 ITR 43 (Del)]: “The entries in third party documents cannot be presumed to be true without corroborative evidence.” CIT v. P.V. Kalyanasundaram [(2007) 294 ITR 49 (Mad)]: “Where there is no confirmation of the transaction or corroboration from either side, mere notings in seized material are insufficient to sustain addition.” Layer Exports Pvt. Ltd. v. ACIT [(2021) 129 taxmann.com 324 (ITAT Mumbai)] “Pen drive entries not supported by confirmation from the assessee or the person from whom it was seized are…

Rangamani Krishnan, Chennai vs. ACIT, Central Circle-1(3), Chennai

In the result all the five appeals filed by the assessee for the A

ITA 453/CHNY/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 Jul 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Hon’Ble & Shri S.R.Raghunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपीलसं./Ita Nos.: 453, 454, 455, 456 & 457/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2016-17, 2017-18, 2018-19 & 2019-20 & Sa Nos.41, 42, 43, 44 & 45/Chny/2025 [In Ita Nos. 453, 454, 455, 456 & 457/Chny/2025]

For Appellant: Shri D. Anand, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. E. Pavuna Sundari, CIT
Section 131Section 142Section 142(1)Section 250Section 69

…ntents. In the above context, the ld.AR relied on the following decisions CIT v. S.M. Aggarwal [(2007) 293 ITR 43 (Del)]: “The entries in third party documents cannot be presumed to be true without corroborative evidence.” CIT v. P.V. Kalyanasundaram [(2007) 294 ITR 49 (Mad)]: “Where there is no confirmation of the transaction or corroboration from either side, mere notings in seized material are insufficient to sustain addition.” Layer Exports Pvt. Ltd. v. ACIT [(2021) 129 taxmann.com 324 (ITAT Mumbai)] “Pen drive entries not supported by confirmation from the assessee or the person from whom it was seized are…

Geeta Devi Agarwal, Jaipur vs. Income Tax Officer, ITO WD 1(4), Jpr, Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 450/JPR/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur30 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No. 450/JP/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year : 2017-18 Badri Lal Agarwal through Legal heir Smt. Geeta Devi G-5, Shyama Residency, Plot No. 7, Purander Ji Ka Bag Moti Doongri Road, Jaipur स्थायी लेखा सं. / जीआईआर सं./PAN/GIR No.: ALGPA5194C अपीलार्थी / Appellant निर्धारिती की ओर से / Assessee by: Sh. S. B. Natani, CA राजस्व की ओर से / Revenue by : Sh. Gautam Singh Choudhary, JCIT सुनवाई की तारीख /

For Appellant: Sh. S. B. Natani, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Gautam Singh Choudhary, JCIT
Section 115BSection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 68Section 69A

…able on the assessee. Following case laws are quoted in support a) Hon’ble Supreme Court is directly on the issue which is very much relevant in the context of taxation of on money. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. P.V. Kalyana Sundaram (2007) 294 ITR 49, under similar circumstances held in favor of the assessee. The relevant portion of order is reproduced here under :– 18 Geeta Devi Agarwal vs. ITO “We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record. It is true that the Division Bench of the High Court has borrowed extensively from the orders of the Tribunal and the…

Surendra Pal Singh Sahni, Kota vs. Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Kota

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 450/JPR/2024[2005-06]Status: FixedITAT Jaipur30 Jun 2025AY 2005-06

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Sh. S. B. Natani, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Gautam Singh Choudhary, JCIT
Section 115BSection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 68Section 69A

…able on the assessee. Following case laws are quoted in support a) Hon’ble Supreme Court is directly on the issue which is very much relevant in the context of taxation of on money. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. P.V. Kalyana Sundaram (2007) 294 ITR 49, under similar circumstances held in favor of the assessee. The relevant portion of order is reproduced here under :– 18 Geeta Devi Agarwal vs. ITO “We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record. It is true that the Division Bench of the High Court has borrowed extensively from the orders of the Tribunal and the…

M/S. Lalitha Jewellery Mart Ltd., Chennai vs. DCIT, Central Circle-1(4), Chennai

ITA 680/CHNY/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai12 Jun 2025AY 2021-22
For Appellant: Mr. D. Anand, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mr. Shiva Srinivas, CIT
Section 132Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 153A

…tries therein are correct. It is further incumbent upon the person relying upon those entries to prove that they were in accordance with facts. 8.19 We also gainfully refer to the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. P.V. Kalayanasundaram (294 ITR 49) wherein at Para 5, it was observed that, the notings on the loose pieces of paper may be a cause for suspicion but the same cannot be relied upon, unless there is corroboration by corresponding entry in regular accounts of both the parties to the transaction. 8.20 Having taken note of the above position of law, we now again revert back to the fac…

