Gur Prasad Hari Das v. Commissioner of Income Tax

47 ITR 634High Court1963#8499 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2022 to 2024.

Sections most often in play

Section 115BBE Section 133(6)Section 133A Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 37(1)Section 68 Section 69A

Issues it is cited on

section 254(1)section 115bb section 115b section 254 section 115bbe section 44ab section 115 limited scrutiny section 11 unexplained cash credit unexplained money section 133(6)

Judgments citing Gur Prasad Hari Das v. Commissioner of Income Tax

ACIT, CIRCLE-22(2), NEW DELHI vs. SAMVARDHAN MARKETING PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is partly allowed

ITA 27/DEL/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Oct 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumar, Judicialmember Acit, Circle 22(2), Vs. Samvardhan Marketing Pvt. Ltd. New Delhi 2366, Satya Chambers, Rajguru Road, Paharganj, New Delhi – 110 055 (Pan: Aalcs8254L) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Rajkumar, Ca Shri J.P. Sharma, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Sujit Kumar, Cit (Dr) Date Of Hearing : 05.08.2024 Date Of Order : 16.10.2024 O R D E R Per S. Rifaur Rahman, Am :

For Appellant: Shri Rajkumar, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sujit Kumar, CIT (DR)

Section 115BSection 143(2)Section 68

…xmann.com 58 (Chandigarh – Trib.); (iv) Narendra G. Goradia vs. CIT (1998) 234 ITR 571 (Bombay HC); (v) Lakshmi Rice Mills vs. CIT (1974) 97 ITR 258 (Pat.)(HC); (vi) Lakhmichand Baijnath vs. CIT (1959) 35 ITR 416 (SC); (vii) Gur Prasad Hari Das vs. CIT (1963) 47 ITR 634 (All.)(HC); 14 Kanpur Steel Co. Ltd. vs. CIT (1957) 32 ITR 56 (All.)(HC); (ix) Sri Sri Nilkantha Narayan Singh vs. CIT (1951) 20 ITR 8 (Pat.)(HC); (x) Lalchand Bhagat Ambica Ram vs. CIT (1959) 37 ITR 288 (SC). 12. With regard to disallowance of salary expenses, ld. AR for the assessee submitted that assessee has submitted before the ld. CIT (A) t…

AVINASH ARADHYA,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(2), BANGALORE , BENGALURU

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

ITA 1418/BANG/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore19 Sept 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year: 2020-21

For Appellant: Shri Siddesh Nagaraj Gaddi, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, CIT (DR)

Section 143(3)Section 69A

…mote, that the assessee was in possession of the currency which was the legal tender i.e. currency of Rs. 100, 50, 20 and 10. In holding so, we find necessary to refer the judgement of Allahabad High Court in the case of Gur Prasad Haridas vs. CIT reported in 47 ITR 634 wherein it was observed as under: It has been case of this in Kanpur Co. Ltd. a matter. Prior to 12-1-1946, high denomination notes were legal tender. Accordingly, prior to that date it was no part of the duty of an assessee to keep particulars of any high denomination notes that he might have received. It was only as a result of the Ordinance tha…

SHRI HARESHKUMAR JAYANTILAL MAHADEVWALA HUF,SURAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1(3)(1), SURAT

In the result, ground No.1 of the appeal is partly allowed

ITA 248/SRT/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Surat30 Nov 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh(Hybrid Hearing) Hareshkumar Jayantilal I.T.O., Mahadevwala Huf, Ward-1(3)(1), Vs. 145, Sarjan Society, Parlepoint, Surat. Athwalines, Surat, Gujarat-395001. Pan No. Aaahh 8541 R Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

Section 115BSection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 254(1)Section 68

…d cash credit is not warranted, relied on the following decisions: (1) Narendra G. Goradia HUF Vs CIT (1998) 234 ITR 571 (Bom) (2) CIT Vs. Kulvant Rai 291 ITR 36 (Del) (3) Lakshmi Rice Mills Vs CIT (1974) 97 ITR 258 (Pat) (4) Gur Prasad Hari Das Vs CIT (1963) 47 ITR 634 (All) (5) Kanpur Steel Co. Ltd. Vs CIT (1957) 32 ITR 56 (All) (6) S.R. Venkata Ratnam Vs CIT (1980) 48 CCH 619 (Kar) (7) Vinatha Madhusdan Reddy Vs ACIT (2018) 54 CCH 151 (Mum Trib) (8) R.S. Diamond (P) Ltd. Vs ACIT (2022) 145 taxmann.com 545 (Mum Trib) (9) ACIT Vs Baldev Raj Charla & ors. 121 TTJ 366 (Del Trib) (10) Om Prakash Nahar Vs ITO (2022)…

