How many judgments cite Kachwala Gems v. JCIT?

332 judgments on BharatTax cite Kachwala Gems v. JCIT (288 ITR 10), spanning 2015 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Kachwala Gems v. JCIT come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 143(3), Section 148, Section 144, Section 145(3), Section 147, Section 68.

Kachwala Gems v. JCIT

288 ITR 10Supreme Court of India2007#229 most cited

What is Kachwala Gems v. JCIT authority for?

In a best judgment assessment, some guesswork is inherent, but the estimate must be fair and not arbitrary. Books of account can be rejected under Section 145(3) if the assessee fails to substantiate entries or prove the genuineness of transactions, leading to estimation of income.

332

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,842 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Kachwala Gems v. JCIT · Section 145(3) · best judgment assessment · rejection of books of account · genuineness of purchases · arbitrary estimate · onus to prove transactions · estimation of income · Section 144 · Section 69C

Also reported as

158 Taxmann 71

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 148 Section 144 Section 145(3)Section 147 Section 68 Section 69A Section 69C

Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

best judgment assessment rejection of books of account section 145(3)section 145 loose papers section 133a section 132(4)documents seized accommodation entry regular assessment section 69c service of notice

Judgments citing Kachwala Gems v. JCIT

Kshitj Interiors P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 10(1)(2), Mumbai

The appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 2272/MUM/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Sept 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Rajesh Kumar

…ed on estimate. This High Court in the case of Sanjay Oil Cake [2009] 316 ITR 274 (Guj) has held that whether an estimate should be at a particular sum or at a different sum can never be a question of law. 7. The apex court in the case of Kachwala Gems [2007] 288 ITR 10 (SC) has held that in a best judgment assessment there is always a certain degree of guess work. No doubt, the authorities should try to make an honest and fair estimate of the income even in a best judgment assessment and should not act totally arbitrarily but there is necessarily some amount of guess work involved in a best judgment assessment.…

ACIT Cir. 1, Kalyan vs. Shreya Trading Company, Bhiwandi

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed and the appeal of Revenue is dismissed

ITA 5364/MUM/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Sept 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri P.K. Bansal, Vice- & Shri Pawan Singhm/S Shreya Trading Company Acit Circle-1 H. No. 1662, Saraswati Kalyan. Compound, Nr. Ganesh Society, Vs. Behind Apsara Cinema, Bhiwandi- 421302. Pan: Abjfs2817H (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit Circle-1 M/S Shreya Trading Company Kalyan. H. No. 1662, Saraswati Compound, Nr. Ganesh Society, Vs. Behind Apsara Cinema, Bhiwandi- 421302. Pan: Abjfs2817H (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Sunil M. Makhija (AR)For Respondent: Shri V.Vidhyadhar (DR)

Section 145(3)Section 147Section 253Section 254(1)

…and conjectures. 2. The Revenue in its cross appeal has raised the following grounds of appeal. (i) On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in relying on the decision of Supreme Court in the case of Kanchwala Gems Vs. JCIT 288 ITR 10(SC) and Hon'ble High Court's decision in the case of Vijay Protein, Sanjay Oil Cake Industries, etc. (ii) On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, and in law, the Hon'ble CIT(A) erred in not following the order of ITAT, Pune in ITA No. 1411-1415 dated 20.02.2015 in the case of M/s. Kolte Patil Developers Ltd. wherein 100% addition of bog…

Shreya Trading Company, Bhiwandi vs. ACIT Cir. 1, Kalyan

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed and the appeal of Revenue is dismissed

ITA 5051/MUM/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Sept 2017AY 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Sunil M. Makhija (AR)For Respondent: Shri V.Vidhyadhar (DR)

Section 145(3)Section 147Section 253Section 254(1)

DCIT 9(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Acon Measurement P.Ltd, Mumbai

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and the

ITA 4736/MUM/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Sept 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Rajesh Kumarassessment Year: 2009-10 Dcit -9(1))(1), M/S Acon Measurement Pvt. Room No.260A, 02Nd Floor बनाम/ Limited, Aayakar Bhavan A-22, Nanddham Indl. Estate, Vs. M.K. Road Marol Maroshi Road, Mumbai-400020. Andheri (East), Mumbai-400059 (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) Pan. No. Aaaca5078K

Section 133(6)

ACIT Cir 4(2), Mumbai vs. Kaysons Agencies P.Ltd, Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 7717/MUM/2012[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Sept 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Rajesh Kumarassessment Year:2007-08

Section 147

…ed on estimate. This High Court in the case of Sanjay Oil Cake [2009] 316 ITR 274 (Guj) has held that whether an estimate should be at a particular sum or at a different sum can never be a question of law. 7. The apex court in the case of Kachwala Gems [2007] 288 ITR 10 (SC) has held that in a best judgment assessment there is always a certain degree of guess work. No doubt, the authorities should try to ITA No.1508, 6935 & 7717/Mum/2012 8 Kaysons Agencies Private Limited make an honest and fair estimate of the income even in a best judgment assessment and should not act totally arbitrarily but there is necessar…

Kaysons Agencies Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. A.C.I.T.Cir.4(2), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 6935/MUM/2012[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Sept 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Rajesh Kumarassessment Year:2007-08

