How many judgments cite CIT v. Taj Borewells?

52 judgments on BharatTax cite CIT v. Taj Borewells (291 ITR 232), spanning 2016 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does CIT v. Taj Borewells come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 68, Section 115BBE, Section 143(2), Section 144, Section 69, Section 69C.

CIT v. Taj Borewells

291 ITR 232High Court2007#2212 most cited

What is CIT v. Taj Borewells authority for?

The assessee has a duty to maintain and produce comprehensive books of account, including cash book, bank book, ledger accounts, and supporting bills/vouchers. A mere Balance Sheet and Profit & Loss Account may not be considered sufficient "books of account" to substantiate claims or discharge the onus under Section 68 regarding cash credits.

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Taj Borewells · 291 ITR 232 · Section 68 · books of account · duty to produce books · cash credits · Balance Sheet sufficiency · Profit & Loss Account · ledger accounts · vouchers · onus on assessee · evidence production

Sections most often in play

Section 68 Section 115BBE Section 143(2)Section 144 Section 69 Section 69C Section 131 Section 132

Issues it is cited on

voluntary admission section 127(2)(a)section 2(12a)section 106 section 158b(b)section 158bb(1)section 66 section 158bb section 127(2)preponderance of probability joint development agreement statement under section 132(4)

Judgments citing CIT v. Taj Borewells

Rajendra Ship Breakers Pvt. Ltd., Bhavnagar vs. The DCIT, Circle-1, Bhavnagar

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2177/AHD/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad04 Mar 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 2177/Ahd/2018 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2014-2015 Rajendra Ship Breakers Pvt. Ltd., D.C.I.T., D-79, Kalvibid, Vs. Circle-1, Nr. Ram Mantra Mandir, Bhavnagar. Bhavnagar-364002. Pan: Aabcr0105P

For Appellant: Shri B.R. Popat, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Vidhyut Trivedi, Sr.D.R

…e Act are thus required to be interpreted by considering this aspect as well. 11.4 On legal side, reliance in this regard is placed on the ratio of the judgment delivered by Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case of CIT vs. Taj Borewells, as reported at (2007) 291 ITR 232, wherein the aforementioned view has been taken. Relevant portion of this judgment is reproduced herein below for the sake of convenience: "12. So, books of account is defined as any book which forms an integral part of a system of book keeping employed in any particular business and consequently includes both the ledger and the books of original…

Champ Info Software, Noida vs. Prcit, Noida

The appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 2799/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Jun 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year: 2013-14 Champ Info Software, Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax, E-24, Sector-55, A2, D Block, Sector 24, Noida. Noida (U.P.)-201301 Vs

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Ms Nidhi Srivastava, C.I.T. DR

Section 143(3)Section 154Section 263

…612 (All) Zafa Ahmad and Co. v. CIT xii) 268 ITR 381 (Pat) CIT v. Md. Perwez Ahmad and Others xiii) 282 CTR 200 (Pat) CIT v. Anurag Rice Mills xiv) 268 ITR 381(Pat) CIT v. Md. Parwez Ahmad xv) 400 ITR 120 (Jhar.) Prayag Tendu Leaves Processing Co. v. CIT xvi) 291 ITR 232 (Mad.) CIT v. Taj Borewells xvii) ITA No. 2912/D/2014 dated 20.12.2017 Shri Gems v. ITO xviii) ITA No. 3734/D/2018 dated 29.3.2019 AMS Roadlines v. DCIT 3.1 It was also submitted by the Ld. AR that the issue is squarely covered by the order of the Hon’ble High Court of Jharkhand in case of Prayag Tendu Leaves Processing Co. vs. CIT reported in…

Pradeep Jain, Gurgaon vs. ITO, Ward-3(3), Gurgaon

In the result, appeal of Assessee allowed

ITA 8001/DEL/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Jun 2019AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini

For Appellant: Shri Somil AgarwalFor Respondent: Shri S.L. Anuragi, Sr.DR

Section 44ASection 68

…copies of the same are filed in the paper book at Page Nos. 9-11 of the PB. He has submitted that cash sales cannot be added under section 68 of the I.T. Act. He has relied upon decision of Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of CIT vs. Taj Borewells [2007] 291 ITR 232 (Mad.) in which it was held as under : “Held, that the following striking features were present : (a) since there were no books of account, there could be no credits in such books ; (b) it was the first year of assessment of the assessee; (c) the explanation offered 6 ITA.No.8001/Del./2018 Mr. Pradeep Jain, Gurgaon. by the assessee-firm was not…

