Govindarajulu Mudaliar v. CIT

34 ITR 807Supreme Court of India1958#245 most cited

What is Govindarajulu Mudaliar v. CIT authority for?

The onus lies on the assessee to satisfactorily explain the source and nature of any unexplained cash or credit entries; if they fail to do so, the amount is treated as taxable income. The Income Tax Department is not required to locate the exact source of such funds, and this principle applies even if Section 68 is not strictly invoked.

306

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2009 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Govindarajulu Mudaliar v CIT · Section 68 · Section 69 · Section 69A · unexplained cash credit · onus of proof · source and nature of credit · creditworthiness · department not required to locate source · taxable income · general principles of taxation

Sections most often in play

Section 68Section 143(3)Section 115BBESection 142(1)Section 69ASection 69Section 143(2)Section 144

Issues it is cited on

section 106section 66creditworthiness of the creditoronus of proofpaper companysource of sourceshare capital and share premiumsection 251(2)section 31addition u/s 68live linksection 251(1)(a)

Judgments citing Govindarajulu Mudaliar v. CIT

THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, vs. SHRI SHAILENDRA KUMAR GUPTA,

The appeals are dismissed

ITA/44/2025HC Rajasthan24 Mar 2026

Bench: SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA,SHUBHA MEHTA

Section 68

…[2026:RJ-JP:12292-DB] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D.B. Income Tax Appeal No. 44/2025 The Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax, (Central), Rajasthan, Room No. 402, 4Th Floor, Lic Building, Bhawani Singh Road, Ambedkar Circle, Jaipur-302005. ----Appellant Versus Shri Shailendra Kumar Gupta, E-20, Dynamic Engineers, Opposite Multi Metal Industrial Area Kota (Pan/gir No. - Acupg 6276 C). ----Respondent Connected With D.B. Income Tax Appeal No. 45/2025 The Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax, (Central), Rajasthan, Room No. 402, 4Th Floor, Lic Building, Bhawani Singh Roa…

THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, vs. SHRI PAWAN GUPTA,

The appeals are dismissed

ITA/45/2025HC Rajasthan24 Mar 2026

Bench: SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA,SHUBHA MEHTA

Section 68

…[2026:RJ-JP:12292-DB] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D.B. Income Tax Appeal No. 44/2025 The Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax, (Central), Rajasthan, Room No. 402, 4Th Floor, Lic Building, Bhawani Singh Road, Ambedkar Circle, Jaipur-302005. ----Appellant Versus Shri Shailendra Kumar Gupta, E-20, Dynamic Engineers, Opposite Multi Metal Industrial Area Kota (Pan/gir No. - Acupg 6276 C). ----Respondent Connected With D.B. Income Tax Appeal No. 45/2025 The Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax, (Central), Rajasthan, Room No. 402, 4Th Floor, Lic Building, Bhawani Singh Roa…

THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, vs. SHRI RAJ RAJESHWARI GUPTA,

The appeals are dismissed

ITA/46/2025HC Rajasthan24 Mar 2026

Bench: SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA,SHUBHA MEHTA

Section 68

…[2026:RJ-JP:12292-DB] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D.B. Income Tax Appeal No. 44/2025 The Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax, (Central), Rajasthan, Room No. 402, 4Th Floor, Lic Building, Bhawani Singh Road, Ambedkar Circle, Jaipur-302005. ----Appellant Versus Shri Shailendra Kumar Gupta, E-20, Dynamic Engineers, Opposite Multi Metal Industrial Area Kota (Pan/gir No. - Acupg 6276 C). ----Respondent Connected With D.B. Income Tax Appeal No. 45/2025 The Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax, (Central), Rajasthan, Room No. 402, 4Th Floor, Lic Building, Bhawani Singh Roa…

HOLLIS VITRIFIED PRIVATE LIMITED,MORBI, GUJARAT, INDIA vs. THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - 1, RAJKOT, RAJKOT, GUJARAT, INDIA

