CIT v. S.K.Srigiri & Bros.

152 Taxmann.com 595Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2023#9439 most cited
11

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2024 to 2025.

Sections most often in play

Section 69BSection 115BBESection 143(3)Section 28Section 133ASection 69Section 69ASection 132(4)

Issues it is cited on

abatement of assessmentsection 153a proceedingsthird party informationsection 158bdsection 69bstatement under section 132(4)assistant directorsection 156section 132(4a)survey under section 133asection 34section 292c

Judgments citing CIT v. S.K.Srigiri & Bros.

INDER KUMAR NIGOTIYA,JAIPUR vs. ITO WARD,1 (1), JAIPUR

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1011/JPR/2025[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur28 Aug 2025AY 2017-2018

Bench: SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member), SHRI NARINDER KUMAR (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Rajeev Sogani, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Gautam Singh Choudhary, JCIT
Section 115BSection 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 69A

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”SMC” JAIPUR Jh jkBkSM+ deys'k t;UrHkkbZ] ys[kk lnL; ,o Jh ujsUnz dqekj] U;kf;d lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM & SHRI NARINDER KUMAR, JM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 1011/JP/2025 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year : 2017-18 cuke Inder Kumar Nigotiya ITO, Vs. 3954 Nigotiya House, MSB Ka Ward 1(1), Rasta Johari Bazar, Jaipur Jaipur LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AAGPN6846H vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Sh. Rajeev Sogani, CA jktLo dh vksj ls@ Rev…

N SUMATHI KUMAR HUF,CHENGALPATTU vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(3), CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed and Cross-

ITA 40/CHNY/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Jul 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.40/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19 V. Smt. N. Sumathi Kumar, Huf, The Dcit, 56, High Road, Chengalpattu, Central Circle-3(3), Kancheepuram-603 002. Chennai. [Pan: Aaahn 0177 P] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.330/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Ms. Anitha, Addl. CIT
Section 133ASection 143(3)

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण ’सी’ "यायपीठ, चे"ई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘C’ BENCH: CHENNAI "ी मनु कुमार िग"र, "ाियक सद" एवं एवं एवं एवं "ी अिमताभ शु"ा, लेखा सद" के सम" BEFORE SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI AMITABH SHUKLA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.40/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19 v. Smt. N. Sumathi Kumar, HUF, The DCIT, 56, High Road, Chengalpattu, Central Circle-3(3), Kancheepuram-603 002. Chennai. [PAN: AAAHN 0177 P] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.330/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19 v. The DCIT, N. Sumathi Kumar, HUF…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CHENNAI vs. N SUMATHI KUMAR, KANCHEEPURAM

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed and Cross-

ITA 330/CHNY/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Jul 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.40/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19 V. Smt. N. Sumathi Kumar, Huf, The Dcit, 56, High Road, Chengalpattu, Central Circle-3(3), Kancheepuram-603 002. Chennai. [Pan: Aaahn 0177 P] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.330/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Ms. Anitha, Addl. CIT
Section 133ASection 143(3)

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण ’सी’ "यायपीठ, चे"ई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘C’ BENCH: CHENNAI "ी मनु कुमार िग"र, "ाियक सद" एवं एवं एवं एवं "ी अिमताभ शु"ा, लेखा सद" के सम" BEFORE SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI AMITABH SHUKLA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.40/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19 v. Smt. N. Sumathi Kumar, HUF, The DCIT, 56, High Road, Chengalpattu, Central Circle-3(3), Kancheepuram-603 002. Chennai. [PAN: AAAHN 0177 P] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.330/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19 v. The DCIT, N. Sumathi Kumar, HUF…

LIFE CARE HOSPITAL,SIROHI vs. ACIT/DCIT, CIRCLE-1,, JODHPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 938/JODH/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur24 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: DR. MITHA LAL MEENA (Accountant Member), DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

Section 115BSection 133ASection 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 234ASection 250Section 69A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL JODHPUR BENCH, JODHPUR. BEFORE: DR. MITHA LAL MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No. 938/Jodh/2024 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Life Care Hospital Vs. CIT(A), Tatoili Road, Opp. Sai Baba Jaipur. Mandir, P.O. Aburoad, Dist. Sirohi. PAN No.: AAFFL2914H Appellant Respondent Appellant by Sh. Sarla Agarwal, C.A. Respondent by Sh. Karni Dan, Addl. CIT(Sr. DR) Date of Hearing 05/05/2025 24/06/2025 Date of Pronouncement ORDER PER: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, J.M. This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of learned CIT (A), Jaipur-4 dat…