M/S. Lalitha Jewellery Mart Ltd., Chennai vs. DCIT, Central Circle-1(4), Chennai

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

ITA 679/CHNY/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai12 Jun 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shrimanoj Kumar Aggarwal

For Appellant: Mr. D. Anand, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mr. Shiva Srinivas, CIT
Section 132Section 153A

…We also gainfully refer to the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in We also gainfully refer to the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in We also gainfully refer to the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. P.V. CIT Vs. P.V. Kalayanasundaram (294 ITR 49) Kalayanasundaram (294 ITR 49) wherein at Para 5, it was observed that, Para 5, it was observed that, the notings on the loose pieces of paper notings on the loose pieces of paper may be a cause for suspicion but the same cannot be relied upon, unless may be a cause for suspicion but the same cannot be relied upon, unless may be a cause for suspi…

M/S. Lalitha Jewellery Mart Ltd., Chennai vs. DCIT, Central Circle-1(4), Chennai

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

ITA 678/CHNY/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai12 Jun 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shrimanoj Kumar Aggarwal

For Appellant: Mr. D. Anand, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mr. Shiva Srinivas, CIT
Section 132Section 153A

…We also gainfully refer to the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in We also gainfully refer to the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in We also gainfully refer to the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. P.V. CIT Vs. P.V. Kalayanasundaram (294 ITR 49) Kalayanasundaram (294 ITR 49) wherein at Para 5, it was observed that, Para 5, it was observed that, the notings on the loose pieces of paper notings on the loose pieces of paper may be a cause for suspicion but the same cannot be relied upon, unless may be a cause for suspicion but the same cannot be relied upon, unless may be a cause for suspi…

M/S. Lalitha Jewellery Mart Ltd., Chennai vs. DCIT, Central Circle-1(4), Chennai

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

ITA 677/CHNY/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai12 Jun 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shrimanoj Kumar Aggarwal

For Appellant: Mr. D. Anand, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mr. Shiva Srinivas, CIT
Section 132Section 153A

…We also gainfully refer to the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in We also gainfully refer to the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in We also gainfully refer to the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. P.V. CIT Vs. P.V. Kalayanasundaram (294 ITR 49) Kalayanasundaram (294 ITR 49) wherein at Para 5, it was observed that, Para 5, it was observed that, the notings on the loose pieces of paper notings on the loose pieces of paper may be a cause for suspicion but the same cannot be relied upon, unless may be a cause for suspicion but the same cannot be relied upon, unless may be a cause for suspi…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle - 2(4), Bengaluru vs. Sri Adichunchanagiri Shikhana Trust, Mandya

ITA 1207/BANG/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 May 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Soundararajan K.

For Appellant: Shri Bharath L, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Vidya K., Jt.CIT (DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 69ASection 69C

…e summons referred to in the letter dated March 9, 1957, and what statement he had made.” 228. Further, third party statement cannot be relied upon without proper enquiry and providing proper cross examination to the assessee. In CIT v. P.V. Kalyana Sundaram, 294 ITR 49 (SC), the Hon’ble Supreme Court observed that no reliance could be placed on loose sheets seized during the course of search and third party statements unless provided crossexamination. Collection of capitation fee is governed by Karnataka Institutions (Prohibition of Capitation Fees) Act, 1984 and there was no violation noticed by the State autho…

M/S. Sri . Adichunchanagiri Shilkshana Trust, Mandya vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(4), Bengaluru

ITA 1096/BANG/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 May 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Soundararajan K.

For Appellant: Shri Bharath L, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Vidya K., Jt.CIT (DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 143(3)Section 69ASection 69C

…e summons referred to in the letter dated March 9, 1957, and what statement he had made.” 228. Further, third party statement cannot be relied upon without proper enquiry and providing proper cross examination to the assessee. In CIT v. P.V. Kalyana Sundaram, 294 ITR 49 (SC), the Hon’ble Supreme Court observed that no reliance could be placed on loose sheets seized during the course of search and third party statements unless provided crossexamination. Collection of capitation fee is governed by Karnataka Institutions (Prohibition of Capitation Fees) Act, 1984 and there was no violation noticed by the State autho…

M/S. Global Star Indmetal Private Limited, Udupi vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Mangalore

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

ITA 52/BANG/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Apr 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahushri. Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Smt. Sheetal Borker, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Subramanian S, JCIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 132(4)Section 133ASection 147