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

ITA 363/RJT/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot12 Feb 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Dr. Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No. 363/Rjt/2024 (Assessment Year: 2018-19) (Hybrid Hearing) Hollis Vitrified Pvt. Ltd. Vs. The Pr. Commissioner Of Income Revenue Survey No. 756/P1/P1/P1, Opp. Tax-1, Rajkot Antique Granito, Ghuntu,-Lakhdhirpur Road, Morbi (Gujarat)-363642 "ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aacch5628Q (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Fenil H. Mehta, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Punglia, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 68

…CIT v Independent Media (P.) Ltd. [2012] 25 taxmann.com 276 (Delhi) held that for making addition under section 68, it is not incumbent upon assessing officer to establish that money had come from assessee's coffers. In A. Govindarajulu Mudaliar v. CIT [1958] 34 ITR 807 (SC), Supreme Court observed that it was not the duty of the Revenue to adduce evidence to show from what source, income was derived and why it should be treated as concealed income. The assessee must prove satisfactorily the source and nature of cash received during the accounting year. Similarly, observations were made in Page 11 of 37 I.T.A N…

ASHOK HIRACHAND SHAH,PANVEL vs. ASSESSING OFFICER WARD 2, PANVEL

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 812/PUN/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune17 Dec 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.812/Pun/2025 धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2011-12 Ashok Hirachand Shah, Assessing Officer, Plot No. 4, Mangal Bunglow, Ward – 2, Panvel Road No. 5, Sector No. 19, Vs. New Panvel, Tal.-Panvel-410206 Pan : Acdps4800M अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent Assessee By : Shri Ajinkya Shah Department By : Shri Rajesh Gawali Date Of Hearing : 09-12-2025 Date Of 17-12-2025 Pronouncement : आदेश / Order Per Astha Chandra, Jm : The Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 20.01.2025 Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Nfac, Delhi [“Cit(A)/Nfac”] Pertaining To Assessment Year (“Ay”) 2011-12. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “1. Denial Of Natural Justice & Proper Opportunity The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Erred In Dismissing The Appeal Without Considering That The Appellant Was Denied Proper Opportunity & Natural Justice During The Assessment Proceedings. The Assessing Officer Called For Information At The Far End Of The Assessment Proceedings On 19/11/2018 & Despite The Appellant'S Authorized Representative Submitting The Details On 19/12/2018, The Ao Failed To Discuss Or Consider The Same. The Matter Ought To Have Been Remanded Back For Fresh Adjudication To Allow Proper Analysis Of The Transactions. 2. Addition Without Specifying The Section The Cit(A) Erred In Upholding The Addition Of Rs. 1,49,05,289/- Made By The Ao Without Specifying The Section Under Which The Addition Was Made. The Non-Mention Of The Specific Section Renders The Assessment Order Bad In Law, As It Violates The Principles Of Natural Justice & Transparency In Taxation. 3. Failure To Discharge Onus Under Section 69A

For Appellant: Shri Ajinkya ShahFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Gawali
Section 147Section 69A

…ot fatal to the assessment order. Taxation can be done on general principles of taxation. Reliance is placed on the following decisions: (a) Manoj Agarwal Vs DCIT (2008) 27 CCH 0557 (DelTrib), Special Bench (para 26) (b) A Govind Rajulu Mudaliar Vs CIT (1958) 34 ITR 807 (SC) (c) Shri Arif Vs ACIT ITA No. 976/Bang./2022 (d) Namdev Arora Vs CIT Jalandhar (2016) 72 taxmann.com 124 (P&H) (e) Rajmeet Singh v. Income-tax Officer [2024] 160 taxmann.com 83 (Jharkhand) (f) Dr. Prakash Tiwari Vs Commissioner of Income-tax [1983] 14 Taxman 252 (MP) Thus, the contention of the appellant wherein it has been contended that add…

RAJESH KAPOOR,DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE- 47(1), DELHI

Appeal is partly allowed

ITA 1452/DEL/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Dec 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA (Judicial Member), SHRI MANISH AGARWAL (Accountant Member)