Sh. Surinder Kumar Sanpal, New Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

In the result Ground no 3 of the appeal is partly allowed

ITA 3362/DEL/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 May 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri K.N.Charysurinder Kumar Sanpal, Vs. Ito, A-250, New Subzi Mandi, Ward-19(4), Azadpur, New Delhi New Delhi Pan: Abbps5068C (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Akash Garg, CAFor Respondent: Shri N. K. Bansal, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)

…INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “G”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI K.N.CHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER Surinder Kumar Sanpal, Vs. ITO, A-250, New Subzi Mandi, Ward-19(4), Azadpur, New Delhi New Delhi PAN: ABBPS5068C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Akash Garg, CA Shri Abhiroop Aggarwal, CA Revenue by: Shri N. K. Bansal, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 28/02/2019 Date of pronouncement 15/05/2019 O R D E R PER PRASHANT MAHARISHI, A. M. 1. This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld CIT (A)-XXII, New Delhi dated 28.02.2014 for the Assessment Year 20…

M/S. Alliance Engineers and Construction, Faridabad vs. ACIT, Faridabad

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3106/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Mar 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: : Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri L.P. Sahuassessment Year: 2010-11

Section 271Section 32(2)Section 69

…be made in the hands of the assessee firm and the same may be considered in the hands of the partners. For this proposition, the ld. AR has relied on following case laws : (i). CIT vs. Rameshwar Dass Uresh Pal Cheeka, 208 ITR 459 (P & H) (ii). Taj Borewells, 291 ITR 232 (Mad.) (iii). CIT vs. Jaiswal Grain Stores, 272 ITR 136 (All) (iv). CIT vs. M/s. Phool Singh Yadav & Co. Gurgaon (P&H). 8. We, however, notice that all the documentary evidence filed before us, as noted above, were filed before the ld. authorities below for consideration, is not clear from the orders of the authorities below. The assessee has, h…

M/S Alliance Engineers and Construction, Faridabad vs. Addl. CIT, Faridabad

In the result, the first issue raised by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes and the second issue is allowed

ITA 6180/DEL/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Feb 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kambleassessment Year : 2011-12 Alliance Engineers & Vs. Addl.Cit, Construction, Range-1, 1645, Sector-29, Faridabad. Faridabad. Pan: Aakfa0810A (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Kapil Goel, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Surender Pal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 07.02.2019 Date Of Pronouncement: 15.02.2019 Order Per R.K. Panda, Am: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 13Th September, 2015 Of The Cit(A)-Faridabad, Relating To Assessment Year 2011-12. 2. The First Issue Raised By The Assessee In The Grounds Of Appeal Relates To The Order Of The Cit(A) In Sustaining The Addition Of Rs.25,04,347/- On Account Of Depreciation.

For Appellant: Shri Kapil Goel, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Surender Pal, Sr. DR

Section 32(2)

…s advanced certain sums to the firm, no addition in the hands of the firm can be made and investment can be examined in the hands of the partner u/s 69, etc.:- i) Punjab & Haryana High Court in 208 CTR 459, 224 ITR 180; ii) Madras High Court in Taj Browellers 291 ITR 232; iii) Hon'ble Supreme Court in Lovely Exports; and iv) Allahabad High Court in 141 ITR 706. 14. He accordingly submitted that addition, if any, can be made in the hands of the partner and not in the hands of the partnership firm. However, since the partner has sufficient means to extent the cash loan, therefore, no addition could have been made a…

Harsh Saluja, Mathura vs. ITO 1(3)(2), Mathura

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 122/AGR/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Agra08 Jun 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain

Section 68Section 69Section 69A

…deposits as unexplained. The argument is that the bank passbook is not a book of account of the assessee and, therefore, no addition u/s 68 of the Act can be made. Reliance has been placed on ‘Bhaichand N. Gandhi’, 11 Taxman 59 (Bom), ‘CIT vs. Taj Borewells’, 291 ITR 232 (Mad), both followed by this Bench in order dated 25.09.2007 in ITA Nos. 249 and 250/Agra/2007, for A.Y. 2003-04 (copy filed), in Narendra Kishore Goswami’. 5. On the other hand, the ld. DR has placed strong reliance on the impugned order. It has been contended that as correctly observed by the ld. CIT(A), the assessee has not been able to show a…

