CIT v. Vinod Danchand Ghodawat

247 ITR 448High Court2001#7786 most cited

What is CIT v. Vinod Danchand Ghodawat authority for?

Additions made by the Department on the ground of undisclosed income are erroneous when the assessee has made disclosures in their wealth tax return which were accepted by the Department.

14

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,315 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2025.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Vinod Danchand Ghodawat · 247 ITR 448 · undisclosed income · wealth tax return · search · block assessment · Section 158B(b)

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 132Section 148Section 153ASection 153CSection 69CSection 112

Issues it is cited on

section 132(5)section 100section 153(c)(1)section 94abatement of assessmentanonymous donationsection 153(c)section 164third party informationonus of proofsection 158bcincome tax settlement commission

Judgments citing CIT v. Vinod Danchand Ghodawat

V Ramakrishnan, Chennai vs. DCIT Central Circle III(4), Chennai

In the result, the appeal for the A

ITA 744/CHNY/2005[2000-01]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Dec 2025AY 2000-01

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S. R. Raghunatha

For Appellant: Shri. N. Arjun Raj, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Bipin. C.N., C.I.T
Section 132Section 148Section 15Section 158BSection 17(1)(iv)

…in this factual scenario, the disputed dividend component could not be reckoned as ‘undisclosed income’ within the ambit of Section 158B(b) of the Act. 31. We find that the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT v. Vinod Danchand Ghodawat, reported in 247 ITR 448 under identical circumstances also held when the assessee had made disclosure in their wealth tax return, which was accepted by the Department, additions made by the Department on the ground of undisclosed income was erroneous. The relevant extract of the said judgement is as follows: :-15-: IT(SS)A Nos. 153 & 162/Chny/2003 & ITA. Nos:744 & 219…

V Ramakrishnan, Chennai vs. DCIT Central Circle III(4), Chennai

In the result, the appeal for the A

ITA 2197/CHNY/2005[1999-2000]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Dec 2025AY 1999-2000

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S. R. Raghunatha

For Appellant: Shri. N. Arjun Raj, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Bipin. C.N., C.I.T
Section 132Section 148Section 15Section 158BSection 17(1)(iv)

…in this factual scenario, the disputed dividend component could not be reckoned as ‘undisclosed income’ within the ambit of Section 158B(b) of the Act. 31. We find that the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT v. Vinod Danchand Ghodawat, reported in 247 ITR 448 under identical circumstances also held when the assessee had made disclosure in their wealth tax return, which was accepted by the Department, additions made by the Department on the ground of undisclosed income was erroneous. The relevant extract of the said judgement is as follows: :-15-: IT(SS)A Nos. 153 & 162/Chny/2003 & ITA. Nos:744 & 219…

Anil Chaudhary, New Delhi vs. ACIT Central Circle-17, New Delhi

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 2938/DEL/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Aug 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Amisha Gupt, CIT DR
Section 127Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 153CSection 153DSection 69C

…0] [In favour of assessee] xii) 103 ITD 1 (Mum) (TM)(SB) Uttamchand P.Jaiin vs. ITO xiii) 52 SOT 62 (Chd) Rajdeep Builders vs. ACIT xiv) ITA No. 1502/D/2013 dated 27.6.2014 G. K. Consultants Ltd. vs. ITO 14.4 Reliance is placed on the following judgments: i) 247 ITR 448 (Bom) CIT vs. Vinod Danchand Ghodawat ii) 185 Taxman 18 (Chd) Jagdish Chander Bajaj vs. ACIT iii) I.T.A. Nos. 4520, 4521, 4522, 4523, 4524& 4525/Del/ 2010 Sh. Prem Arora vs ACIT iv) ITA No(s) 802 TO 806/Chd/2012, dated 27.11.2012 Naresh Kumar Verma vs. ACIT 8. The AO, in the present case made the impugned addition, on the foundation of bare husk…

Anil Chaudhary, New Delhi vs. ACIT Central Circle-17, New Delhi

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 2937/DEL/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Aug 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Amisha Gupt, CIT DR
Section 127Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 153CSection 153DSection 69C

…0] [In favour of assessee] xii) 103 ITD 1 (Mum) (TM)(SB) Uttamchand P.Jaiin vs. ITO xiii) 52 SOT 62 (Chd) Rajdeep Builders vs. ACIT xiv) ITA No. 1502/D/2013 dated 27.6.2014 G. K. Consultants Ltd. vs. ITO 14.4 Reliance is placed on the following judgments: i) 247 ITR 448 (Bom) CIT vs. Vinod Danchand Ghodawat ii) 185 Taxman 18 (Chd) Jagdish Chander Bajaj vs. ACIT iii) I.T.A. Nos. 4520, 4521, 4522, 4523, 4524& 4525/Del/ 2010 Sh. Prem Arora vs ACIT iv) ITA No(s) 802 TO 806/Chd/2012, dated 27.11.2012 Naresh Kumar Verma vs. ACIT 8. The AO, in the present case made the impugned addition, on the foundation of bare husk…