Section 131Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147

…editworthiness and genuineness of the transaction in respect of the purchase. Nothing has been brought on record to justify this transaction. 5.13 Reliance is put on the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of A. Govindarajulu Mudaliar v. CIT (1958) 34 ITR 807, Commissioner of Income Tax V. Independent Media (P) Ltd. 210 ΤΑΧΜΑΝΝ 14(Delhi)(2012.) 5.14 The Income Tax Department has conducted detailed enquiries, made analysis of the documents and made a list of beneficiaries. The reports prepared details of complete modus operandi, list of conduits entities, list of TIN number, etc., in the name of conduit…

KISHOR RAMESHBHAI MEHTA,SURAT vs. ITO, WARD-1(5), BHARUCH

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 60/SRT/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Surat10 Nov 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.60/Srt/2025 Assessment Year: 2013-14 (Hybrid Hearing) Kishor Rameshbhai Mehta Vs. Ito, Prop. Of Aditya Infrastructure, Ward - 1(5), 139, Maher Nagar, Opp. Baps Bharuch Hospital, Adajan Gam Circle, Surat - 395 009 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Adepm 4458 R (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri P. M. Jagasheth, Ca Respondent By Shri Ajay Uke, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 12/08/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 10/11/2025

Section 194ASection 194CSection 2(24)Section 250Section 253(3)Section 36(1)(iii)Section 40Section 68Section 69A

…rious decision, viz. (i) Sumati Dayal vs. CIT, 214 ITR 801 (SC), (ii) Kale Khan Mohammad Hanif vs. CIT, 50 ITR 1 (SC), (iii) Roshan Di Hatti vs. CIT, 107 ITR 938 (SC), (iv) CIT vs. M. Ganapathi Mudaliar, 53 ITR 623 (SC), (v) A. Govindarajulu Mudaliar vs. CIT, 34 ITR 807 (SC), (vi) Shankar Industries vs. CIT, ITA No.60/SRT/2025/AY 2013-14 Kishor Rameshbhai Mehta 114 ITR 689, (vii) Shreelekha Banerjee vs. CIT, 49 ITR 112, (viii) CIT vs. Devi Prasad Vishwanath Prasad, 72 ITR 194 (SC), (ix) Bomin P. Ltd. vs. CIT, 160 ITR 477 (Guj.), (x) ITO vs. Diza Holdings (P.) Ltd., 255 ITR 573 (Ker.) and (xi) Smt Iva Gogoi vs.…

DCIT, CIRCLE 4(2), NEW DELHI vs. MS COMMUNIQUE MARKETING SOLUTIONS PVT LTD, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is dismissed and cross-objection of Assessee is allowed

ITA 4762/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri S Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumarassessment Year: 2017-18 Deputy Commissioner Of Income Vs. Ms Commmunique Marketing Tax, Circle 4(2), Solutions (P) Ltd., 5407, Arya Samaj New Delhi. Road, Karol Bagh, New Delhi-110005 Pan :Aaccc3432F (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 115Section 115BSection 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 250Section 37Section 68

…tly applicable since the assessee was not maintaining any books of account and the bank statement cannot be considered as the assessee's books of account, on the basis of the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of A. Govindarajulu Mudaliar v. CIT (1958) 34 ITR 807, it is the onus of the assessee to explain the cash received by him and if there is no explanation or acceptable evidence to prove the nature and source of the receipt, the amount may be added as the assessee's income on general principles and it is not necessary to invoke section 68, nor is it necessary for the income- tax authorities to point ou…

RUPESH TAMBI,JAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR

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

ITA 1470/JPR/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur29 Oct 2025AY 2015-16
For Appellant: Shri S. R. Sharma, CA &For Respondent: Shri Gautam Singh Choudhary, Addl. CIT
Section 1Section 132Section 133ASection 271Section 271A

…Di Hatti v. Commissioner of Income-tax [1977] 107 ITR 938\n(SC)[08-03-1977], Kale Khan Mohammad Hanif v. Commissioner of Income-tax\n[1963] 50 ITR 1 (SC)[08-02-1963), CIT v. M. Ganapathi Mudaliar [1964] 53 ITR\n623 (SC)/A. Govindarajulu Mudaliar v. CIT [1958] 34 ITR 807 (SC)].\n(ii) If the burden is not discharged satisfactorily, it is open to the Revenue to hold\nthat it is income of the assessee and no further burden lies on the Revenue to\nshow that income is from any other particular source. [As per principle laid down\nin CIT v. M.Ganapathi Mudaliar [1964] 53 ITR 623 (SC)/A. Govindarajulu Mudaliar\nv. CIT [1…