Harsh Saluja, Mathura vs. ITO 3(2), Mathura

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 165/AGR/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Agra01 Dec 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain

Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 251(2)Section 44ASection 68

…argument is that the bank passbook is not a book of I.T.A No. 165/Agra/2016 7 account of the assessee and, therefore, no addition u/s 68 of the Act can be made. Reliance has been placed on ‘Bhaichand N. Gandhi’, 11 Taxman 59 (Bom), ‘CIT vs. Taj Borewells’, 291 ITR 232 (Mad), both followed by this Bench in order dated 25.09.2007 in ITA Nos. 249 and 250/Agra/2007, for A.Y. 2003-04 (copy filed), in Narendra Kishore Goswami’. 5. On the other hand, the ld. DR has placed strong reliance on the impugned order. It has been contended that as correctly observed by the ld. CIT(A), the assessee has not been able to show…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. Shri Vikrant Puri, New Delhi

In the result, both the Revenue’s Appeals stand dismissed

ITA 3376/DEL/2011[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Mar 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri O.P. Kant

For Appellant: Sh. V.K. Agarwal, ARFor Respondent: Sh. Amit Mohan Govil, CIT(DR)

Section 127(2)Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153A

…cheque of Rs. 2,50,000/--, Rs. 50,000/-- was credited by clearing while Rs. 2,00,000/- was deposited in cash. However, the fact remains that the funds were available with the creditor. I have also considered the case laws like CIT vs. Taj Borewells, (2007) 291 ITR 232 (Mad), CIT vs. Diamond Products Ltd., (2009) 21 DTR (Del) 9, Jaikishan Dadlani vs. ITO, (2005) 4 SOT 138 (Mum) and Tolaram Daga vs. CIT, (1966) 59 ITR 632 (Assam) wherein it has been held that source of source cannot be examined by the AO. If the AO has any doubt about the source of cash deposit (Rs. 2,00,000/--) in the account of the creditor,…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. Shri Vikrant Puri, New Delhi

In the result, both the Revenue’s Appeals stand dismissed

ITA 3375/DEL/2011[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Mar 2016AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri O.P. Kant

For Appellant: Sh. V.K. Agarwal, ARFor Respondent: Sh. Amit Mohan Govil, CIT(DR)

Section 127(2)Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153A

ACIT, New Delhi vs. Shri Vikrant Puri, New Delhi

In the result, the Revenue’s Appeal stands dismissed

ITA 3377/DEL/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Mar 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri O.P. Kanta.Y. 2007-08 Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax Vs. Shri Vikrant Puri, Central Circle-13, New Delhi A-1/36, Panchsheel Enclave, New Delhi (Pan:Afypp9110K) (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. V.K. Agarwal, ARFor Respondent: Sh. Amit Mohan Govil, CIT(DR)

Section 127(2)Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…9 "AO is not permitted to examine the source of the source once the assessee is able to establish that the transaction with his creditor is genuine and the identity and creditworthiness of the creditor have been established. ii) CIT vs. Taj Borewells, (2007) 291 ITR 232 (Mad) "Income-Cash credit-Genuineness-Assessee firm did not maintain any books of account-It has shown the capital contributions of the partners in the P&L alc and balance sheet-P&L alc and balance sheet are not books of account as contemplated under the provisions of the Act- Further, explanation offered by the assessee firm has not been rejecte…

ITO, New Delhi vs. M/S. Anand Jewellers, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 4583/DEL/2011[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Feb 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: : Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: Sh. K.K. Jaiswal, DRFor Respondent: None

Section 133(6)

…tworthiness: The payers had sufficient balance in their accounts to enable them to advance the money. 8.3. The Ld. Counsel has also placed reliance on the following case laws which are found to be well in support of his case: • In CIT vs. Taj Borewells (2007) 291 ITR 232 (Mad), it was held: "The assessee firm had explained the source of the capital and hence the same cannot be assessed as undisclosed income in the hands of the firm. If the AO doubted the genuineness of the source of the partners, he should have considered the same in the hands of the partners only and not in the hands of the firm." • In CIT vs. M…