What is (ⅲ)Pooja Bhatt v. ACIT authority for?

Additions to income cannot be justified based on loose papers or rough notes found during a search if there is no other corroborative evidence to prove that the amounts represent undisclosed income or actual expenditures not recorded in books of account. The onus is on the revenue to discharge its burden of proof.

How many judgments cite (ⅲ)Pooja Bhatt v. ACIT?

40 judgments on BharatTax cite (ⅲ)Pooja Bhatt v. ACIT (73 ITD 205), spanning 2018 to 2025.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does (ⅲ)Pooja Bhatt v. ACIT come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 1961, Section 133A, Section 143(3), Section 147, Section 292C, Section 45(4).

(ⅲ)Pooja Bhatt v. ACIT (73 ITD 205)

HEMANT NARESH AGARWAL,SURAT vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIR. 4, SURAT

In the result, appeal of assessee is dismissed

ITA 170/SRT/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Surat24 Oct 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआ.(खो और ज).सं /It(Ss)A No.68 & 70/Srt/2023 Assessment Years: 2015-16 & 2018-19 (Physical Court Hearing) Deputy Commissioner Of Hemant Naresh Agarwal बनाम/ Income-Tax, Central Circle-4, 701, Shree Shyam Awas, Bhatar Vs. Surat Room No.508, 5Th Floor, Road, Near Vidhya Bharti School, Aayakar Bhawan, Majura Surat-395 010 Gate, Surat-395 001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Auppa 9003 J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita.No.170/Srt/2023 Assessment Year: 2020-21 Hemant Naresh Agarwal Assistant Commissioner Of बनाम/ 701, Shree Shyam Awas, Bhatar Income-Tax, Central Circle-4, Vs. Road, Near Vidhya Bharti School, Surat, Aaykar Bhawan, Surat-395 010 Majura Gate, Surat-395 001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Auppa 9003 J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent) िनधा"रती की ओर से /Assessee By Shri Kiran K. Shah राज" की ओर से /Revenue By Shri Mukesh Jain, Cit-Dr & Shri Kevin Langaliya, Ca सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing 18/09/2025 उद्घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement 24/10/2025

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 292CSection 69

…(307 ITR 137) (Guj.) b) CIT vs. S. M. Aggrawal (293 ITR 43) Del. HC. c) Jayantilal Patel vs. ACIT (1998) 233 ITR 588 (Raj.) d) S. K. Gupta vs. DCIT (1999) 63 TTJ Del. Trib. 532 e) Atulkumar Jain vs. DCIT (64 TTJ Del. Trib. 786) f) Pooja Bhatt vs. ACIT (2000) 73 ITD 205 (Mum. Trib.) g) ITO vs. Shri Rajkumar Birla (ITA No. 934/944/945 / Hyd. / 2012) (ITAT Hyd.) h) ACIT vs. Shri Sharad Chaudhary (ITA No. 933 / Del. / 2012) i) Mohan Foods Ltd vs. CIT (301 ITR 185) 1.7 The learned CIT (A) held that the said image is regarding loan given against collateral security of gold ornaments and the same was returned on 12.10.…

JAYANTILAL RAJMAL SETH,MUMBAI vs. DCIT-CC-4(3), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

ITA 3260/MUM/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Sept 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan () Assessment Year: 2018-19 Jayantilal Rajmal Seth, Dcit-Cc-4(3), A-3, Saibaba Shopping Centre, Bkc, Mumbai-400051. Mumbai Central, Vs. Mumbai-400008. Pan No. Agepj 0499 E Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. Vivek Perampurna, CIT-DRFor Respondent: Mr. Jayant Bhat

Section 139(5)Section 148Section 263

…gree cannot partake the direct documentary evidences filed on record. {P.K. Noorjahan 237 ITR 570 (SC) and Pooja Bhatt filed on record. {P.K. Noorjahan 237 ITR 570 (SC) and Pooja Bhatt filed on record. {P.K. Noorjahan 237 ITR 570 (SC) and Pooja Bhatt v. ACIT (73 ITD 205 Mum v. ACIT (73 ITD 205 Mum-ITAT)). There is no contrary documentary ITAT)). There is no contrary documentary evidence available on record to disprove t evidence available on record to disprove the loan transactions. The he loan transactions. The assessee also request to provide an opportunity of cross assessee also request to provide an opportuni…

SURESH KUMAR BANTHIA,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 4(3), , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 835/KOL/2025[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Sept 2025AY 2020-2021

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm Suresh Kumar Banthia Dcit, Central Circle-4(3) 147 Banthia House Mahatma Aayakar Bhavan, Poorva, 110 Gandhi Road, Burra Bazar, Shantipally, E.M. By Pass, Vs. Kolkata-700007, West Bengal Kolkata-700107, West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aevpb2317L Assessee By : S.M. Surana & Sunil Surana, Ars Revenue By : Sanat Kumar Raha, Dr Date Of Hearing: 29.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 18.09.2025