Anil Chaudhary, New Delhi vs. ACIT Central Circle-17, New Delhi

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 2936/DEL/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Aug 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Amisha Gupt, CIT DR
Section 127Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 153CSection 153DSection 69C

…0] [In favour of assessee] xii) 103 ITD 1 (Mum) (TM)(SB) Uttamchand P.Jaiin vs. ITO xiii) 52 SOT 62 (Chd) Rajdeep Builders vs. ACIT xiv) ITA No. 1502/D/2013 dated 27.6.2014 G. K. Consultants Ltd. vs. ITO 14.4 Reliance is placed on the following judgments: i) 247 ITR 448 (Bom) CIT vs. Vinod Danchand Ghodawat ii) 185 Taxman 18 (Chd) Jagdish Chander Bajaj vs. ACIT iii) I.T.A. Nos. 4520, 4521, 4522, 4523, 4524& 4525/Del/ 2010 Sh. Prem Arora vs ACIT iv) ITA No(s) 802 TO 806/Chd/2012, dated 27.11.2012 Naresh Kumar Verma vs. ACIT 8. The AO, in the present case made the impugned addition, on the foundation of bare husk…

Anil Chaudhary, New Delhi vs. ACIT Central Circle-17, New Delhi

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 2935/DEL/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Aug 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Amisha Gupt, CIT DR
Section 127Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 153CSection 153DSection 69C

…0] [In favour of assessee] xii) 103 ITD 1 (Mum) (TM)(SB) Uttamchand P.Jaiin vs. ITO xiii) 52 SOT 62 (Chd) Rajdeep Builders vs. ACIT xiv) ITA No. 1502/D/2013 dated 27.6.2014 G. K. Consultants Ltd. vs. ITO 14.4 Reliance is placed on the following judgments: i) 247 ITR 448 (Bom) CIT vs. Vinod Danchand Ghodawat ii) 185 Taxman 18 (Chd) Jagdish Chander Bajaj vs. ACIT iii) I.T.A. Nos. 4520, 4521, 4522, 4523, 4524& 4525/Del/ 2010 Sh. Prem Arora vs ACIT iv) ITA No(s) 802 TO 806/Chd/2012, dated 27.11.2012 Naresh Kumar Verma vs. ACIT 8. The AO, in the present case made the impugned addition, on the foundation of bare husk…

Shri Ashish Kumar Dey, Dharmanagar vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-Silchar, Silchar

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 122/GTY/2011[1/4/1989 to 8/12/1999]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati20 Sept 2022

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon’Ble & Shri Manish Borad, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 120/Gty/2011 Block Year: 01/04/1989 To 08/12/1999 Shri Subhash Chandra Dey Assistant Commissioner Of Office-Tilla Vs Income Tax, Circle-Silchar Dharmanagar -799250 Tripura [Pan: Acrpd1916F] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Nirmal Singh Dugar, ITPFor Respondent: Shri N.T. Sherpa, JCIT
Section 132Section 158B

…able to tax to the best of judgment on the basis of the material that is available with him.” 10. The Hon'ble Bombay High Court had also an occasion to examine the concept of block assessment in CIT v. Vinod Danchand Ghodawat (2000) 163 CTR (Bom) 432 : (2001) 247 ITR 448 (Bom), wherein it was found that an assessee had constructed a bungalow and incurred an expense of Rs. 4,16,000. Thereafter search was carried out and the AO referred the valuation of the bungalow to the Departmental Valuer who determined the value of the property at Rs. 6,66,000 and the AO added the difference to the income of the assessee as un…

Smt. Maya Rani Dey, Dharmanagar vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-Silchar, Silchar

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 121/GTY/2011[1/4/1989 to 8/12/1999]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati20 Sept 2022

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon’Ble & Shri Manish Borad, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 120/Gty/2011 Block Year: 01/04/1989 To 08/12/1999 Shri Subhash Chandra Dey Assistant Commissioner Of Office-Tilla Vs Income Tax, Circle-Silchar Dharmanagar -799250 Tripura [Pan: Acrpd1916F] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Nirmal Singh Dugar, ITPFor Respondent: Shri N.T. Sherpa, JCIT
Section 132Section 158B

…able to tax to the best of judgment on the basis of the material that is available with him.” 10. The Hon'ble Bombay High Court had also an occasion to examine the concept of block assessment in CIT v. Vinod Danchand Ghodawat (2000) 163 CTR (Bom) 432 : (2001) 247 ITR 448 (Bom), wherein it was found that an assessee had constructed a bungalow and incurred an expense of Rs. 4,16,000. Thereafter search was carried out and the AO referred the valuation of the bungalow to the Departmental Valuer who determined the value of the property at Rs. 6,66,000 and the AO added the difference to the income of the assessee as un…

Shri Subhash Chandra Dey, Dharmanagar vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- Silchar, Silchar

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 120/GTY/2011[1/4/1989 to 8/12/1999]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati20 Sept 2022

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon’Ble & Shri Manish Borad, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 120/Gty/2011 Block Year: 01/04/1989 To 08/12/1999 Shri Subhash Chandra Dey Assistant Commissioner Of Office-Tilla Vs Income Tax, Circle-Silchar Dharmanagar -799250 Tripura [Pan: Acrpd1916F] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Nirmal Singh Dugar, ITPFor Respondent: Shri N.T. Sherpa, JCIT
Section 132Section 158B