NISHTHA VINCOM PVT. LTD., ,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD 6(3), , KOLKATA

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

ITA 1160/KOL/2025[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Oct 2025AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250Section 68

…pon the decisions in CIT v Precision Finance Pvt. Ltd. 208 ITR 463 (Calcutta), CIT v Ruby Traders and Exporters Ltd. 134 Taxman 29 (Calcutta), CIT v Nipun Builders and Developers Pvt. Ltd. [2013] 30 Taxmann.com 292 (Del), A. Govindrajulu Mudaliar v CIT [1958] 34 ITR 807, CIT v Devi Prasad Vishwanath Prasad [1969] 72 ITR 194 (SC) and CIT v Independent Media (P.) Ltd. [2012] 25 taxmann.com 276 (Delhi) for making addition under section 68 of the Act besides, relying upon other judicial I.T.A. No.: 1160/KOL/2025 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Nishtha Vincom Pvt. Ltd. pronouncements for disallowance under section 14A of the…

SANJAY KUMAR KARNANI,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, all appeals of the assessee are disposed off in terms of

ITA 673/JPR/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur15 Oct 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: AO on 12-04-2021 18. Reply filed before AO on 15-07-2021 19. Additional Written Submissions filed before CIT(A) for AY 2014-15 on 11-11-2024 20. Written Submissions filed before CIT(A) for AY 2014-15 21. Written Submissions filed before CIT(A) for AY 2015-16 on 10-10-2024 22. Written Submissions filed before CIT(A) for AY 2016-17 on 10-10-2024 23. Written Submissions filed before CIT(A) for AY 2017-18 on 15-10-2024 24. Written Submissions filed before CIT(A) for AY 2018-19 on 15-10-2024 25.

For Appellant: Shri Deepak Sharma, AdvFor Respondent: Mrs. Alka Gautam, CIT
Section 153ASection 250Section 68

…taxation under the provisions of the Act. In the absence of such proof, the revenue is entitled to treat it as taxable income. This was laid down as far back as 1958 when this court pointed out in A. Govindarajulu Mudaliar v. Commisioner of Income-tax [1958] 34 ITR 807, 810 (SC) that: "There is ample authority for the position that where an assessee fails to prove satisfactorily the source and nature of certain amount of cash received during the accounting year, the Income-tax Officer is entitled to draw the inference that the receipts are of an assessable nature." To put it differently, where the nature and sou…

SANJAY KUMAR KARNANI,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, all appeals of the assessee are disposed off in terms of

ITA 672/JPR/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur15 Oct 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Deepak Sharma, AdvFor Respondent: Mrs. Alka Gautam, CIT
Section 153ASection 250Section 68

…taxation under the provisions of the Act. In the absence of such proof, the revenue is entitled to treat it as taxable income. This was laid down as far back as 1958 when this court pointed out in A. Govindarajulu Mudaliar v. Commisioner of Income-tax [1958] 34 ITR 807, 810 (SC) that: "There is ample authority for the position that where an assessee fails to prove satisfactorily the source and nature of certain amount of cash received during the accounting year, the Income-tax Officer is entitled to draw the inference that the receipts are of an assessable nature." To put it differently, where the nature and sou…

SHRI AMBICA GARMENTS, JODHPUR,JODHPUR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, all appeals of the assessee are disposed off in terms of

ITA 61/JPR/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur15 Oct 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Deepak Sharma, AdvFor Respondent: Mrs. Alka Gautam, CIT
Section 153ASection 250Section 68

…taxation under the provisions of the Act. In the absence of such proof, the revenue is entitled to treat it as taxable income. This was laid down as far back as 1958 when this court pointed out in A. Govindarajulu Mudaliar v. Commisioner of Income-tax [1958] 34 ITR 807, 810 (SC) that: "There is ample authority for the position that where an assessee fails to prove satisfactorily the source and nature of certain amount of cash received during the accounting year, the Income-tax Officer is entitled to draw the inference that the receipts are of an assessable nature." To put it differently, where the nature and sou…