…V. Lakshmi Savitri Devi Vs ACIT ITTA 563 of 2017 (AP)(HC) • Jawahar Bhai Atmaram Hathiwala Vs ITO 128 ITJ 36 (Ahd) • DCIT Vs B. Vijaya Kumar ITA No.930 & 931 of 2009 (Hyd). • CIT Vs R. Nalini Devi ITTA 232 of 2013 (A. P) • CIT Vs P. V Kalyana Sundaran (2007) 294 ITR 49 • Venkata Rama Sai Developers Vs DCIT ITA 453/Vizag/2012. • P. Venkateshwar Rao Vs DCIT ITA 25/825/Vizag/2012. 11.29 Further, Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Common Cause (A registered Society) Vs. Union of India in Writ Petition (Civil) No.505 of 2015 dated 2.7.2018 [2017] 394 ITR 220 (SC) wherein it observed that "the entries in the loose p…

M/S. Global Star Indmetal Private Limited, Udupi vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Mangalore

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

ITA 51/BANG/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Apr 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahushri. Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Smt. Sheetal Borker, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Subramanian S, JCIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 132(4)Section 133ASection 147

…V. Lakshmi Savitri Devi Vs ACIT ITTA 563 of 2017 (AP)(HC) • Jawahar Bhai Atmaram Hathiwala Vs ITO 128 ITJ 36 (Ahd) • DCIT Vs B. Vijaya Kumar ITA No.930 & 931 of 2009 (Hyd). • CIT Vs R. Nalini Devi ITTA 232 of 2013 (A. P) • CIT Vs P. V Kalyana Sundaran (2007) 294 ITR 49 • Venkata Rama Sai Developers Vs DCIT ITA 453/Vizag/2012. • P. Venkateshwar Rao Vs DCIT ITA 25/825/Vizag/2012. 11.29 Further, Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Common Cause (A registered Society) Vs. Union of India in Writ Petition (Civil) No.505 of 2015 dated 2.7.2018 [2017] 394 ITR 220 (SC) wherein it observed that "the entries in the loose p…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Nungambakkam vs. Pinnathevar Palanichamy, Madurai

ITA 3015/CHNY/2024[2021]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai29 Apr 2025
For Appellant: Mr.Shivanand K. Kalakeri, CIT
Section 132

…eration of this Court. Accordingly, the above tax case is dismissed. No costs." 28. The above findings of the Hon'ble High Court as well as the lower appellate authorities are noted to have been affirmed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in their order reported in 294 ITR 49. 29. We find that the above decision is applicable with equal force to the case of the assessee. Like in the decided case, Shri R. Sabapathy had originally admitted that he had paid on-monies of Rs.20 crores in cash to the assessee for purchase of land, which he later on retracted. Further, the contents of Page No. 61 of document ID marked ANN/SK/…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(1), Nagpur vs. Deepak Suresh Gadge, Nagpur

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 99/NAG/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur03 Apr 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri K.M. Roy, Hon’Ble Accountant, Member

Section 132Section 153Section 69C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI K.M. ROY, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT, MEMBER ITA No.99 & 100/NAG/2023 (Assessment Years: 2018-19 & 2019-20) Dy.CIT – Central Circle – 2(1) v. Deepak Suresh Gadge 3rd Floor, Room No. 312 G/2, 2nd Lane Aayakar Bhawan Behind Hitwada Press Telangkhedi Road, Civil Lines Dhantoli, Nagpur – 440012 Nagpur – 440001 PAN – ABZPG6643H (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented by : Shri Manoj G. Moryani, Advocate Shri Sandipkumar Salunke, CIT(DR) Revenue Represented by : Date of conclusion of hearing : 18.03.20…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(1), Nagpur vs. Deepak Suresh Gadge, Nagpur

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 100/NAG/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur03 Apr 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri K.M. Roy, Hon’Ble Accountant, Member

Section 132Section 153Section 69C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI K.M. ROY, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT, MEMBER ITA No.99 & 100/NAG/2023 (Assessment Years: 2018-19 & 2019-20) Dy.CIT – Central Circle – 2(1) v. Deepak Suresh Gadge 3rd Floor, Room No. 312 G/2, 2nd Lane Aayakar Bhawan Behind Hitwada Press Telangkhedi Road, Civil Lines Dhantoli, Nagpur – 440012 Nagpur – 440001 PAN – ABZPG6643H (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented by : Shri Manoj G. Moryani, Advocate Shri Sandipkumar Salunke, CIT(DR) Revenue Represented by : Date of conclusion of hearing : 18.03.20…