How many judgments cite CIT v. Sanghamitra Bharali?

60 judgments on BharatTax cite CIT v. Sanghamitra Bharali (361 ITR 481), spanning 2016 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does CIT v. Sanghamitra Bharali come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 106, Section 131, Section 133(6), Section 143(3), Section 147, Section 153A.

CIT v. Sanghamitra Bharali

361 ITR 481High Court2014#1913 most cited

What is CIT v. Sanghamitra Bharali authority for?

Capital gains arising from sham transactions, particularly those involving penny stocks designed to appear genuine, are not exempt under Section 10(38) but are taxable as unaccounted income brought into the books.

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Sanghamitra Bharali · 361 ITR 481 · Section 10(38) · bogus long term capital gain · penny stock · sham transaction · accommodation entry · genuineness of transaction · onus of proof · Section 131 · Section 147 · entry operator

Sections most often in play

Section 106 Section 131 Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 147 Section 153A Section 1961 Section 250

Issues it is cited on

onus of proof paper company bogus long term capital gain bogus ltcg penny stock section 10(38)entry operator long term capital gains share application money accommodation entry section 131 genuineness of the transaction

Judgments citing CIT v. Sanghamitra Bharali

ACIT CC 7(3), MUMBAI vs. TRISHUL REALTY INFRA LLP, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue and the COs filed by the Assessee stand dismissed

ITA 7649/MUM/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Feb 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankar

Section 250Section 68

…e and the lender, and it is not the burden of the assessee to find out the source of creditworthiness of the lender to prove the genuineness of the transaction. This issue is dealt by the Gauhati High Court in the case of CIT v. Smt. Sanghamitra Bharal (2014) 361 ITR 481 (Gau). The aforesaid points were also affirmed in the past by the Appex Court in the case of CIT v. Orissa Corporation P. Ltd reported in (1986) 159 ITR 78 (SC). In the case of CIT v. Varinder Rawley (2014) 366 ITR 232 (P&H) the court held that where the assessee shows that the entries regarding credit in a third party's account were in fact rece…

DCIT CC 7(3), MUMBAI vs. M/S OM TRILOK REALTY & INFRASTRUCTURE , MUMBAI

ITA 4048/MUM/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Dec 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shree Pawan Singh, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am Deputy Commissioner M/S Om Trilok Realty & Of Income Tax, Cc-7(3), Infrastructures, Shop No. 6Th Room No. 655, 8, Botawala Building, V Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, 82086, Raghavji Road, S M. K. Road, Mumbai- Gowalia Tank, 400020, Maharashtra Mumbai-400036 Pan No. Aabfo8779M (Appellant) : (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Rushabh Mehta : Shri R A Dhyani, Cit-Dr Respondent By : 17.09.2025 Date Of Hearing Date Of : 10.12.2025 Pronouncement

For Appellant: Shri Rushabh MehtaFor Respondent: 17.09.2025

Section 131Section 132Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153A(1)(a)Section 250Section 68Section 69C

…nd the creditor, and it is not the burden of the assessee to find out the source of creditworthiness of the lender to prove the genuineness of the transaction. This issue is dealt by the Gauhati High Court in the case of CIT v. Smt. Sanghamitra Bharali (2014) 361 ITR 481 (Gau). The aforesaid points were also affirmed in the past by the Apex Court in the case of CIT v. Orissa Corporation P. Ltd reported in (1986) 159 ITR 78 (SC). In the case of CIT v. Varinder Rawley (2014) 366 ITR 232 (P & H) the court held that "where the assessee shows that the entries regarding credit in a third party's account were in fact re…

SHRI KRISHAN KUMAR JALAN,BANGALORE vs. ITO, W-1, SIRSA

In the result appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 933/CHANDI/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh15 Jan 2025AY 2014-15

For Appellant: \nShri P.K. Prasad, Advocate &For Respondent: \nDr. Vivek Vardhan, JCIT, Sr. DR