SHRI AMBICA GARMENTS, JODHPUR,JODHPUR vs. ACIT, CENTAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR, JODHPUR

In the result, all appeals of the assessee are disposed off in terms of

ITA 59/JPR/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur15 Oct 2025AY 2017-18
For Appellant: Shri Deepak Sharma, AdvFor Respondent: Mrs. Alka Gautam, CIT
Section 153ASection 250Section 68

…taxation under the provisions of the Act. In the absence of such proof, the revenue is entitled to treat it as taxable income. This was laid down as far back as 1958 when this court pointed out in A. Govindarajulu Mudaliar v. Commisioner of Income-tax [1958] 34 ITR 807, 810 (SC) that: "There is ample authority for the position that where an assessee fails to prove satisfactorily the source and nature of certain amount of cash received during the accounting year, the Income-tax Officer is entitled to draw the inference that the receipts are of an assessable nature." To put it differently, where the nature and sou…

SHRI AMBICA GARMENTS, JODHPUR,JODHPUR vs. ACIT, CENTAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, all appeals of the assessee are disposed off in terms of

ITA 57/JPR/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur15 Oct 2025AY 2015-16
For Appellant: Shri Deepak Sharma, AdvFor Respondent: Mrs. Alka Gautam, CIT
Section 153ASection 250Section 68

…taxation under the provisions of the Act. In the absence of such proof, the revenue is entitled to treat it as taxable income. This was laid down as far back as 1958 when this court pointed out in A. Govindarajulu Mudaliar v. Commisioner of Income-tax [1958] 34 ITR 807, 810 (SC) that: "There is ample authority for the position that where an assessee fails to prove satisfactorily the source and nature of certain amount of cash received during the accounting year, the Income-tax Officer is entitled to draw the inference that the receipts are of an assessable nature." To put it differently, where the nature and sou…

SHRI AMBICA GARMENTS,JODHPUR vs. ACIT, CENTAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR

ITA 56/JPR/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur15 Oct 2025AY 2014-15
For Appellant: Shri Deepak Sharma, AdvFor Respondent: Mrs. Alka Gautam, CIT
Section 153ASection 250Section 68

…the addition holding that cash credit in the account of one of the partners, could not be assessed in the hands of the firm. On reference, in this judgement, it is held by the Hon'ble Rajasthan High Court as under:- "In A. Govindarajulu Mudaliar v. CIT [1958] 34 ITR 807, it was observed by the Supreme Court that there is ample authority for the position that where an assessee fails to prove satisfactorily the source and nature of certain amounts of cash received during the accounting year, the Income tax Officer is entitled to draw the inference that the receipts are of an assessable nature. In P.V. Raghdva Reddi…

PRADEEP JAIN,JAIPUR vs. DCIT-CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR

25. As a result, this appeal deserves to be allowed

ITA 937/JPR/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur08 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Learned Cit(A), While Challenging The Assessment Order Dated 27.12.2019, Passed By The Assessing Officer, As Regards Assessment Year 2017-18. That Appeal Came To Be Dismissed.

For Appellant: Shri Avinash Khandelwal, C.AFor Respondent: Smt. Alka Gautam, CIT
Section 132Section 133ASection 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 68

…ss and creditworthiness of the credits received.” 15. In support of the above observations, Learned CIT(A) relied on the following decisions:- 8 Pradeep Jain, Jaipur  M. Ganapathi Mudaliar, (1964) 53 ITR 623 (SC).  A. Govindarajulu Mudaliar v. CIT, (1958) 34 ITR 807 (SC).  Roshan di Hatti v Commissioner of Income-tax, (1977) 107 ITR 938 (SC)  Kale Khan Mohammad Hanif v. CIT, (1963) 50 ITR 1 (SC). 16. Hence, the appellant is before this Appellate Tribunal. Contentions 17. Ld. AR for the appellant has submitted that from the seized material it can safely be inferred that the transactions recorded on Exhibit…

SUMAN LATA,NOIDA vs. ITO,WARD-3(2), NOIDA

In the result, the case remanded back to CIT(A)