For Appellant: S.M. Surana, &For Respondent: Sanat Kumar Raha, DR

Section 132Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 69A

…8. viii. CIT Vs. Chandra Chemouse P. Ltd. (2008) 298 ITR 98 (Raj.) Suresh Kumar Banthia; A.Y. 2020-21 ix. MM financiers (P) Ltd. Vs. DCIT (2007) 107 TTJ (Chennai) 2000 x. Mongra Metals (P) Ltd. Vs. ACIT 67 TTJ 247 (All. Trib) xi. Pooja Bhatt Vs. ACIT (2000) 73 ITD 205 (Mum. Trib) xii. Atual Kumar Jain Vs. CIT (2000) 64 TTJ (Del. Trib) 786 xiii. SK gupta Vs. DCIT (1999) 63 TTJ (del. Trib) 532 xiv. CIT Vs. S. Khader Khan Son-SC 2012 (25) taxmann.com 413 07. The ld. DR on the other hand relied on the order of the first appellate authority by submitting that the additions were made by the ld. AO and enhanced by…

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL CIRCLE)-1,, RAIPUR vs. M/S. CHHATISGARH DISTILLERIES LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the revenue in ITA No

ITA 103/RPR/2020[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur31 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.103/Rpr/2020 Co No.15/Rpr/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18 The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax (Central Circle)-1, Raipur (C.G.)

For Appellant: Shri S.R Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri S.L Anuragi, Ld. CIT-DR

Section 115BSection 132Section 132(4)Section 153ASection 69C

…discharge its burden of proof that the figures appearing in the loose papers found from assessee's possession constitute undisclosed income. [In the present case, loose papers were not even seized from assessee's possession]. (iii) Paola Bhatt Vs. ACIT (2000) 73 ITD 205 (Mum. Trib) Held that where document seized during search was merely a rough noting and not any evidence found that actual expenditures were not recorded in books of account, additions not justified. [In the instant case, similarly no other corroborative evidence was found in search to prove that details/figures mentioned in notings on page 117 to…

DCIT CENTRAL, BHOPAL vs. SHARAD SHARMA, BHOPAL

ITA 309/IND/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Indore19 Jul 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniit(Ss)A No. 29/Ind/2023 (Ay: 2010-11) It(Ss)A No. 32/Ind/2023 (Ay: 2015-16) Shri Sharad Sharma, Acit, Central, बनाम/ H-3B, Nishant Colony, Gwalior Vs. 74 Bunglows, (Stationed At Bhopal) Tt Nagar, Bhopal (Pan: Amzps9791D) (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent)

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 153A

…discharge its burden of proof that the figures appearing in the loose papers found from assessee’s possession constitute undisclosed income. [In the present case, loose papers were not even seized from assessee’s possession]. (iii) Pooja Bhatt Vs. ACIT (2000) 73 ITD 205 (Mum. Trib) Held that where document seized during search was merely a rough noting and not any evidence found that actual expenditures were not recorded in books of account, additions not justified. [In the instant case, similarly no other corroborative evidence was found in search to prove that details/figures mentioned in notings on page 117 to…

DCIT CENTRAL, BHOPAL vs. SHARAD SHARMA, BHOPAL

ITA 304/IND/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Indore19 Jul 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniit(Ss)A No. 29/Ind/2023 (Ay: 2010-11) It(Ss)A No. 32/Ind/2023 (Ay: 2015-16) Shri Sharad Sharma, Acit, Central, बनाम/ H-3B, Nishant Colony, Gwalior Vs. 74 Bunglows, (Stationed At Bhopal) Tt Nagar, Bhopal (Pan: Amzps9791D) (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent)

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 153A

…discharge its burden of proof that the figures appearing in the loose papers found from assessee’s possession constitute undisclosed income. [In the present case, loose papers were not even seized from assessee’s possession]. (iii) Pooja Bhatt Vs. ACIT (2000) 73 ITD 205 (Mum. Trib) Held that where document seized during search was merely a rough noting and not any evidence found that actual expenditures were not recorded in books of account, additions not justified. [In the instant case, similarly no other corroborative evidence was found in search to prove that details/figures mentioned in notings on page 117 to…

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE -2(2) , MUMBAI vs. SHRI VIRAL SARAF MITTAL , MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1843/MUM/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Feb 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Bledcit – Central Circle – 2(2) V. Viral Saraf Mittal Room No. 806, 8Th Floor 901/902, Capri Heights Old Cgo Annex Building Palli Hill, Bandra (W) M.K. Road, Mumbai - 400020 Mumbai - 400050 Pan: Azbps0317C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented By : Shri Sidharth Kothari Department Represented By : Ms. Kavitha Kaushik

Section 10(38)Section 143(2)Section 68

…[2016] 69 taxmann.com 309 (Guj.). These principles enunciated by the Apex Court/High Courts have been followed by various Tribunals. In this regard the notable cases are DN Kamani (HUF) v. Dy.CIT [1999] 70 ITD 77 (Pat.) (TM), Pooja Bhatt v. Asstt. CIT [2000] 73 ITD 205 (Mum.) and Aishwarya K. Rai v. Dy. CIT [2007] 104 ITD 166 (Mum.) (TM). 8.9. On the identical issue of LTCG on the sale of penny stock, where addition was made on the basis of Kolkata Investigation Wing Report, Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Jainam Investment vs ACIT [2021] 131 taxmann.com 327 (Bombay), has held as under- “15. As regards…