Section 10(38)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250(6)Section 253Section 68

…es. Therefore, human\nprobabilities have also to be applied to comprehend the transactions\nand to see the real intention behind entering into these transactions. In\nthe similar circumstances,- the Honourable Gauhati High Court of CTT Vs\nSanghamitra Bharali(361 ITR 481) had held that the capital gains are sham\ntransactions entered only to give colour of genuineness_and therefore,\nheld that the capital gain arising out of these transactions cannot be\nbelieved as genuine and upheld taxing the said amount as unaccounted\nincome brought into books in the guise of exempted capital gains.\n(iv) That even assuming…

SADHU RAM BALANI,INDORE vs. ITO-5(1), INDORE, INDORE

ITA 470/IND/2023[2014-15]Status: HeardITAT Indore24 Sept 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanisadhu Ram Balani Ito-5(1) Flat No.B-503, Moti Mahal Indore Apartment 28-A, Sector-C Vs. Scheme No.71, Indore (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Abspb5367L Assessee By Shri S.N. Agrawal, Ar Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Revenue By Date Of Hearing 04.09.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 24.09.2024

Section 10(38)Section 132Section 133A

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, इंदौर "यायपीठ, इंदौर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI B.M. BIYANI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Sadhu Ram Balani ITO-5(1) Flat No.B-503, Moti Mahal Indore Apartment 28-A, Sector-C Vs. Scheme No.71, Indore (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) PAN: ABSPB5367L Assessee by Shri S.N. Agrawal, AR Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. DR Revenue by Date of Hearing 04.09.2024 Date of Pronouncement 24.09.2024 O R D E R Per Vijay Pal Rao, JM : This appeal by assessee is directed against the order dated 16.10.2020 of the Commissioner of Inco…

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

…axmann.com 98 (ITAT Pune) 8. Abhishek Gupta Vs. ITO (2023) 147 taxmann.com 21 (ITAT Indore) 9. Suman Poddar Vs. ITO (2019) 112 taxmann.com 330 (SC) 10. DCIT Vs. Pawan Kumar Malhotra (2010) 2 ITR (T) 250 (Delhi ITAT): 11. CIT Vs. Smt. SanghamitraBharali (2014) 361 ITR 481 (Gauhati (Cal.) 12. Success Tours & Travels Pvt. Ltd. [2017] 80 Taxmann.com 262 (Cal.) 13. Ratnakar M. Pujari, Mumbai vs ITO, Ward 25(3)(3), I.T.A. No.995/Mum/2012 Date of Order 03.08.2016 7.16 As such, a detailed analysis of the facts brought out on record would reveal the fact that the explanation offered by the assessee and corresponding evide…

VENU GOPAL KARWA,KARIMNAGAR vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 174/HYD/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad31 Jul 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda, Vice- & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2015-16 Shri Venu Gopal Karwa Vs. Dy. C. I. T. Karimnagar Central Circle 1(2) Pan:Aavpk2698B Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri V Guna Sekhar Reddy, Ca Revenue By: Shri Jeevan Lal Lavidiya, Cit (Dr) Date Of Hearing: 25/07/2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 31/07/2023 Order Per R.K. Panda, Vice-This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 30.10.2018 Of The Learned Cit (A)-11, Hyderabad, Relating To A.Y.2015-16. 2. Facts Of The Case, In Brief, Are That The Assessee Is An Individual & Derives Income From Salary, Hose Property & Other Sources. He Filed His Return Of Income On 6.3.2016 Belatedly Declaring Taxable Income At Rs.47,71,060/-. The Return Was Selected For Complete Scrutiny Under Cass. Accordingly Statutory Notices U/S 143(2) & 142(1) Were Issued & Served On The Assessee To Which The Ar Of The Assessee Appeared From Time To Time & Furnished The Requisite Details. One Of The Cass Reasons Page 1 Of 14

