CIT v. Sh. Jawahar Lal Oswal

382 ITR 453High Court2016#12764 most cited
8

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2018 to 2025.

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 68Section 131Section 142(1)Section 250Section 115BBESection 132(4)Section 133(6)

Issues it is cited on

addition u/s 68section 131unexplained cash creditgenuineness of the transactionsection 68section 69apersonsection 143(2)transfersection 143(3)total incomedocument

Judgments citing CIT v. Sh. Jawahar Lal Oswal

ABHAY CHORDIA,JAIPUR vs. THE ACIT, JAIPUR

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1121/JPR/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur12 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Dheeraj Borad, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Ojha, Ld. CIT a
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 68

…an inference against an assesseeon the basis of tangible material and not on mere suspicion, conjectures or perceptions. In support of it the humble appellant craves leave to refer to and rely upon the judgment of CIT vs. Jawaharlal Oswal & others reported in 382 ITR 453- Punjab and Haryana High Court. Some other judgments on this issue forms part of list of judicial pronouncements annexed to the written submissions. 4.9. If the contention of the lower authorities is accepted then the same income would be taxed twice, once when being offered for tax by the assessee as part of cash sales and subsequently as separa…

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-9(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. S G S FASHION PRIVATE LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 729/KOL/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Oct 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shripradip Kumar Choubey, Jm Income Tax Officer, Ward 9(1), Sgs Fashion Private Limited 5Th Floor, Room No.5/12/2B, 49/1/1, Cotton Street, Barabazar, Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, H.O. Kolkata-700007, Vs. Chowringhee Square, West Bengal Kolkata-700069, West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aancs2236G Assessee By : Shri Manish Tiwari, Ar Revenue By : Shri Manas Mondal, Dr Date Of Hearing: 18.09.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 15.10.2025

For Appellant: Shri Manish Tiwari, ARFor Respondent: Shri Manas Mondal, DR
Section 131Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 68

…no compliance to the summons issued u/s 131 of the Act. The learned CIT (A) relied on the decision of the CIT Vs Orissa Corporation (P) ltd. (1986) 159 ITR 78 (SC), and the decision of the Punjab and Haryana High Courtin case of Jawahar Lal Oswal reported at 382 ITR 453, (Punjab and Haryana)& CIT VS. Navodaya Castles (P.) Ltd. (2014) 367 ITR 306 (Delhi). 06. After hearing the rival contentions and perusing the materials available on record, we find that in this case the assessee company is engaged in trading in services. We note that during the year the assessee issued 1,93,500 equity shares of face value of ₹1…

INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 52(1) NEW DELHI, NEW DELHI vs. M/S NOVEL INFRATECH, NEW DELHI

In the result appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 188/DEL/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Aug 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Sudhir Kumarito, Vs. M/S. Novel Infratech, Ward-52(1), Flat No. 915, Indra Prakash New Delhi Building, 21, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aajfn0187A

For Appellant: Shri Ved Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Kumar Arora, Sr. DR
Section 131(1)(d)Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 68

…ere has to be some positive evidence to establish the case of applicability of section 68. 21. Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of N.C. Cables [2017] 391 ITR 11 (Delhi) and Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of Shri Jawaharlal [2016] 382 ITR 453, has held that suspicion, no matter how strong, cannot take place of evidence. It was held that in order to prove the suspicion, the Assessing Officer should have brought on record, the conclusive and clinching evidence to prove that any unaccounted cash of assessee through multiple layers of unsecured loan from any lender was infused and that th…

JAI GOPAL GOYAL,MOHALI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 6(1), MOHALI

In the result, Assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 1123/CHANDI/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh11 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 1123/Chd/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18 Jai Gopal Goyal, The Ito, बनाम C-146, Industrial Area, Ward 6(1), Phase Vii, Chandigarh Vs. Mohali, Punjab "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Acdpg0160G अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent ( Physical Hearing ) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Sh. Parikshit Aggarwal, Ca & Ms. Shruti Khandelwal, Advocate राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue By : Shri Vivek Vardhan, Addl. Cit, Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 04.06.2025 उदघोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 11.08.2025 आदेश/Order Per Krinwant Sahay, Am: Appeal In This Case Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 04.10.2024 Of Ld. Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi.

