Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Durai Murugan\nKathir Anand v. Additional Commissioner of Income-tax come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 115BBE, Section 69A, Section 153A, Section 68, Section 131, Section 143(3).

Durai Murugan\nKathir Anand v. Additional Commissioner of Income-tax

Q: How many judgments cite Durai Murugan\nKathir Anand v. Additional Commissioner of Income-tax?

11 judgments on BharatTax cite Durai Murugan\nKathir Anand v. Additional Commissioner of Income-tax (443 ITR 423), spanning 2024 to 2025.

443 ITR 423High Court2022#9796 most cited

What is Durai Murugan\nKathir Anand v. Additional Commissioner of Income-tax authority for?

The assessee bears the onus to link and prove the source of funds when unexplained cash is found, particularly when seized in circumstances suggesting it relates to election-related activities. Failure to discharge this onus can lead to the addition of such cash as undisclosed income.

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,005 Indian tax judgments — from 2024 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Durai Murugan Kathir Anand v. Additional Commissioner of Income-tax · Section 69A · Section 144A · Section 153A · unexplained cash · onus on assessee · election expenses · undisclosed income

Sections most often in play

Section 115BBE Section 69A Section 153A Section 68 Section 131 Section 143(3)Section 144 Section 132

Issues it is cited on

section 127(2)(a)section 2(12a)section 106 section 66 section 127(2)preponderance of probability retraction of statement section 114 statement under section 132(4)section 158bb section 144a income tax settlement commission

Judgments citing Durai Murugan\nKathir Anand v. Additional Commissioner of Income-tax

Peeyush Agarwal, Jaipur, Rajasthan vs. ITO, Ward 1(5), Jaipur, Rajasthan

In the result Ground and 1 and 2 raised by the assessee are allowed

ITA 488/JPR/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur19 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI GAGAN GOYAL (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Goyal, C.A. &For Respondent: Mrs. Alka Gautam, CIT

Section 115BSection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 250Section 68Section 69A

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”B” JAIPUR Mk0 ,l- lhrky{eh] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh xxu xks;y] ys[kk lnL;] ds le{k BEFORE: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JM & SHRI GAGAN GOYAL, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 488/JPR/2025 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year : 2017-18 cuke Peeyush Agarwal The ITO, Vs. 197, Johari Bazar, Ward-1(5), Jaipur Jaipur. LFkk;hys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AKZPA9803G vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksjls@Assesseeby : Shri Vijay Goyal, C.A. & Shri Gulshan Agarwal, C.A. jktLo dh vksjls@Revenue by : Mrs. Alka Gautam, CI…

Kailash Chand Maheshwari, Jaipur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Jaipur

ITA 1465/JPR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur20 May 2025AY 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri S. L. Poddar, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Ojha, CIT-DR

Section 127Section 132Section 133ASection 144Section 153ASection 57Section 68Section 69C

…ns has to be linked and proved. The onus in this regard is on the assesse which has not been discharged. (vi) Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case of Durai Murugan Kathir Anand v Additional Commissioner of Income-tax [2022] 136 taxmann.com 70 (Madras)/[2022] 443 ITR 423 (Madras)[25-02-2022] has observed as under: Extract from headnotes Section 69A, read with sections 144A and 153A, of the Income-tax Act, 1961 Unexplained moneys (Cash)-Assessment year 2019-20-Pursuant to cash seized at premises of employee of a trust where assessee was a trustee, a show cause notice was issued to assessee for addition of seized c…

Kailash Chand Maheshwari, Jaipur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Centralcircle-2, Jaipur

ITA 1464/JPR/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur20 May 2025AY 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri S. L. Poddar, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Ojha, CIT-DR

Section 127Section 132Section 133ASection 144Section 153ASection 57Section 68Section 69C

…s has to be linked and proved. The onus in this regard is on the assesse which has not been discharged. (vi) Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case of Durai Murugan Kathir Anand v. Additional Commissioner of Income-tax [2022] 136 taxmann.com 70 (Madras)/[2022] 443 ITR 423 (Madras)[25-02-2022] has observed as under: Extract from headnotes Section 69A, read with sections 144A and 153A, of the Income-tax Act, 1961 Unexplained moneys (Cash)-Assessment year 2019-20-Pursuant to cash seized at premises of employee of a trust where assessee was a trustee, a show cause notice was issued to assessee for addition of seized c…

Kailash Chand Maheshwari, Jaipur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Jaipur

ITA 1463/JPR/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur20 May 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri S. L. Poddar, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Ojha, CIT-DR

Section 127Section 132Section 133ASection 144Section 153ASection 57Section 68Section 69C

…s has to be linked and proved. The onus in this regard is on the assesse which has not been discharged. (vi) Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case of Durai Murugan Kathir Anand v Additional Commissioner of Income-tax [2022] 136 taxmann.com 70 (Madras)/[2022] 443 ITR 423 (Madras)[25-02-2022] has observed as under: Extract from headnotes Section 69A, read with sections 144A and 153A, of the Income-tax Act, 1961 Unexplained moneys (Cash)-Assessment year 2019-20-Pursuant to cash seized at premises of employee of a trust where assessee was a trustee, a show cause notice was issued to assessee for addition of seized…

Jaipal Singh, Jaipur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Jaipur

Appeal of the assessee are disposed off

ITA 120/JPR/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur11 Mar 2025AY 2018-19