For Appellant: Shri V Guna Sekhar Reddy, CAFor Respondent: Shri Jeevan Lal Lavidiya, CIT (DR)

Section 10(38)Section 143(2)

…sproved. Therefore, human probabilities have also to be applied to comprehend the transactions and to see the real intention behind entering into these transactions. In the similar circumstances, the Honorable Gauhati High Court of CIT Vs Sanghamitra Bharali (361 ITR 481) had held that the capital had held that the capital gains are sham transactions entered only to give colour of genuineness and therefore, held that the capital gain arising out of these transactions cannot be believed as genuine and upheld taxing the said amount as unaccounted income brought into the books in the guise of exempted capital gains.…

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 28, NEW DELHI vs. CHARVAK TRADING PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the revenue are disposed of in the manner as indicated above

ITA 3271/DEL/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Jun 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & M.Balaganesh

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh Gupta AdvFor Respondent: Shri T James Singson, CIT(DR)

Section 132Section 143(1)

…n’ble jurisdictional High Court of Delhi in the case of Kabul Chawla (supra) and various judgments/orders of Hon’ble High Court and coordinate benches of the Tribunal including judgment of Hon’ble Gauhati High Court in the case of CIT vs. Sangahmitra Bharali, 361 ITR 481 (Gau.) it has been held that the assessee by way of application under Rule 27 of ITAT Rules 1963 can raise legal grounds which have not been considered and adjudicated by the ld. CIT(A). Accordingly, application of assessee in both the appeals are allowed and above noted grounds are admitted for adjudication. 5. The ld. counsel submitted that the…

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 28, NEW DELHI vs. CHARVAK TRADING PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the revenue are disposed of in the manner as indicated above

ITA 3270/DEL/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Jun 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & M.Balaganesh

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh Gupta AdvFor Respondent: Shri T James Singson, CIT(DR)

Section 132Section 143(1)

ITO, WARD-2(3), DEHRADUN vs. SANJAY GHAI, DEHRADUN

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1926/DEL/2018[2000-01]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Apr 2023AY 2000-01

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh Gupta, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Kajal Singh, Sr. DR

Section 271Section 271(1)(c)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH ‘G’ : NEW DELHI) SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER and SHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.1925/Del./2018 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 1997-98) ITA No.1926/Del./2018 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2000-01) ITO, Ward 2 (3), vs. Sanjay Ghai, Dehradun. Guru Ram Rai Market, Dharam Bazar, Rajpur Road, Dehradun (Uttarakhand). (PAN : ABIPG9612P) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Advocate Shri Somil Agarwal, Advocate REVENUE BY : Ms. Kajal Singh, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 18.04.2023 Date of Order : 26.04.2023 ORDER PER SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT…

ITO, WARD-2(3), DEHRADUN vs. SANJAY GHAI, DEHRADUN

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1925/DEL/2018[1997-98]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Apr 2023AY 1997-98

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh Gupta, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Kajal Singh, Sr. DR

Section 271Section 271(1)(c)

I.T.O. - 23(1)(5), MUMBAI vs. GRACE DEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATES , MUMBAI

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

ITA 712/MUM/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Mar 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Baskaran Br & Shir Pavan Kumar Gadaleito – 23(1)(5) Vs. M/S Grace Development Room.No.113,1St Floor Associates Matru Mandir, 101, B-Wing, Landmark Tardeo Road, Building, 1St Floor, 150 Mumbai – 400 007 Pali Road, Nr. Hdfc Bank, Bandra (W), Mumbai – 400050. Pan/Gir No. : Aahfg5648M Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Ms.Neeraja Sarma.Dr Respondent By : Mr.Devendra Jain.Ar Date Of Hearing 09.02.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 16.03.2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Pavan Kumar Gadale Jm: The Revenue Has Filed The Appeal Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) -32, Mumbai Passed U/S 250 Of The Act. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

