How many judgments cite Govindarajulu Mudaliar v. CIT?

306 judgments on BharatTax cite Govindarajulu Mudaliar v. CIT (34 ITR 807), spanning 2009 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Govindarajulu Mudaliar v. CIT come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 68, Section 143(3), Section 115BBE, Section 142(1), Section 69A, Section 69.

Govindarajulu Mudaliar v. CIT

34 ITR 807Supreme Court of India1958#255 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 367,154 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 68 Section 143(3)Section 115BBE Section 142(1)Section 69A Section 69 Section 143(2)Section 144

Issues it is cited on

section 106 section 66 creditworthiness of the creditor onus of proof paper company source of source share capital and share premium section 251(2)section 31 addition u/s 68 live link section 251(1)(a)

Judgments citing Govindarajulu Mudaliar v. CIT

M/S Vatsalya Builders, Nagpur vs. Assistant Comissioner of Income Tax Centarl Circle 1(2), Nagpur

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 210/NAG/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur31 Oct 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.85 To 87 & 210/Nag/2018 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2011-12 To 2014-15 M/S. Vatsalya Builders & Vs. Acit, Central Circle- Developers Pvt. Ltd., 1(2), Nagpur. 202, Ganesh Chambers, Dhantoli, Nagpur- 440012. Pan : Aabcv6745K Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Mukesh Agrawal Revenue By : Shri Kailash G. Kanojiya Date Of Hearing : 17.10.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 31.10.2023 आदेश / Order Per Inturi Rama Rao, Am : These Are The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Directed Against The Different Orders Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)- 3, Nagpur [‘The Cit(A)’] Dated 26.02.2018 & 22.06.2018 For The Assessment Years 2011-12 To 2014-15 Respectively. 2. Since The Identical Facts & Common Issues Are Involved In All The Above Captioned Four Appeals Of The Assessee, We Proceed To Dispose Of The Same By This Common Order. 3. For The Sake Of Convenience & Clarity, The Facts Relevant To The Appeal In Ita No.85/Nag/2018 For The Assessment Year 2011-12 Are Stated Herein.

For Appellant: Shri Mukesh AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri Kailash G. Kanojiya

Section 115BSection 14Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 68Section 69C

…ar that the Assessing Officer had denied such set-off only on the ground that the deemed income u/s 69C does not fall within any category of income contained in section 14 of the Act. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of A. Govindarajulu Mudaliar vs. CIT, 34 ITR 807 (SC) held as under :- “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 an inference that the receipts are of an assessable nature". Following the said observations in Lakhmi…

ITO, WD-5(1), Kolkata vs. M/S Safeline Marketing Pvt. Ltd, Kolkata

ITA 20/KOL/2021[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 Oct 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon’Ble & Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Surana, A/RFor Respondent: Shri S. Datta, CIT, D/R

Section 250Section 68

…| आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण "यायपीठ, कोलकाता | IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, HON’BLE VICE PRESIDENT & DR. MANISH BORAD, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No. 20/Kol/2021 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Income Tax Officer, Ward-5(1), M/s. Safeline Marketing Pvt. Ltd. Kolkata Vs 3rd Floor, R. No. 5 16, India Exchange Place, Dalhousie Kolkata - 700001 [PAN: AAOCS7729P] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Sunil Surana, A/R Revenue by : Shri S. Datta, CIT, D/R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date of Hearing : 26/09/2023 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date of Pronouncement: 16/10/2023 आ…

Income Tax Officer, Ward 4(1), Raipur vs. Aviral Finance Private Limited, Raipur

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

ITA 13/RPR/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur22 Sept 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.13/Rpr/2021 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2017-18 V. Ito-4(1) Aviral Finance Pvt. Ltd. Raipur Ground Floor, Nalghar Chowk, Raipur – 492 001 [Pan: Aabcg 2701 N] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) : अपीलाथ" की ओर से/ Appellant By Shri Praveen Khandelwal & Shri Praveen Goyal, Cas ""थ" की ओर से /Respondent By : Smt. Ila M. Parmar, Cit-D.R. सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 13.07.2023 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 22.09.2023