MAHESH KUMAR ,RAJGARH ALWAR vs. PR. CIT CENTRAL JAIPUR , JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 502/JPR/2024[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur27 Nov 2024AY 2018-2019

Bench: Dr. S. Seethalakshmi & Shri Gagan Goyalmahesh Kumar, Prop. M/S. Bhagwan Sahai & Sons, Station Road, Rajgarh, Alwar – 301 408. Pan No.: Adrpk 4704 K ..... Appellant Vs. Pr. Cit, (Central) Jaipur, Jaipur – 302 005 ..... Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. S. B. Natani, CA, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Mr. Arvind Kumar, Ld. CIT-DR
Section 115BSection 133ASection 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 69B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL JAIPUR BENCH “A”, JAIPUR BEFORE Dr. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI GAGAN GOYAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Mahesh Kumar, Prop. M/s. Bhagwan Sahai & Sons, Station Road, Rajgarh, Alwar – 301 408. PAN No.: ADRPK 4704 K ..... Appellant Vs. Pr. CIT, (Central) Jaipur, Jaipur – 302 005 ..... Respondent Appellant by : Mr. S. B. Natani, CA, Ld. AR Respondent by : Mr. Arvind Kumar, Ld. CIT-DR Date of hearing : 27/11/2024 Date of pronouncement : 27/11/2024 O R D E R PER GAGAN GOYAL, A.M: This appeal by assessee is directed against the order of Ld. PCIT (Central), Jaipur dated 19.…

SH. SURENDRA KUMAR PATNI,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 977/JPR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur21 Nov 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. S. Seethalakshmi & Shri Gagan Goyalshri Surendra Kumar Patni, C/O. M/S. Kalani & Co., 5Th Floor, Milestone Building, Gandhi Nagar Turn, Tonk Road, Jaipur, Rajasthan – 302 015. Pan No.: Adupp9249 D ..... Appellant Vs. Acit, Circle-2, New Central Revenue Building, Bhagwan Dass Road, Jaipur, Rajasthan – 302 005. ..... Respondent Appellant By : Mr. P.C. Parwal, Ca, Ld. Ar Respondent By : Mrs. Anita Rinesh, Ld. Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 19/11/2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 21/11/2024 O R D E R Per Gagan Goyal, A.M: This Appeal By Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Cit (A), Jaipur Dated 25.06.2024 Passed U/S. 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short ‘The Act’) For A.Y. 2017-18. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:-

For Appellant: Mr. P.C. Parwal, CA, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, Ld. Sr. DR
Section 115BSection 133Section 133ASection 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)Section 69Section 69B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL JAIPUR BENCH “A”, JAIPUR BEFORE Dr. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI GAGAN GOYAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Shri Surendra Kumar Patni, C/o. M/s. Kalani & Co., 5th Floor, Milestone Building, Gandhi Nagar Turn, Tonk Road, Jaipur, Rajasthan – 302 015. PAN No.: ADUPP9249 D ..... Appellant Vs. ACIT, Circle-2, New Central Revenue Building, Bhagwan Dass Road, Jaipur, Rajasthan – 302 005. ..... Respondent Appellant by : Mr. P.C. Parwal, CA, Ld. AR Respondent by : Mrs. Anita Rinesh, Ld. Sr. DR Date of hearing : 19/11/2024 Date of pronouncement : 21/11/2024 O R D E R PER GAGAN GOYAL,…

INCOME TAX OFFICER W 1, HASSAN vs. RAMACHANDRA SETTY AND SONS, HASSAN

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA

ITA 1166/BANG/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore10 Jun 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri C. Ramesh, A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, D.R
Section 115BSection 132(4)Section 250Section 69B

…on’ble ITAT, Chandigarh) (2023) 68 CCH 0287 Chd Trib. • Principal Commissioner of Income Tax V Deccan Jewellera (P) Ltd (2021) 132 Taxmann.com 73 (Andhra Pradesh) • CIT V. S.K.Srigiri & Bros (2008) 171 Taxman 264 (Karnataka) • Overseas Leathers V. DCIT (2023) 152 Taxmann.com 595 (Chennai-Trib) 5.9 It is also incomprehensible that any assessee would invest in business stock the unexplained money earned from other sources because at some point of time, the income earned out of such business stock has to be offered to tax and thus there is no apparent advantage or logic to invest the unexplained money in business as…