KRISHNA HIREN GUJARATI,SURAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WD. 3(2)(4), SURAT

In the result, the ground of appeal raised by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 188/SRT/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Surat07 Nov 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh(Hybrid Hearing) Krishna Hiren Gujarati, I.T.O., C-24, Krishna Park Society, Opp. Ward-3(2)(4), Vs. Bhagat Nagar, Ved Gurukul Road, Surat. Surat-4 (Gujarat) Pan No. Acupk 0294 Q Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

Section 115BSection 254(1)Section 44ASection 69A

…on that the addition on account of unexplained cash credit is not warranted, relied on the following decisions: (1) Narendra G. Goradia Vs CIT (1998) 234 ITR 571 (Bom) (2) Lakshmi Rice Mills Vs CIT (1974) 97 ITR 258 (Pat) (3) Gur Prasad Hari Das Vs CIT (1963) 47 ITR 634 (All) (4) Kanpur Steel Co. Ltd. Vs CIT (1957) 32 ITR 56 (All) (5) Sri Sri Nilkantha Narayan Singh Vs CIT (1951) 20 ITR 8 (pat) (6) R.S. Diamond (P) Ltd. Vs ACIT (2022) 145 taxmann.com 545 (Mum Trib) On the wrong invocation/application of Section 115BBE of the Act, the ld. AR of the assessee relied on the following decisions: (7) J.K. Choksi Vs ACI…

JITENDRA NEMICHAND GUPTA,SURAT vs. ITO, WARD-2(3)(2), SURAT

In the result, the ground No

ITA 211/SRT/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Surat30 Jun 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh(Physical Hearing) Jitendra Nemichand Gupta, I.T.O., B-102, Swastik Woods, Vesu, Ward-2(3)(2), Vs. Surat-395007. Surat. Pan No. Ammpg 2317 A Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

Section 254(1)

…: (1) Radhasoami Satsang Vs CIT (1992) 60 Taxman 248 (SC) (2) ITO Vs Ashwin d. Menta Tax Appeal No. 386 of 2000 (3) Narendra g. Goradia Vs CIT (1998) 234 ITR 571 (Bom) (4) Lakshmi Rice Mills Vs CIT (1974) 97 ITR 258 (Pat) (5) Gur Prasad Hari Das Vs CIT (1963) 47 ITR 634 (All) (6) Kanpur Steel Co. Ltd. Vs CIT (1957) 32 ITR 56 (all) (7) Anantpur Kalpana Vs ITO (2022) 138 taxmann.com 141 (Bang Trib) (8) Dr. T.A. Qureshi Vs CIT 287 ITR 0547 (SC) (9) Lakhmichand Baijnath vs CIT 35 ITR 416 (SC) 6 Jitendra Nemichand Gupta Vs ITO (10) Naliniknat Ambalal Mody Vs CIT 61 ITR 428 (SC) (11) CIT Vs D.P. Sandu Bros. Chembur (P)…

ARJUNSINH HARISINH THAKOR,SURAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, BARDOLI

In the result, grounds No

ITA 245/SRT/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Surat15 Jun 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh(Physical Hearing) Arjunsinh Harisinh Thakor, I.T.O., 1 Thakor Niwas, Zanda Chowk, Ward-1, Vs. Tarasadi Road, Kosamba, Bardoli. Surat-394120. Pan No. Aabpt 1270 G Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

Section 115BSection 254(1)Section 68

…tion with regard to unexplained cash credit, the ld. AR of the assessee has relied upon the following case laws: (1) Narendra G Goradia Vs CIT (1998) 234 ITR 571 (Bom) (2) Lakshmi Rice Mills Vs CIT (1974) 97 ITR 258 (Pat) (3) Gur Prasad Hari Das Vs CIT (1963) 47 ITR 634 (All) (4) Kanpur Steel Co. Ltd. Vs CIT (1957) 32 ITR 56 (All) (5) Sri Sri Nilkantha Narayan Singh Vs CIT (1951) 20 ITR 8 (Pat) (6) CIT Vs Kulvant Rai 291 ITR 36 (Del) (7) S.R. Venkata Ratnam Vs CIT (1980) 48 CCH 0619 (Kar) (8) Vinatha Madhusudan Reddy Vs ACIT (2018) 54 CCH 0151 (Mum Trib) (9) R.S. Diamonds India (P) Ltd. Vs ACIT (2022) 145 taxmann…