For Respondent: Smt. Ila M. Parmar, CIT-D.R

Section 143(3)Section 250(4)Section 68

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण "यायपीठ रायपुर म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RAIPUR BENCH: RAIPUR "ी रवीश सूद, "ाियक सद", एवं "ी अ"ण खोड"पया, लेखा सद" के सम" BEFORE SHRI RAVISH SOOD, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ARUN KHODPIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.13/RPR/2021 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2017-18 v. ITO-4(1) Aviral Finance Pvt. Ltd. Raipur Ground Floor, Nalghar Chowk, Raipur – 492 001 [PAN: AABCG 2701 N] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) : अपीलाथ" की ओर से/ Appellant by Shri Praveen Khandelwal & Shri Praveen Goyal, Cas ""थ" की ओर से /Respondent by : Smt. Ila M. Parmar, CIT-D.R. सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Da…

M/S. Layog Properties Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

ITA 753/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Sept 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year 2012-13 M/S. Layog Properties Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Ito N-18, First Floor, Ward-15(2) Malviya Nagar, New Delhi. New Delhi – 110 017 Pan Aabcl9997R (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Salil Aggarwal, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Smita Singh, Sr. DR

Section 131Section 133(6)Section 234BSection 68

…icer and thereupon the Assessing Officer should form an opinion accepting or rejecting the explanation based upon appreciation of facts/materials and other attending circumstances. Section 68 of the Act was examined in A. Govindarajulu Mudallar v. CIT, [19581 34 ITR 807 (SC) observing that there were ample authorities for the proposition that where an assessee fails to prove satisfactorily the source and nature of certain amount of cash received during an accounting year, the Assessing Officer is entitled to draw inference that the receipts are of an assessable nature. Whether explanation should be accepted or no…

Gurcharan Singh, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle-47(1), New Delhi

In the result, assessee’s appeals being ITA Nos

ITA 5580/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: HeardITAT Delhi30 Aug 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya & Shri Kul Bharata.Y. 2009-10 & A.Y. 2010-11

Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 68

…ssessee fails to prove satisfactorily the source and nature of certain amount of cash/credit •'eceived during the accounting year, the Income Tax Officer is entitled to draw the inference that the receipts are of ah assessable "atere. '’Govindarajulu Mudaliar 34 ITR 807 (SC) In the case, of Independent Media (P.) Ltd 210 TAXMAN 14 (Deihi)(20i2) that came up before the Hon'bie High Court, Delhi. c/e are unable to uphold the view of the Tribunal that it is incumbent monies had come or emanated form the assessee's coffers. Section 58 Of the Act casts no such burden upon the Assessing Officer. This aspect has been co…

Gurcharan Singh, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle-47(1), New Delhi

In the result, assessee’s appeals being ITA Nos

ITA 5579/DEL/2019[2009-10]Status: HeardITAT Delhi30 Aug 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya & Shri Kul Bharata.Y. 2009-10 & A.Y. 2010-11

Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 68

Aman Exports International, Jaipur vs. DCIT Circle 1, Jaipur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 147/JPR/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur24 Aug 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Manish Tatiwal (CA)For Respondent: Smt. Runi Pal (Addl. CIT) &

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 40A(3)

…at credits have not been explained then, there is no duty upon the AO to point out the source from which the money was received by the assessee. Reliance is put on the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of A. Govindarajulju Mudaliaar v. CIT (1958) 34 ITR 807, Commissioner of Income-tax vs Independent Media (P.) Ltd.210 TAXMANN 14(Delhi)(2012). 23. Further reliance is placed upon the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of State Bank of India vs. S.K. Sharma AIR 1996 SC 364 where the Hon'ble Apex Court observed: "Justice means justice between the parties. The interest of justice equally demand…

Shri Rajesh Sondhi, Jalandhar vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-1, Jalandhar

In the result, the ground

ITA 188/ASR/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar21 Aug 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

Section 115BSection 131(1)Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 69