INCOME TAX OFFICER, W-1, VIJAYANAGAR vs. RAMACHANDRA SETTY AND SONS, HASSAN

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA

ITA 1165/BANG/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore10 Jun 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri C. Ramesh, A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, D.R
Section 115BSection 132(4)Section 250Section 69B

…on’ble ITAT, Chandigarh) (2023) 68 CCH 0287 Chd Trib. • Principal Commissioner of Income Tax V Deccan Jewellera (P) Ltd (2021) 132 Taxmann.com 73 (Andhra Pradesh) • CIT V. S.K.Srigiri & Bros (2008) 171 Taxman 264 (Karnataka) • Overseas Leathers V. DCIT (2023) 152 Taxmann.com 595 (Chennai-Trib) 5.9 It is also incomprehensible that any assessee would invest in business stock the unexplained money earned from other sources because at some point of time, the income earned out of such business stock has to be offered to tax and thus there is no apparent advantage or logic to invest the unexplained money in business as…

INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1 HASSAN, HASSAN vs. RAMACHANDRA SETTY AND SONGS, HASSAN

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA

ITA 1164/BANG/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore10 Jun 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri C. Ramesh, A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, D.R
Section 115BSection 132(4)Section 250Section 69B

…on’ble ITAT, Chandigarh) (2023) 68 CCH 0287 Chd Trib. • Principal Commissioner of Income Tax V Deccan Jewellera (P) Ltd (2021) 132 Taxmann.com 73 (Andhra Pradesh) • CIT V. S.K.Srigiri & Bros (2008) 171 Taxman 264 (Karnataka) • Overseas Leathers V. DCIT (2023) 152 Taxmann.com 595 (Chennai-Trib) 5.9 It is also incomprehensible that any assessee would invest in business stock the unexplained money earned from other sources because at some point of time, the income earned out of such business stock has to be offered to tax and thus there is no apparent advantage or logic to invest the unexplained money in business as…

INCOME TAX OFFICER, W-1, HASSAN vs. RAMACHANDRA SETTY & SONS, HASSAN

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA

ITA 1163/BANG/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore10 Jun 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri C. Ramesh, A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, D.R
Section 115BSection 132(4)Section 250Section 69B

…on’ble ITAT, Chandigarh) (2023) 68 CCH 0287 Chd Trib. • Principal Commissioner of Income Tax V Deccan Jewellera (P) Ltd (2021) 132 Taxmann.com 73 (Andhra Pradesh) • CIT V. S.K.Srigiri & Bros (2008) 171 Taxman 264 (Karnataka) • Overseas Leathers V. DCIT (2023) 152 Taxmann.com 595 (Chennai-Trib) 5.9 It is also incomprehensible that any assessee would invest in business stock the unexplained money earned from other sources because at some point of time, the income earned out of such business stock has to be offered to tax and thus there is no apparent advantage or logic to invest the unexplained money in business as…

M/S. S. RAMASHANDRA SETTY & SONS,HASSAN vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1 , HASSAN

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA

ITA 1156/BANG/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore10 Jun 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri C. Ramesh, A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, D.R
Section 115BSection 132(4)Section 250Section 69B

…on’ble ITAT, Chandigarh) (2023) 68 CCH 0287 Chd Trib. • Principal Commissioner of Income Tax V Deccan Jewellera (P) Ltd (2021) 132 Taxmann.com 73 (Andhra Pradesh) • CIT V. S.K.Srigiri & Bros (2008) 171 Taxman 264 (Karnataka) • Overseas Leathers V. DCIT (2023) 152 Taxmann.com 595 (Chennai-Trib) 5.9 It is also incomprehensible that any assessee would invest in business stock the unexplained money earned from other sources because at some point of time, the income earned out of such business stock has to be offered to tax and thus there is no apparent advantage or logic to invest the unexplained money in business as…

CIT v. S.K.Srigiri & Bros. (152 Taxmann.com 595) — Cited in 11 Judgments | BharatTax