CLAYTON CHARLES PINTO,MUMBAI vs. INT TAX WARD 3(3)(1) , MUMBAI

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

ITA 102/MUM/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Jun 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Bleclayton Charles Pinto Mumbai. V. Int Tax Ward 3(3)(1) Mumbai. Air India Building, Mumbai- 400021 303 Palm Beach Apartments, 31 J P Road, Andheri West Mumbai- 400061

Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)

…alance was increasing steadily, the assessee might not have felt if necessary to keep the balance in currency notes of low denomination. Such an explanation by assessee is not an unreasonable explanation." xiv) In the case of Gur Prasad Hari Das vs CIT (1963) 47 ITR 634 (AR) it was held that, "Whether in view of aforesaid, there was no material before Tribunal for holding that assessee could not have been in possession of any of remaining thirteen notes also and that those notes or any part of them represented income of assessee from some undisclosed sources." xv. In the case of Gordhan v Dy. CIT dated 19/10/2019…

SHREE ABHISHEK BIPINBHAI NAIK,SURAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(2)(1), SURAT

In the result, the ground No

ITA 12/SRT/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Surat31 May 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh(Virtual Hearing) Abhishek Bipinbhai Naik I.T.O., (Prop. Of M/S Shivbhole Services), Ward 1(2)(1), Vs. House No. 1, Desai Faliyu, At Po Surat. Vaktana, Tal, Choryasi Via Sachin, Surat-394230. Pan No. Agppn 5994 H Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

Section 254(1)Section 271ASection 69A

…mits that the entire addition is liable to be deleted. To support his submission, the ld. AR of the assessee has relied upon the following decisions: (i) New Pooja Jewellers Vs ITO ITA No. 1329/Kol/2018 dated 26/02/2020. (ii) Gur Prasad Hari Das Vs CIT (1963) 47 ITR 634 (All) 8 Abhishek Bipinbhai Naik Vs ITO (iii) DCIT Vs M/s Karthik Construction Co. ITA No. 2292/Mum/2016 dated 23/02/2018. (iv) Smt. Teena Bethala Vs ITO ITA No. 1383 & 1384/Bang/2019 dated 28/08/2019 9. On the other hand, the ld. Sr. DR for the revenue submits that the assessee has not furnished any evidence in response to show cause notice befor…

THAKORDAS PAREKH & SONS,,NA vs. ARIVS.INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-5, NAVSARI

In the result, ground No. 2 & 3

ITA 167/SRT/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Surat30 Mar 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Pawan Singhआ.अ.सं./Ita No.167/Srt/2022 (Ay 2017-18) (Hearing In Physical Court) Thakordas Parekh & Sons Income Tax Officer, Ward-5, Bazar Street, Chikhli, Navsari, 204, 2Nd Floor, Vs Navsari-396530 Income Tax Office, Pan No: Aabft 4593 J Charpool, Awabaug, Navsari-396445 अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By Shri Rasesh Shah, C.A राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing 05.01.2023 उ"घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of 30.03.2023 Pronouncement Order Under Section 254(1) Of Income Tax Act Per Pawan Singh: 1. This Appeal By Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [For Short To As “Nfac/Ld.Cit(A)”] Dated 23.03.2022 For Assessment Year 2017-18, Which In Turn Arises From The Addition Made By The Income Tax Officer, Ward-5, Navsari / Assessing Officer In Assessment Order Passed Under Section 144 R.W.S143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) Dated 30.12.2019. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:- “1. On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case As Well As Law On The Subject, The Learned Cit(A) Has Erred In Confirming The Action Thakordas Parekh & Sons Of Assessing Officer In Rejecting The Books Of Accounts U/S 145(3) Of The Act.