…The explanation given by the appellant as to how the amounts came to be received is rejected by all the IT authorities as untenable. The credits are accordingly treated as business receipts which are chargeable to tax. In Govindarajulu Mudaliar vs. CIT (1958) 34 ITR 807 (SC) , this Court observed: "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 ITO is entitled to draw the inference that the receipts are of an assessable nature." I.T.A. No. 188/Asr/2023 6 Assessment Year: 20…

East West Finvest India Limited, Bilaspur vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle -1(1), Bilaspr

In the result, appeal of the assessee company being devoid and bereft of any merit is dismissed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 21/RPR/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur14 Aug 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

For Appellant: Shri Harsh Vijayvargiya, CAFor Respondent: Shri V.K Singh, CIT-DR

Section 131(1)(d)Section 133ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 68

…ld not on such a standalone basis suffice to discharge the onus that was cast upon the assesse company u/s. 68 of the Act. Elaborating on his aforesaid view, the A.O. relied on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the Case of A Govindarajulu Mudaliar, 34 ITR 807 (S.C.), and observed that if on verification of the documents, the A.O. was 10 M/s. East West Finvest India Limited Vs.DCIT, Circle-1(1), Bilaspur unable to contact the share applicants or the information was found to be unverifiable, then the onus shifted back to the assessee to substantiate his claim by making available the requisite details, fa…

M/S Purvi Finvest Limited, Bilaspur vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 1(1), Bilaspur

In the result, appeal of the assessee company being devoid and bereft of any merit is dismissed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 20/RPR/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur14 Aug 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

For Appellant: Shri Harsh Vijayvargiya, CAFor Respondent: Shri V.K Singh, CIT-DR

Section 131(1)(d)Section 133ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 68

…ld not on such a standalone basis suffice to discharge the onus that was cast upon the assesse company u/s. 68 of the Act. Elaborating on his aforesaid view, the A.O. relied on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the Case of A Govindarajulu Mudaliar, 34 ITR 807 (S.C.), and observed that if on verification of the documents, the A.O. was 10 M/s. Purvi Finvest Limited Vs. DCIT, Circle-1(1) unable to contact the share applicants or the information was found to be unverifiable, then the onus shifted back to the assessee to substantiate his claim by making available the requisite details, failing which, the ad…

M/S Trimurthy Finvest Limited, Bilaspur vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 1(1), Bilaspur

In the result, appeal of the assesse company being devoid and bereft of any merit is dismissed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 19/RPR/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur14 Aug 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

For Appellant: Shri Harsh Vijayvargiya, CAFor Respondent: Shri V.K Singh, CIT-DR

Section 131(1)(d)Section 133ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 68

…ld not on such a standalone basis suffice to discharge the onus that was cast upon the assesse company u/s. 68 of the Act. Elaborating on his aforesaid view, the A.O. relied on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the Case of A Govindarajulu Mudaliar, 34 ITR 807 (S.C.), and observed that if on verification of the documents, the A.O. was unable to contact the share applicants or the information was found to be unverifiable, then the onus shifted back to the assessee to substantiate his 9 M/s. Trimurti Finvest Limited Vs. DCIT, Circle-1(1), Bilaspur claim by making available the requisite details, failing…

M/S. Goldline Dealers Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward - 9(2), Kolkata

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

ITA 608/KOL/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 Jul 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Sri Rajpal Yadav & Sri Rajesh Kumar

Section 249Section 253Section 3Section 5

…y the source and nature of certain amount of credit during the accounting year, the Income-tax Officer is entitled to draw the inference that the receipt are of an assessable nature. This view was adopted in the case of A. Govindarajulu Mudaliar v. CIT [1958] 34 ITR 807. Similar view was also taken in the case of (i) CIT v. Devi Prasad Vishwanath Prasad [1969] 72 ITR 194 (SC), and (ii) Commissioner of Income-tax v. Independent Media (P.) Ltd. [2012] 25 taxmann.com 276 (Delhi). In the light of the facts of the case and aforesaid exposition of the legal position, with regard to the identity and creditworthiness of…

