K. L. Sreenhasulu v. CIT

127 ITR 834High Court1981#22295 most cited
3

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 348,631 Indian tax judgments — from 2025 to 2025.

Sections most often in play

Section 115BBESection 131Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 37(1)Section 68

Issues it is cited on

section 115beproximate nexussection 91preponderance of probabilityviolation of natural justicecreditworthiness of the creditoraddition under section 68section 148a(d)section 115bbsection 115bsection 37(1)commissioner (appeals)

Judgments citing K. L. Sreenhasulu v. CIT

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle -5(2), Mumbai, Nariman Point vs. Agv Consultants, Borivali (E), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals filed by the revenue

ITA 4878/MUM/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 May 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Hon'Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain & Hon'Ble Shri Prabhash Shankar

Section 131Section 133ASection 250Section 68

…f India [1973] 92 ITR 1 (Delhi), Shakuntla Mehra v. CWT [1976] 102 ITR 301 (Delhi) and Paras Bhan Sadh v. CIT 114 ITR 834 (All.). The order which is based on reasons which are invalid, is also liable to be set aside as invalid- K. L. Sreenhasulu v. CIT [1981] 127 ITR 834 (Kar.). Orders passed in violation of natural justice is a nullity- Ram Swarup v. Shikar Chand AIR 1966 SC 893, State of U.P. v Kaluwa 40 STC 79 (All.) and Raja Jagdambika Pratap Narain Singh v. CBDT [1975] 100 ITR 698 (SC). f) The primary and sole reason for making the addition on account of cash credit u/s.68 in respect of Consultancy received…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle -5(2), Mumbai, Nariman Point vs. Agv Consultants, Borivali (E), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals filed by the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 4872/MUM/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 May 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain & Hon’Ble Shri Prabhash Shankar

Section 131Section 133ASection 250Section 68

…f India [1973] 92 ITR 1 (Delhi), Shakuntla Mehra v. CWT [1976] 102 ITR 301 (Delhi) and Paras Bhan Sadh v. CIT 114 ITR 834 (All.). The order which is based on reasons which are invalid, is also liable to be set aside as invalid— K. L. Sreenhasulu v. CIT [1981] 127 ITR 834 (Kar.). Orders passed in violation of natural justice is a nullity— Ram Swarup v. Shikar Chand AIR 1966 SC 893, State of U.P. v Kaluwa 40 STC 79 (All.) and Raja Jagdambika Pratap Narain Singh v. CBDT [1975] 100 ITR 698 (SC). f) The primary and sole reason for making the addition on account of cash credit u/s.68 in respect of Consultancy received…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle- 5(2), Mumbai, Nariman Point vs. Agv Consultants, Borivali (E), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals filed by the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 4865/MUM/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 May 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain & Hon’Ble Shri Prabhash Shankar

Section 131Section 133ASection 250Section 68

…f India [1973] 92 ITR 1 (Delhi), Shakuntla Mehra v. CWT [1976] 102 ITR 301 (Delhi) and Paras Bhan Sadh v. CIT 114 ITR 834 (All.). The order which is based on reasons which are invalid, is also liable to be set aside as invalid— K. L. Sreenhasulu v. CIT [1981] 127 ITR 834 (Kar.). Orders passed in violation of natural justice is a nullity— Ram Swarup v. Shikar Chand AIR 1966 SC 893, State of U.P. v Kaluwa 40 STC 79 (All.) and Raja Jagdambika Pratap Narain Singh v. CBDT [1975] 100 ITR 698 (SC). f) The primary and sole reason for making the addition on account of cash credit u/s.68 in respect of Consultancy received…

K. L. Sreenhasulu v. CIT (127 ITR 834) — Cited in 3 Judgments | BharatTax