ITO v. Diza

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

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

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

…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. CIT, 254 ITR 576 (Gau.). The AO made total additions/disallowances of Rs.28,70,370/-, which is mentioned at para (i) to (ix) of the assessment order. He assessed the total income of Rs.48,50,300/- against the returned income of Rs.19,79,930/-. 7. Aggrieved by the addition made by AO, the assessee filed appeal bef…

AGRAWAL INFRABUILD PRIVATE LIMITED ,RAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-II, RAIPUR

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अऩीऱ सं./Ita Nos.10 & 11/Rpr/2020 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2013-2014 & 2014-2015) Agrawal Infrabuild Private Limited, Vs Acit, Central Circle-Ii, Raipur 1St Floor, V.R.Plaza, Bilaspur Pan No. :Aafca 6636 C (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) ..

…case, assessee is unable to establish the ingredients of section 68 - Addition is called for. Pramila Investment and Finance Ltd. v. ITO (2013) 22 ITJ 149 (Trib. =Indore). 3. CIT vs Bikram Singh (Delhi High Court): P Mohankala 291 ITR 278 (SC): Diza Holdings 255 ITR 573 (Ker): CIT vs Precision Finance 208 ITR 265 (Cal~ wherein it has been held that if the lenders do not have the financial strength to lend such huge sum and if there is no explanation a sto their relationship with the assessee, no collateral security and no agreement the transactions have to be treated as bogus unexplained credits .. 4. Share Capi…

AGRAWAL INFRABUILD PRIVATE LIMITED ,RAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-II, RAIPUR

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अऩीऱ सं./Ita Nos.10 & 11/Rpr/2020 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2013-2014 & 2014-2015) Agrawal Infrabuild Private Limited, Vs Acit, Central Circle-Ii, Raipur 1St Floor, V.R.Plaza, Bilaspur Pan No. :Aafca 6636 C (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) ..

…case, assessee is unable to establish the ingredients of section 68 - Addition is called for. Pramila Investment and Finance Ltd. v. ITO (2013) 22 ITJ 149 (Trib. =Indore). 3. CIT vs Bikram Singh (Delhi High Court): P Mohankala 291 ITR 278 (SC): Diza Holdings 255 ITR 573 (Ker): CIT vs Precision Finance 208 ITR 265 (Cal~ wherein it has been held that if the lenders do not have the financial strength to lend such huge sum and if there is no explanation a sto their relationship with the assessee, no collateral security and no agreement the transactions have to be treated as bogus unexplained credits .. 4. Share Capi…

SHRI SHRI SUDHIR KUMAR JHA,BHILAI(CG) vs. THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 1(1), BHILAI, BHILAI(CG)

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

…further held that mere filing of bank statement is not ei establish identity of creditors. The hon'ble Kerala High Court held that “The mere fact that the payment was by way of account payee cheque is also not conclusive (ITO v. Diza Holding (P) Ltd., (2002) 255 ITR 573, 577 (Ker.)” In view of the above observations the addition of Rs.10,04,418/- and Rs.20,36,092/- (Rs.30,40,510/-) is confirmed. 10. Now, to decide this issue in hand, on which the addition was sustained by the LD CIT(A), based on the allegation that the assessee was failed to explain and prove the identity and genuineness of the transaction. Ld C…

THE DY.CIT,CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, SURAT vs. SHRI DHARMESH PADAMSHIBHAI PATEL, SURAT

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

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.18/Srt/2017 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2014-15) (Virtual Court Hearing) The Deputy Commissioner Of Shri Dharmesh Padamshibhai Patel, 07, Green House, Kailash Nagar, Income Tax, Central Circle-3, Vs. Sagrampura, Surat Aayakar Bhavan, Room No.507 5Th Floor, Majura Gate, Surat- 395001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Abgpp 6255 P (Appellant ) (Respondent)

…heque, also held that burden is on the assessee to explain the deposit satisfactorily, mere furnishing of some particulars not enough, payment by cheque not conclusive. The Assessing Officer relied on the decision in the case of ITO Vs. Dlza Holdings (P) Ltd, 255 ITR 573 (Kerala), and in the case of Shankar Ghosh Vs. ITO 11985] 23 TTJ (Cal.) 20, ITA No.18/SRT/2017 A.Y. 14-15 Sh. Dharmesh P Patel wherein it was held that assessee had failed to prove the capacity of the person from whom he had allegedly taken loan. Loan amount was rightly held as assessee's own undisclosed income. In view of the foregoing discussio…

SHRI SHRI NITESHKUMAR GOYAL, RAIPUR,RAIPUR (CG) vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4(4),RAIPUR, RAIPUR (CG)

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed in terms of our aforesaid observations

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Jamlappa D Battullआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 36/Rpr/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13 Shri Nitesh Kumar Goyal Prop. Com Con India Net Work Solution Shop No.327 Lal Ganga, Shopping Mall, Raipur (C.G.) Pan : Aigpg6386B .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer Ward-4(4), Raipur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent Assessee By : Shri Prafulla Pandse, Ar Revenue By : Shri Sanjay Kumar, Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing :15.03.2022 घोषणा क" तार"ख / Date Of Pronouncement : 30.03.2022

…of the amount found credited in the books of the assessee. It is also- clear that the mere furnishing of particulars is not enough. The mere fact that the payment was by way of account payee cheque is also not conclusive (ITO v. Diz.a Holding (P) Ltd., (2002) 255 ITR 573, 577 (Ker.)". 2.4 With respect to filing of bank statement the hon'ble Andhra Pradesh High Court in 221 Taxman 143 held that mere filing of bank statement is not enough to establish identity of creditors. The courts have further held : It is necessary for the assessee to prove prima facie the transaction which results in a cash credit in his book…

SHRI SHAKTIDHAM INFRAVENTURE PRIVATE LIMITED,BILASPUR vs. PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, , BILASPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri N. K. Choudhryआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 71/Rpr/2020) ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16)

…source from which such third party has been able to obtain money. Useful reference in this regard can be made to the decision of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in case of Rohini Builders (supra) and also Nemi Chand Kothari (supra); ITO vs. Diza Holdings (P) Ltd. 255 ITR 573 (Kerala) and so on. 12. In the background of the tenets of law relevant to the present case as digested above, we take a look at the facts emerging from the record. As noted, the assessee has established not only the source of loan obtained but has also adequately demonstrated before the AO the source of money in the hands of the share applicant…