For Appellant: Ms.Neeraja Sarma.DRFor Respondent: Mr.Devendra Jain.AR

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 148Section 250Section 68

…e assessee and the creditor, and it is not the burden of the assessee to find out the source of creditworthy capacity in order to prove the genuineness of the transaction. As held by the Hon. Gauhati High Court in the case of CIT v. Sanghamitra Bharali (2014) 361 ITR 481 (Gau) at p. 482. The aforesaid points were also affirmed in the past by the apex court in the caseof CIT v. Orissa Corporation P. Ltd. Reported in (1986) 159 ITR 78 (SC) wherein it is held as under: Held, that in this case the respondent had given the names address of the alleged creditors. It was in the knowledge of the Revenue that the said cr…

DCIT, CC - 7(3), MUMBAI vs. SHRI KHIMJI KARAMSHI PATEL, MUMBAI

Accordingly, the ground nos. 1 to 3 of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 3039/MUM/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Feb 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm

For Appellant: Shri. Rushabh Mehta, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Madhumalti Ghosh, CIT DR

Section 131Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 57Section 68

…nd the creditor, and it is not the burden of the assessee to find out the source of creditworthiness of the lender to prove the genuineness of the transaction. This issue is dealt by the Gauhati High Court in the case of CIT v. Smt. Sanghamitra Bharali (2014) 361 ITR 481 (Gau). The aforesaid points were also affirmed in the past by the Apex Court in the case of CIT v. Orissa Corporation P. Ltd reported in (1986) 159 ITR 78 (SC). In the case of CIT v. Varinder Rawley (2014) 366 ITR 232 (P & H) the court held that “where the assessee shows that the entries regarding credit in a third party’s account were in fact re…

DCIT 7(3), MUMBAI vs. SHRI. KHIMJI KARAMSHI PATEL, MUMBAI

Accordingly, the ground nos. 1 to 3 of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 4038/MUM/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Feb 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm

For Appellant: Shri. Rushabh Mehta, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Madhumalti Ghosh, CIT DR

Section 131Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 57Section 68

…nd the creditor, and it is not the burden of the assessee to find out the source of creditworthiness of the lender to prove the genuineness of the transaction. This issue is dealt by the Gauhati High Court in the case of CIT v. Smt. Sanghamitra Bharali (2014) 361 ITR 481 (Gau). The aforesaid points were also affirmed in the past by the Apex Court in the case of CIT v. Orissa Corporation P. Ltd reported in (1986) 159 ITR 78 (SC). In the case of CIT v. Varinder Rawley (2014) 366 ITR 232 (P & H) the court held that “where the assessee shows that the entries regarding credit in a third party’s account were in fact re…

DCIT, CC - 7(3), MUMBAI vs. SHRI KHIMJI KARAMSHI PATEL, MUMBAI

Accordingly, the ground nos. 1 to 3 of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 3117/MUM/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Feb 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm

For Appellant: Shri. Rushabh Mehta, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Madhumalti Ghosh, CIT DR

Section 131Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 57Section 68

…nd the creditor, and it is not the burden of the assessee to find out the source of creditworthiness of the lender to prove the genuineness of the transaction. This issue is dealt by the Gauhati High Court in the case of CIT v. Smt. Sanghamitra Bharali (2014) 361 ITR 481 (Gau). The aforesaid points were also affirmed in the past by the Apex Court in the case of CIT v. Orissa Corporation P. Ltd reported in (1986) 159 ITR 78 (SC). In the case of CIT v. Varinder Rawley (2014) 366 ITR 232 (P & H) the court held that “where the assessee shows that the entries regarding credit in a third party’s account were in fact re…