Section 115BSection 144Section 145(3)Section 254(1)Section 68

…d before VAT Department. To support such submission, the Ld. AR for the assessee relied on the following case law:  Narendra G. Goradia vs. CIT (1998) 234 ITR 571 (Bom)  Lakshmi Rice Mills vs. CIT (1974) 97 ITR 258 (Pat)  Gur Prasad Hari Das vs. CIT (1963) 47 ITR 634 (All)  Kanpur Steel Co. Ltd. vs. CIT (1957) 32 ITR 56 (All)  Sri Sri Nilkantha Narayan Singh vs. CIT (1951) 20 ITR 8 (Pat)  CIT vs. Kulvant Rai 291 ITR 36 (Del)  Atish Singla Vs Income Tax Officer [ITA No.1185/Del/2021 dated 06.04.2022  Agson Global Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT 115 taxmann.com 342 (Del.Trib)  Asst. Commissioner of Income-tax Vs M/s Hi…

ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1 , JAIPUR vs. MAHENDRA KUMAR AGARWAL, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 172/JPR/2022[ABUPK2500L]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur22 Nov 2022

For Appellant: Shri Kapil Khejrolia (CA)For Respondent: Shri A.S. Nehra (Addl. CIT) fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@

Section 115BSection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 68

…en taxed". The assessee has already offered the sales for taxation hence the onus has been discharged by it and the same income cannot be taxed again. 15) Hon’ble High Court of Allahabad in the case of Gur Prasad Hari Das vs Commissioner of Income Tax [1963] 47 ITR 634 (Allahabad) Case Law paper Book page 229-231 Section 143 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [Corresponding to section 23(3) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922] - Assessment – Addition to income - Assessment year 1947-48 – On demonetisation of high denomination notes assessee encashed 21 such notes, part of 34 Shri Mahendra Kumar Agarwal, Jaipur. which…

INCOME TAX OFFICER , JAIPUR vs. RAJ KUMAR NOWAL, JAIPUR

In the result, this appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 165/JPR/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur22 Nov 2022AY 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Kapil Khejrolia (CA)For Respondent: Shri A.S. Nehra (Addl. CIT) fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@

Section 143(3)Section 68

SANJIV RAMESH KOCHHAR,MUMBAI vs. ACIT CIRCLE 17(3), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 818/MUM/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Oct 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shrikuldip Singh & Shri Gagan Goyalsanjiv Ramesh Kochhar 202, A Wing, Eastern Court, Tejpal Road, Vile Parle (E), Mumbai-400057. Pan: Aadpk0769K ...... Appellant Vs. Acit, Circle-17(3) Room No. 122, 1St Floor, Kautilya Bhavan, C-141 To C-43, G Block, Bkc, Bandra (E), Mumbai-400051. ..... Respondent Appellant By : Sh. Govind Javeri Respondent By : Sh. Tejinder Pal Singh Date Of Hearing : 13/07/2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 04/10/2022 Order Per Gagan Goyal, A.M: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As [‘Nfac’] Dated 26.11.2021 Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter

For Appellant: Sh. Govind JaveriFor Respondent: Sh. Tejinder Pal Singh

Section 143Section 250Section 271ASection 69C

…denomination notes. When both the possibilities were there, it could not be 4. ITA No. 818/Mum/2022-Sanjiv Ramesh Kochhar said that those or any of them represented the income of the assessee from some undisclosed source. Gur Prasad Hari Das vs. CIT [1963] 47 ITR 634 (All.) 3. Assessee produced details of withdrawals for past 7 years, and claimed the amount encashed on demonetization as to be out of savings from such withdrawals, such an explanation cannot be rejected by AO. -Sri Sri Nilkantha Narayan Singh vs. CIT [1951] 20 ITR 8 (Pat) On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the Learned Assessin…

INCOME TAX OFFICER, JAIPUR vs. MOTISONS JEWELLERS LTDL, JAIPUR

ITA 161/JPR/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur29 Sept 2022AY 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Goyal (C.A.)For Respondent: Shri Sanjay Dhariwal (CIT) a

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 68

…een taxed". The assessee has already offered the sales for taxation hence the onus has been discharged by it and the same income cannot be taxed again. 16) Hon’ble High Court of Allahabad in the case of Gur Prasad Hari Das vs Commissioner of Income Tax [1963] 47 ITR 634 (Allahabad)(Copy at Case Law PB Page No. 229-231) Section 143 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [Corresponding to section 23(3) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922] - Assessment – Addition to income - Assessment year 1947-48 – On demonetisation of high denomination notes assessee encashed 21 such notes, part of which were held, by Tribunal as his income…