Vishan Raj Jain (HUF), Hyderabad vs. ACIT Central Circle-1 (2), Hyderabad

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

ITA 193/HYD/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad25 May 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2016-17 Vishan Raj Jain (Huf) Vs. Acit, Central Circle-1(2) 6-3-650, G7 6-3-650, G7, Aaykar Bhawan Maheswari Chambers Opp:L.B.Stadium Somajiguda Basheer Bagh Telangana-500 082 Hyderabad-500 004

For Appellant: Shri K.C.Devdas, CAFor Respondent: Shri K.P.R.R.Murthy, Sr.AR

Section 10Section 10(38)Section 115BSection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 250

…e receipt was not income or that if it 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 see A. Govindarajulu Mudaliar v. Commissioner of Income-tax 34 ITR 807 SC. On the above facts and circumstances, it is clear that the assessee has not established her case . Though it did cross in our minds, that the assessee could be granted another opportunity to produce evidences in the form of producing the books involved in the transactions, their contemporary records, share transfer forms, the records of the co…

One Stop Commosale Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward-6(3), Kolkata

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

ITA 636/KOL/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 May 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Sri Rajpal Yadav & Dr. Manish Borad

Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250Section 68

…e source and the nature of certain amount of credit during the accounting year, the Income-tax Officer is entitled to draw the inference that the receipt are of an assessable nature. This view was adopted in the case of A. Govindarajulu Mudaliar vs CIT [1958] 34 ITR 807. Similar view was also taken in the case of:- (i) CIT vs Devi Prasad Viswanath Prasad [1969] 72 ITR 194 (SC), and (ii) Commissioner of Income-tax vs Independent Media (P) Ltd. [2012] 25 taxman.com 276 (Delhi). Reliance is also being placed on the decision of jurisdictional ITAT in the case of M/s Star Griha Pvt. Ltd vs CIT and M/s Bisakha Sales Pv…

Mr. Hanumantrao Jagannath Gharge, Navi Mumbai vs. DCIT Circle-14(1)(1), Mumbai

ITA 2440/MUM/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Jan 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singhassessment Year: 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Satyaprakash Singh, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Krishna Kumar, D.R

Section 139Section 143(3)Section 147Section 250Section 68

…he assessee has offered no other explanation for this course of action. The AO was correct to hold that such an explanation offered is not reliable nor satisfactory Reliance is placed on the following judicial pronouncements: 1. Govindarajulu Muudaliar (1958] 34 ITR 807 (SC): It this case, the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that the assessee has to prove satisfactorily the source and nature of certain amounts of cash received during the accounting year and if not, the ITO is entitled to draw inference that the receipts are of an assessable nature. 2. Durga Prasad More [1971] 82 ITR 540 (SC) Sumati Dayal [1995] 80 tax…

M/S. Govind Stone Private Limited, Hamirpur vs. Income Tax Officer -5(4), Banda

ITA 258/ALLD/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad19 Dec 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shrivijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: Shri. R. S. Agrawal, Adv. &VinayGoel, C.AFor Respondent: Shri A.K. Singh Sr.D.R

Section 143Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 56Section 68

…2018) 94 taxmann.com 12(Mum.) , in which one of us being Accountant Member was part of the Division Bench which pronounced the order. Our view is further fortified by the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of A. Govindarajulu Mudaliar v. CIT [1958] 34 ITR 807, wherein Hon’ble Supreme Court held as under: "Now the contention of the appellant is that assuming that he had failed to establish the case put forward "by him, it does not follow as a matter of law that the amounts in question were income received or accrued during the previous year, that it was the duty of the Department to adduce evidence to…

Rupesh Vyas, Indore vs. The ACIT3(1), Indore

In the result, this appeal of assessee is dismissed

ITA 909/IND/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore07 Dec 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 10(38)Section 143(3)Section 68Section 69C