For Appellant: Sh. S.R. Sharma, CA &For Respondent: Sh. Arvind Kumar, CIT-DR

Section 115BSection 153A

…nder oath there was no reference to these three individuals making the said payment. The legal principles enumerated in the judgements in the case of Durai Murugan Kathir Anand v. Additional Commissioner of Income-tax [2022] 136 taxmann.com 70 (Madras)/[2022] 443 ITR 423 (Madras)(25-02-2022] and in the case of Vivek N. Jajodia v. Income-tax Officer, 16(2)(2), Mumbai [2011] 10 ITR(T) 581 (Mumbai)/[2010] 123 ITD 136 (Mumbai)/[2010] 134 TTJ 806 (Mumbai)[23-01- 2009] are applicable to the present appeal. The onus is on the assesse to prove that the funds deposited / paid to the seller of property are from the source…

Jaipal Singh, Jaipur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Jaipur

Appeal of the assessee are disposed off

ITA 118/JPR/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur11 Mar 2025AY 2016-17

For Appellant: Sh. S.R. Sharma, CA &For Respondent: Sh. Arvind Kumar, CIT-DR

Section 115BSection 153A

Jaipal Singh, Jaipur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Jaipur

Appeal of the assessee are disposed off

ITA 116/JPR/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur11 Mar 2025AY 2014-15

For Appellant: Sh. S.R. Sharma, CA &For Respondent: Sh. Arvind Kumar, CIT-DR

Section 115BSection 153A

…nder oath there was no reference to these three individuals making the said payment. The legal principles enumerated in the judgements in the case of Durai Murugan Kathir Anand v. Additional Commissioner of Income-tax [2022] 136 taxmann.com 70 (Madras)/[2022] 443 ITR 423 (Madras](25-02-2022] and in the case of Vivek N. Jajodia v. Income-tax Officer, 16(2)(2), Mumbai [2011] 10 ITR(T) 581 (Mumbai)/[2010] 123 ITD 136 (Mumbai)/[2010] 134 TTJ 806 (Mumbai)[23-01- 2009] are applicable to the present appeal. The onus is on the assesse to prove that the funds deposited / paid to the seller of property are from the source…

Jaipal Singh, Jaipur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Jaipur

Appeal of the assessee are disposed off

ITA 115/JPR/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur11 Mar 2025AY 2013-14

For Appellant: Sh. S.R. Sharma, CA &For Respondent: Sh. Arvind Kumar, CIT-DR

Section 115BSection 153A

Mohan Lal Ashok Kumar Saraf, Jaipur vs. DCIT Cen Cir 1, Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed as indicated hereinabove

ITA 879/JPR/2024[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur28 Nov 2024AY 2017-2018

For Appellant: Shri Ankit Totuka, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Alka Gautam, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 68

…ctions has to be linked and proved. The onus in this regard is on the assesse which has not been discharged. Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case of Durai Murugan Kathir Anand v. Additional Commissioner of Income-tax [2022] 136 taxmann.com 70 (Madras)/[2022] 443 ITR 423 (Madras) [25-02-2022] has observed as under:- Extract from headnotes Section 69A, read with sections 144A and 153A, of the Income-tax Act, 1961 Unexplained moneys (Cash)- Assessment year 2019-20-Pursuant to cash seized 15 MOHAN LAL ASHOK KUMAR SARRAF VS DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1 JAIPUR at premises of employee of a trust where assessee was a truste…

Shri Bhagwati Farms, Alwar vs. DCIT, Central Circle, Alwar

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed with no orders as to costs

ITA 452/JPR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur02 Sept 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal, CAFor Respondent: Mrs. Monisha Choudhary, Addl. CIT-DR

Section 115Section 68Section 69Section 69A

…e decision of Vivek & Jajodiya Vs. ITO (2010) 123 ITR 136 for preponderance of probability, decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Sreelekha Banerjee Vs. CIT (1963) 49 ITR 112, Madras High Court in case of Durai Murugan Kathir Anand Vs. Addl. CIT (2022) 443 ITR 423 to hold that onus is on the assessee to prove that funds deposited in his bank account are from the sources from which it is being claimed but assessee has not discharged the onus of showing the genuineness of transaction and identity of the transaction. vi. AO is not required to show the source of money deposited in the bank account. The explan…

Sandeep Kherada, Jaipur vs. The Income Tax Officer, Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 610/JPR/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur29 Feb 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Tarun Mittal (CA)For Respondent: MS Alka Gautam (CIT)(V.H)

Section 131Section 144

…a rebuttable presumption, is to be presumed against the petitioner The legal principles enumerated in the above referred judgements in the case of Durai Murugan Kathir Anand v. Additional Commissioner of Income-tax [2022] 136 taxrnann.com 70 (Madras)/[2022] 443 ITR 423 (Madras)[25-02-2022] and in the case of Vivek N. Jajodia v. Income-tax Officer, 16(2)(2), Mumbai [2011] 10 ITR(T) 581 (Mumbai)/[2010] 123 ITD 136 (Mumbai)/[2010] 134 TTJ 806 (Mumbai)[23-01-2009] are applicable to the present appeal. The onus is on the assesse to prove that the funds deposited in his bank account are from the source from which it…