Commissioner Of Income-Tax v. P. Mohanakala

286 ITR 548High Court#24230 most cited
3

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,314 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2024.

Sections most often in play

Section 144Section 147Section 44ADSection 68Section 69

Judgments citing Commissioner Of Income-Tax v. P. Mohanakala

ITO, Ward-1, Narnaul vs. Ashok Kumar Gupta, Narnaul

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

ITA 944/DEL/2020[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 May 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Dr.B.R.R.Kumar

Section 144Section 44ASection 69

…se the onus to establish the source of money deposited (Rs 10 lacs) has not been discharged by the assessee. On this issue, reliance is also placed on the following case laws: Commissioner Of Income-Tax. vs P. Mohanakala. 291 ITR 278(SC); Sethi Cotton Traders 286 ITR 548(P&H) HELD- "A perusal of the concurrent findings recorded by all the authorities below reveals that it is a case where the assessee was unable to prove the genuineness of the credit standing in the name of Sh. Surinder Kumar. The assessee was further unable to pro e not only his capacity but also identifiable source to advance the loan of R. 50,0…

ITO, Ward-1, Narnaul vs. Ashok Kumar Gupta, Narnaul

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

ITA 943/DEL/2020[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 May 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Dr.B.R.R.Kumar

Section 144Section 44ASection 69

…se the onus to establish the source of money deposited (Rs 10 lacs) has not been discharged by the assessee. On this issue, reliance is also placed on the following case laws: Commissioner Of Income-Tax. vs P. Mohanakala. 291 ITR 278(SC); Sethi Cotton Traders 286 ITR 548(P&H) HELD- "A perusal of the concurrent findings recorded by all the authorities below reveals that it is a case where the assessee was unable to prove the genuineness of the credit standing in the name of Sh. Surinder Kumar. The assessee was further unable to pro e not only his capacity but also identifiable source to advance the loan of R. 50,0…

M/S. Adhar Technologies Pvt. Ltd., Bhubaneswar vs. DCIT, Circle-1(1), Bhubaneswar

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 228/CTK/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack08 Mar 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.S Sainiassessment Year :2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Manoj Kumar Patra, ARFor Respondent: Shri D.K.Pradhan, DR
Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CUTTACK ‘SMC’ BENCH, CUTTACK BEFORE SHRI N.S SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year :2011-12 M/s. Adhar Technologies (P) Vs. DCIT, Circle 1(1), Ltd., Plot No.6, 2nd floor, Bhubaneswar. Kharvel Nagar, Unit-III, Bhubaneswar. PAN/GIR No. AAGCA 9820 K (Appellant) .. ( Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Manoj Kumar Patra, AR Revenue by : Shri D.K.Pradhan, DR Date of Hearing : 08 /03/ 2017 Date of Pronouncement : 08/03/ 2017 O R D E R This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of CIT(A)-3, Bhubaneswar. Dated 24.2.2016, for the assessment year 2011-12. 2. The sole…

Commissioner Of Income-Tax v. P. Mohanakala (286 ITR 548) — Cited in 3 Judgments | BharatTax