…able to tax to the best of judgment on the basis of the material that is available with him.” 10. The Hon'ble Bombay High Court had also an occasion to examine the concept of block assessment in CIT v. Vinod Danchand Ghodawat (2000) 163 CTR (Bom) 432 : (2001) 247 ITR 448 (Bom), wherein it was found that an assessee had constructed a bungalow and incurred an expense of Rs. 4,16,000. Thereafter search was carried out and the AO referred the valuation of the bungalow to the Departmental Valuer who determined the value of the property at Rs. 6,66,000 and the AO added the difference to the income of the assessee as un…

The ACIT Cen Cir-13, Mumbai vs. Shri Suresh V. Jain, Mumbai

Accordingly, ground raised by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 5091/MUM/2007[2005-2006]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Dec 2019AY 2005-2006

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am & Shri Ram Lal Negi, Jm आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 5091/Mum/2007 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2005-06)

For Appellant: Shri L. K. S. DehiyaFor Respondent: ShriRajiv Khandelwal
Section 132(1)Section 153A

…ssessment is to be based on the evidence found as a result of search or requisition of books of accounts or documents and such other material or information as available with the AP". d) Ravikdnt Jain, Delhi [250 ITR 141] e) Vinod DhanchandGhodawat, Bombay - [247 ITR 448] f) Rajendra Pd. Gupta, Rajasthan - [248 ITR 350] g) Pooja Bhatt- ITAT Mumbai [73 ITD 208] h) A. Sadasivan - ITAT Cal [255 ITR (A T) 1] In view of the above it is submitted that no additions can be made merely on the basis of the statements recorded u/s. 132(4) and the additions so made deserves to be deleted. 61 I.T.A. No. 5091 & 4198/Mum/2007…

B.R. Associates Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

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

ITA 4966/DEL/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Jan 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: : Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahu

Section 10Section 132Section 153ASection 2(22)Section 234ASection 68

…vidence during the course of search, therefore, no addition can be made on that score alone. Therefore, in our opinion, the impugned addition cannot survive, and the same has to be deleted.” [Emphasis supplied[ Reliance is placed on the following judgments: 247 ITR 448 (Bom) CIT vs. Vinod Danchand Ghodawat i) 185 Taxman 18 (Chd) Jagdish Chander Bajaj vs. ACIT ii) ITA Nos. 4964 to 4966/Del/2012 35 5.10 In view' of the aforesaid, the submission of the appellant is that, the additioncan be made only qua the incriminating material found as a result of search;which is none in the instant case. Reliance is placed…

B.R. Associates Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

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

ITA 4965/DEL/2012[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Jan 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: : Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahu

Section 10Section 132Section 153ASection 2(22)Section 234ASection 68

…vidence during the course of search, therefore, no addition can be made on that score alone. Therefore, in our opinion, the impugned addition cannot survive, and the same has to be deleted.” [Emphasis supplied[ Reliance is placed on the following judgments: 247 ITR 448 (Bom) CIT vs. Vinod Danchand Ghodawat i) 185 Taxman 18 (Chd) Jagdish Chander Bajaj vs. ACIT ii) ITA Nos. 4964 to 4966/Del/2012 35 5.10 In view' of the aforesaid, the submission of the appellant is that, the additioncan be made only qua the incriminating material found as a result of search;which is none in the instant case. Reliance is placed…

B.R. Associates Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

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

ITA 4964/DEL/2012[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Jan 2019AY 2005-06

Bench: : Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahu

Section 10Section 132Section 153ASection 2(22)Section 234ASection 68

…vidence during the course of search, therefore, no addition can be made on that score alone. Therefore, in our opinion, the impugned addition cannot survive, and the same has to be deleted.” [Emphasis supplied[ Reliance is placed on the following judgments: 247 ITR 448 (Bom) CIT vs. Vinod Danchand Ghodawat i) 185 Taxman 18 (Chd) Jagdish Chander Bajaj vs. ACIT ii) ITA Nos. 4964 to 4966/Del/2012 35 5.10 In view' of the aforesaid, the submission of the appellant is that, the additioncan be made only qua the incriminating material found as a result of search;which is none in the instant case. Reliance is placed…

Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Sangeeta Mishra

ITA/423/2004HC Delhi03 Mar 2017

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAJMI WAZIRI

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 158BSection 68

…only be done on the basis of evidence found as a result of search or requisition of books of account or documents and such other materials or information as are available with the AO. The Bombay High Court in the case of CIT v. Vinod Danchand Ghodawat (247 ITR 448 (Bom.) also held, similarly that where the assessee had made disclosure in their wealth tax return, which was accepted by the Department, additions made by the Department on the ground of undisclosed income was erroneous. 26. A larger, five member bench of the Supreme Court reiterated the distinctness of the procedure between normal assessm…

CIT v. Vinod Danchand Ghodawat (247 ITR 448) — Cited in 14 Judgments | BharatTax