For Appellant: Sh. Parikshit Aggarwal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardhan, Addl. CIT, Sr.DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 68

…this issue which are as under: -  CIT vs Burma Electro Corporation [P&H JC] 252 ITR 344 dt. 9.8.2000  Aravali Trading Co. vs ITO (Raj HC) 8 DTR 199 dt. 25.1.2007]  PCIT vs Neotech Education foundation (2023) 458 ITR 0150 (Guj.)  CIT vs Jawaharlal Oswal (382 ITR 453) (P&H HC)  DCIT vs Smt.Veena Awasthi (ITA 215/LKW/2016) [Luck. ITAT] dated 30.11.2018  M/s Choice Buildestate Pvt. Ltd vs ITO, Jaipur (ITA No. 431 & 432/JP/2016) dated 28.3.2018 1123-Chd-2024 Jai Gopal Goyal, Mohali 11  In orient Trading Co. Ltd v CIT 949 ITR 723) (Bom.HC) [1963] 8. After going through the gist of all these case laws, it is…

ITO, WARD-5(1),, KOLKATA vs. M/S. SHIVRASHI INFRAPROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED, KOLKATA

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

ITA 2328/KOL/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Jun 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 68

…A) who allowed the appeal of the assessee relying upon the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Orissa Corpn, (P.) Ltd. [1986] 159 ITR 78 (SC), the decision of Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of Jawahar Lal Oswal reported in 382 ITR 453 and the decision of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT v. Navodaya Castles (P.) Ltd. [2014] 50 taxmann.com 110/226 Taxman 190 (Mag.)/367 ITR 306 and has held in para 7.4 that “The AO has not discussed the contents of the assessee's submissions in the assessment order and has decided the case solely on the basis of high premium. No enquir…

MANINDER SINGH,KALA AMB ROAD, NARAINGARH vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-5, INCOME TAX OFFICER, AMBALA CANTT

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3/CHANDI/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh31 Dec 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Or At The Time Of Hearing Of Case.

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Goel, C.AFor Respondent: Dr. Ranjeet Kaur, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148

…Further, the Ld. AR has relied on the decision of Coordinate Benches in case of Baljit Kaur w/o Gurdev Singh Vs. ITO (in ITA No. 816/Chd/2019 dt. 09/04/2021) and in case of the Hon’ble Punjab and Haryana High Court in case of CIT Vs. Jawahar Lal Oswal (2016) 382 ITR 453 (P&H) and in case of CIT, Patiala II Vs. Sham Lal 127 ITR 816 (P&H). 8. Per contra, the ld DR has taken us through the findings of the lower authorities and has vehemently argued the matter. 9. I have heard the rival contentions and purused the material available on record. A similar matter came up for consideration recently before the Chandigarh…

LAKSHMANAN INDIRANI,COIMBATORE vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1, COIMBATORE

The appeal stands partly allowed

ITA 34/CHNY/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai02 Nov 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri M.P. Senthil Kumar (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Marutha Pandiyan – Ld. CIT-DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 46ASection 69A

…ditional grounds of appeal under sec. 46A dated 14-01- 2019 in full and no specific reason given for the retention of jewellery of 1695.24 grams. The appellant relies decision of P & H High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Sh. Jawahar Lal Oswal reported in (2016) 382 ITR 453 (P & H) As is evident, the assessee is aggrieved by confirmation of addition of unexplained jewellery. 3 2. The Registry has noted delay of 3 days in the appeal, the condonation of which has been sought by the assessee. Considering the period of delay, we condone the same and admit the appeal for adjudication on merits. 2. The Ld. AR relied on…

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-4 vs. M/S HIMACHAL FIBRES LTD.,

ITA/263/2018HC Delhi28 Feb 2018

Bench: Him, The Ao Concluded That The Identity Of The Shareholders & The Genuineness Of The Transaction Had Not Been Established & Accordingly Brought To Tax The Said Amount. The Cit(A), Who Sought A Remand Report, Noted That The Ao Had Recorded In The Course Of His Order That The Assessee Was A

Section 68

…$~31 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + ITA 263/2018 PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-4 ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Sanjay Kumar with Mr. Rahul Chaudhary, Standing Counsels for Revenue. versus M/S HIMACHAL FIBRES LTD. ..... Respondent Through: None. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A. K. CHAWLA O R D E R % 28.02.2018 1. The Revenue appeals concurrent factual findings with respect to the lack of justification in the addition made to the assessee‟s income for A.Y. 2007-08 under Section 6…

CIT v. Sh. Jawahar Lal Oswal (382 ITR 453) — Cited in 8 Judgments | BharatTax