ITA 4919/DEL/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Sept 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Krinwant Sahayasstt. Yr: 2012-13

Section 68

…was, it was exempt from taxation under the provisions of the Act. In the absence of such proof, the Income-tax Officer is entitled to treat it as taxable income". Similar finding was given by the Apex Court in case of A. Govindarajulu Mudaliar vs. CIT [1958] 34 ITR 807 (SC). It was only later that the above dictum of the Apex Court found embodiment in section 68 of the Act. 6.3.2 Background of section 68 Section 68 does not need any introduction. To summarise, it taxes any credit appearing in the books of an assessee, where the assessee is not able to or not satisfactorily able to explain the nature and source…

ITO, MUMBAI vs. VATIKA RAYONS PVT LTD., MUMBAI

ITA 2895/MUM/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Sept 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya & Shri Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Shri Rasesh ShahFor Respondent: Shri Kavitha Kaushik (SR DR)
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 56Section 68

…n the minds of any ordinary man of normal prudence that the said transaction is nothing but a device for any of the purpose best known to them. 32. It has been considered more by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of A Govindarajulu Mudaliar v. CIT (1958) 34 ITR 807 that it is not incumbent upon the Assessing Officer, on the facts and circumstances of the case, to establish with the help of material on record that the share monies had come or emanated from the assessee's coffers. Section 158 of the Act casts no such burden upon the Assessing Officer 33. Considering the submissions, circumstances and preponde…

THE ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, RAJKOT, RAJKOT vs. SHRI BHAGVANJI PRABHUBHAI AMRUTIYA, MORBI

In the result, cross objection filed by the assessee, ( in CO No

ITA 142/RJT/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot29 Aug 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं /.Ita No.139/Rjt/2021 िनधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year: 2019-2020 Asstt.Commissioner Of Income-Tax Expert Particle Board बनाम Cent.Cir.2, Rajkot. Survey No.111, 8-A National Vs. Highway B/H. Bharatinagar Iti, Ravapar Nadi Morbi 363 642. Pan : Aahfe 0299 G आयकर अपील सं /.Ita No.142/Rjt/2021 With Cross Objection No.05/Rjt/2022 िनधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year: 2019-2020 Asstt.Commissioner Of Income-Tax Bhagvaji Prabhubhai बनाम Cent.Cir.2, Rajkot. Amrutiya, Meera Park-2 Vs. House No.1, Vavdi Road Morbi. Pan : Aiwpa 0121 A (अपीलाथ"/Assessee) : (""यथ"/Respondent) िनधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri Mehul Ranpura, Ld.Ar राज"व क" ओर से/Revenue By : Shri Sanjay Punglia, Ld.Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख /Date Of Hearing : 05/06/2025 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 29/08/2025 Order Per, Dr. Arjun Lal Saini: The Captioned Two Appeals Filed By The Revenue Pertaining To Assessment Year 2019-20 & The Cross Objection Filed By The Assessee, Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income-Tax

For Appellant: Shri Mehul Ranpura, ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Punglia, ld.CIT-DR
Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 37Section 69ASection 69B

…owing judgments: i) Namdev Arora Vs. CIT, (2016) 72 taxmann.com 124 (P&H); ii) CIT Vs. Devi Prasad Vishwanath, (1969) 72 ITR 194 (SC); iii) CIT Vs. Nipun Builders & Developers P.Ltd., (2013) 30 taxmann.com 292(Del) iv) A. Govindarajulu Mudalia Vs. CIT, (1958) 34 ITR 807(SC); v) Rajmeet Singh Vs. ITO, (2024) 160 taxmann.ocom 83 (Jhark) vi) CIT Vs. Independent Media P.Ltd., (2012) 25 taxmann.com 276 (Del); vii) Shri Arif Vs. ACIT, ITA No.976/Bang/2022 (ITAT-Bang) order dated 126.1.2023; viii) Manoj Aggarwal Vs. DCIT, (2008) 113 ITD 0377 (Del) 19. On the other hand, the ld.Counsel for the assessee submitted that th…

Showing 1–20 of 306 · Page 1 of 16

...