ITO 25 (3)(3), MUMBAI vs. RAHUL KANTILAL SHAH, MUMBAI

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

ITA 6806/MUM/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Dec 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri M Balaganesh & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaleito – 25(3)(3) Vs. Rahul Kantilal Shah Room No. 606, 6Th Floor 701, Saroj Bldg, C-10, Pratyaksh Kar Sardar Vallabhbhai Bhavan, Bkc Complex Patel Road, Opp Pawan Bandra (E), Mumbia – Hans, Vile Parle (W) 400 051. Mumbai – 400 056. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaips0543C Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Ms. Samruddhi Hande.Dr Respondent By : Mr. Anuj Kisnadwala.Ar Date Of Hearing 23.09.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 19.12.2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Pavan Kumar Gadale Jm: The Revenue Has Filed The Appeal Against The Order Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Cit(A)) - 37, Mumbai Passed U/S 143(3) & 250 U/Sec Of The Act. The Revenue Has Raised The Fallowing Grounds Of Appeal:

For Appellant: Ms. Samruddhi Hande.DRFor Respondent: Mr. Anuj Kisnadwala.AR

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 57Section 68

…nd the creditor, and it is not the burden of the assessee to find out the source of creditworthiness of the lender to prove the genuineness of the transaction. This issue is dealt by the Gauhati High Court in the case of CIT v. Smt. Sanghamitra Bharali (2014) 361 ITR 481 (Gau). The aforesaid points were also affirmed in the past by the Appex Court in the case of CIT v. Orissa Corporation P. Ltd reported in (1986) 159 ITR 78 (SC). In the case of CIT v. Varinder Rawley (2014) 366 ITR 232 (P & H) the court held that "where the assessee shows Rahul Kantilal Shah, Mumbai. that the entries regarding credit in a third…

RUPESH VYAS,INDORE vs. THE ACIT3(1), INDORE, INDORE

In the result, this appeal of assessee is dismissed

ITA 909/IND/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore07 Dec 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 10(38)Section 143(3)Section 68Section 69C

…acts: i) The financials of the penny stock Lifeline Drugs and Pharma and movement of the price is abrupt, unrealistic and not based upon any realistic parameters. ii) In the similar circumstances, the honorable Gauhati High Court of CIT Vs Sanghamitra Bharali(361 ITR 481) had held that the capital gains are sham transactions entered only to give colour of genuineness and therefore, held that the capital gain arising out of these transactions cannot be believed as genuine and upheld taxing the said amount as unaccounted income brought into books in the guise of exempted capital gains. iii) That even assuming the p…

RUPESH VYAS,INDORE vs. THE ACIT3(1), INDORE, INDORE

In the result, this appeal of assessee is dismissed

ITA 50/IND/2020[150-16]Status: DisposedITAT Indore06 Dec 2022

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 10(38)Section 143(3)Section 68Section 69C

SMT. PARAMADEVI TEKRIWAL, ,BHAVNAGAR vs. THE ITO, WARD-1(5),, BHAVNAGAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1999/AHD/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad17 Oct 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Vice- & Ms. Madhumita Royassessment Year : 2013-14 Smt. Paramadevi Tekriwal, The Income-Tax Officer, D-143, Kaliyabid, Bhavnagar Vs Ward 1(5), Pan : Addpt 3030 F Bhavnagar अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : None Revenue By : Shri Rakesh Jha, Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 17/10/2022 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 17/10/2022 आदेश/O R D E R Per P.M. Jagtap, Vice-: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)-6, Ahmedabad (“Cit(A)” In Short) Dated 09.07.2018. 2. The Relevant Facts Of The Case Giving Rise To This Appeal Are That The Assessee Is An Individual Who Filed Her Return Of Income For The Year Under Consideration Originally On 16.03.2014. Although The Said Return Was Originally Accepted Under Section 143(1) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act” In Short), The Assessment Was Subsequently Reopened By The Assessing Officer On The Basis Of Information Received From Investigation Wing Of The Income-Tax Department That The Long Term Capital Gains Of Rs.1,13,53,982/- Arising From The Sale Of Equity Shares Of Kgn Enterprise Ltd. For A Consideration Of Rs.1,13,87,902/- Claimed As Exempt In The Return Of Income Was Bogus & It Was Actually An Accommodation Entry. The Assessing Officer Accordingly Issued A Notice Under Section 148 Of The Act To Smt. Paramadevi Tekriwal Vs. Ito Ay : 2013-14 2