…entry of LTCG. (i) Sumati Dayal a. CIT· (I 995) 2 J.1 JTH 801 (S C); (ii) Durga Prasad More - 82ITR 540 (SC) (iii) Mc. Dowell & Co. Ltd. - 154 ITR 148 (SC), (iv) Asst. CIT u. Sam Nath Mani . (2006) 100 TTJ 917 (Chd) (v) Gooinda Rajulu Mudal.iar a. CIT· (1958) 34 ITR 807 (SC) Sreelekha Banerjee & othrs. o. CIT (1963) 49 ITR 112 (SC) . (vi) (vii) Kalekhan Mohammed Hanif u. CIT (1963) 50 ITR l(SC) viii) CIT vs. Biju Patnaik - (1986) 160 ITR 674 (SC) (ix) CIT v. P. Mohanakala &Others - (2007) 291 ITR 278 (SC) Page 7 of 21 Shri Rupesh Vyas Assessment year 2014-15 7.1. In the decision delivered on 27.3.2015, the H…

Rupesh Vyas, Indore vs. The ACIT3(1), Indore

In the result, this appeal of assessee is dismissed

ITA 50/IND/2020[150-16]Status: DisposedITAT Indore06 Dec 2022

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 10(38)Section 143(3)Section 68Section 69C

…entry of LTCG. (i) Sumati Dayal a. CIT· (I 995) 2 J.1 JTH 801 (S C); (ii) Durga Prasad More - 82ITR 540 (SC) (iii) Mc. Dowell & Co. Ltd. - 154 ITR 148 (SC), (iv) Asst. CIT u. Sam Nath Mani . (2006) 100 TTJ 917 (Chd) (v) Gooinda Rajulu Mudal.iar a. CIT· (1958) 34 ITR 807 (SC) Sreelekha Banerjee & othrs. o. CIT (1963) 49 ITR 112 (SC) . (vi) (vii) Kalekhan Mohammed Hanif u. CIT (1963) 50 ITR l(SC) viii) CIT vs. Biju Patnaik - (1986) 160 ITR 674 (SC) (ix) CIT v. P. Mohanakala &Others - (2007) 291 ITR 278 (SC) Page 7 of 26 Shri Rupesh Vyas Assessment year 2015-16 7.1. In the decision delivered on 27.3.2015, the H…

Hemant Kumar Mulchandani, Jabalpur vs. DCIT Circle 1(1), Jabalpur

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 42/JAB/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur29 Nov 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Hon’Ble & Shri Manomohan Das, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Manoj Jain, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar, CIT-DR

Section 10Section 143(3)Section 183Section 263

…once his explanation as to the nature and source of the credit or asset under reference is found absent or as non-satisfactory, so that the same, of income nature, is deemed as his unexplained income for the relevant year (Govindarajalu Mudaliar v. CIT [1958] 34 ITR 807 (SC), Kale Khan Mohammad Hanif v. CIT [1963] 50 ITR 1 (SC), CIT v. Ganpathi Mudaliar [1964] 53 ITR 623 (SC)). More recently, the Hon’ble Apex Court in Dy. CIT v. M.R. Logistics (P.) Ltd. held that merely because there has been a declaration under IDS, 2016, which in that case was of a related party, the same, unless linked with the impugned receip…

Sabara Impex Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO WD 2(3)(2), Mumbai

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

ITA 3267/MUM/2013[1996-97]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Nov 2022AY 1996-97

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Gagan Goyal

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Ms. Nilu Jaggi, Sr.DR

Section 131Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68Section 80H

…introduced as sales. We further relied on the following judicial pronouncement as under  Roshan di Hatti Vs CIT 107 ITR 938 (S.C)  Kale khan Mohammed Hanif Vs CIT 50 ITR 1(S.C)  CIT Vs M.Ganapathi Mudaliar 53 ITR 623 (S.C)  A.Govindarajulu Mudalair Vs CIT 34 ITR 807 (S.C) In view of the above addition u/s 68 is rightly made and ground no -4 raised by assessee are dismissed. 7 ITA No. 3267 Mum 2013 & 404 Mum 2016-Sabara Impex Ltd. 10. As far as ground no-5 is concerned that has been dealt in detail by the AO in its original order, order of CIT (A) against the earlier assessment order dated 22- 01-2003 (para…