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Rakesh Jha, Sr. DR

Section 143(1)Section 148Section 68

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद "यायपीठ आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण अहमदाबाद "यायपीठ अहमदाबाद "यायपीठ ‘बी’ अहमदाबाद। अहमदाबाद "यायपीठ अहमदाबाद। अहमदाबाद। अहमदाबाद। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, AHMEDABAD ] ] BEFORE SHRI P.M. JAGTAP, VICE-PRESIDENT AND MS. MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year : 2013-14 Smt. Paramadevi Tekriwal, The Income-tax Officer, D-143, Kaliyabid, Bhavnagar Vs Ward 1(5), PAN : ADDPT 3030 F Bhavnagar अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee by : None Revenue by : Shri Rakesh Jha, Sr. DR सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date of Hearing : 17/10/20…

DCIT-CC-7(3), MUMBAI , MUMBAI vs. SHRI MAJNI KARAMSHI PATEL, MUMBAI

In the result, the cross objections of the assessee and the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 6128/MUM/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Aug 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri Gagan Goyal, Accountat Member Dcit, Cc-7(3) Vs. Shri Manji Karamshi Room No. 655, Patel Aayakar Bhavan, Office No. 1, Patel M.K.Road, Bhavan-29, Vijaywadi, Mumbai.-400020. Dr. Nagindas N Shah Lane Chira Bazar, Mumbai – 400002. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aabpp0130D Appellant .. Respondent Co No. 45/Mum/2021 (A.Y: 2014-15) Shri Manji Karamshi Vs. Dcit, Cc-7(3) Patel Room No. 655, Aayakar Office No. 1, Patel Bhavan, Bhuvan-29, Vijaywadi, M.K .Road, Dr. Nagindas N Shah Mumbai-400002. Lane Chira Bazar, Mumbai – 400002. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aabpp0130D Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Shri.Rushab Mehta.ARFor Respondent: Shri .T .Shankar.DR

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 68

…nd the creditor, and it is not the burden of the assessee to find out the source of creditworthiness of the lender to prove the genuineness of the transaction. This issue is dealt by the Gauhati High Court in the case of CIT v. Smt. Sanghamitra Bharali (2014) 361 ITR 481 (Gau). The aforesaid points were also affirmed in the past by the Apex Court in the case of CIT v. Orissa Corporation P. Ltd reported in (1986) 159 IT 78 (SC). In the case of CIT v. Varinder Rawley (2014) 366 ITR 232 (P & H) the court held that "where the assessee shows that the entries regarding credit in a third party's account were in fact rec…

ACIT, CIRCLE- 2(1), CUTTACK vs. SHRI SAURAV AGARWAL, CUTTACK

In the result, appeals of the revenue and cross objections of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 32/CTK/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack27 May 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Before S/Shri George Mathan, Judicial & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpia

…in all the cases is liable to be reversed. Ld SR DR vehemently supported the order of the Assessing Officer. P a g e 6 | 12 5. In the revenue’s ground in Ground No.5, the revenue has placed the 12 decisions being as follows: i) CIT vs Sanghamitra Bharali, 361 ITR 481 (Gau) ii) Sanjay Bhimlchand Jain vs Pr. CIT, 89 TAXMANN.COM 196 (Bom) iii) Udit Kalra vs ITO, (ita No.220/2019) iv) Purviben Snehalbhai Panchhigar vs ACIT (2018) 409 ITR 1254 (Guj) v) Ratnakar M Pujari vs ITO (ita No.995/Mum/2012) order dated 9.5.2016 vi) Pooja Ajmani vs ITO (ITA No.57154/Del/2018) dt.25.4.2019 vii) Sanat Kumar vs ACIT (ITA No.…

Showing 1–20 of 60 · Page 1 of 3