Section 147

…ed on estimate. This High Court in the case of Sanjay Oil Cake [2009] 316 ITR 274 (Guj) has held that whether an estimate should be at a particular sum or at a different sum can never be a question of law. 7. The apex court in the case of Kachwala Gems [2007] 288 ITR 10 (SC) has held that in a best judgment assessment there is always a certain degree of guess work. No doubt, the authorities should try to ITA No.1508, 6935 & 7717/Mum/2012 8 Kaysons Agencies Private Limited make an honest and fair estimate of the income even in a best judgment assessment and should not act totally arbitrarily but there is necessar…

Kaysons Agencies P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT Cen Cir 20, Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1508/MUM/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Sept 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Rajesh Kumarassessment Year:2007-08

Section 147

…ed on estimate. This High Court in the case of Sanjay Oil Cake [2009] 316 ITR 274 (Guj) has held that whether an estimate should be at a particular sum or at a different sum can never be a question of law. 7. The apex court in the case of Kachwala Gems [2007] 288 ITR 10 (SC) has held that in a best judgment assessment there is always a certain degree of guess work. No doubt, the authorities should try to ITA No.1508, 6935 & 7717/Mum/2012 8 Kaysons Agencies Private Limited make an honest and fair estimate of the income even in a best judgment assessment and should not act totally arbitrarily but there is necessar…

Mohmad Taufiq Navlakhiya, Mumbai vs. ITO 20(2)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands dismissed

ITA 7219/MUM/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Jul 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya

For Appellant: Shri Virag ShahFor Respondent: Shri B.Satyanarayana Raju (Sr.DR)

Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 2

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, मुंबई "यायपीठ ‘SMC’, मुंबई । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES “SMC”, MUMBAI Before Shri Shamim Yahya, Accountant Member ITA No.7219/Mum/2016 : Asst.Year 2009-2010 Shri Mohmad Taufiq Navlakhiya The Income Tax Officer बनाम/ 401, June Apartment Ward 20(2)(2) Gautham Lane No.2, Andheri (West) Mumbai. Vs. Mumbai – 400 058. PAN : ACQPN5792A. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से /Appellant by : Shri Virag Shah ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent by : Shri B.Satyanarayana Raju (Sr.DR) सुनवाई क" तार"ख / घोषणा क" तार"ख / Date of Hearing : 16.05.2017 Date of Pronouncement :…

David Bhaskaran, Navi Mumbai vs. DCIT Panvel Cir, Panvel, Raigad

In the result, appeals of assessee are partly allowed

ITA 3441/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 May 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am

Section 133(6)Section 144Section 147Section 44A

…Net Profit for the last two-three years which was considered as under: - 7. The CIT(A) after considering the normal purchase and hawala purchase, applied 8% by relying on the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of M/s Kanchwala Gems Vs JCIT (2007) 288 ITR 10 (SC) & provisions of the section 44AD of the Act vide Para 11.15, which reads as under: - “11. 15 As against 8% of NP, the appellant, being contractor, had shown NP @5.34% in AY 09-10, 5.51% in A.Y 10-11 & 5.49% in AN 11-12, which is much lesser than the NP After disallowance of bogus purchases, in these years, the resultant NP is worked out at 7…

David Bhaskaran, Navi Mumbai vs. DCIT Panvel Cir, Panvel, Raigad

In the result, appeals of assessee are partly allowed

ITA 3440/MUM/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 May 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am

Section 133(6)Section 144Section 147Section 44A

David Bhaskaran, Navi Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Panvel Cir, Panvel, Raigad

In the result, appeals of assessee are partly allowed

ITA 3439/MUM/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 May 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am

Section 133(6)Section 144Section 147Section 44A

Harbans Lal Sethi, Jaipur vs. Addl. CIT, Kota

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and that of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 495/JPR/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur30 May 2017AY 2006-07

For Appellant: Shri Mahendra Gargieya, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri R.A. Verma, Addl. CIT-. DR

Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 234BSection 244A

…SC) 2. Jute Corporation of India Ltd. vs. CIT, 187 ITR 688 (SC) 3. Popular Automobiles vs. CIT, 187 ITR 86 (Ker.) 4. CIT vs. Gotan Lime Khanij Udyog, 256 ITR 243 (Raj.) 5. CIT vs. Maharaja Shree Umed Mills Ltd. ,192 ITR 565 (Raj.) 6. Kachawala Gems vs. JCIT , 288 ITR 10 (SC) 7. Narsingdas Ramkishan Pungaliya vs. ACIT, 184 CTR 448 (Raj) 4.6 We have carefully considered the rival contentions and perused the material available on record. As regards the enhancement made by the ld. CIT(A), we do not accept the contention of the ld. AR that such enhancement is without jurisdiction in as much as there is no new item o…

ITO 19(3)(3), Mumbai vs. Shravan K Bishnoi, Mumbai

Appeal stands dismissed

ITA 2047/MUM/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 May 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Jm & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.2047/Mum/2015 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Income Tax Officer Shravan K. Bishnoi 19(3)(3) Prop. M/S Ganpat Steel 2Nd Floor, Matru Mandir C/O Poonam Enterprises बनाम/ Tardeo Road Ground Floor, Shop No.2 Vs. Mumbai – 400007 Khemraj Bhavan Near Alankar Cinema Mumbai – 400 004 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Amdpb-5985-G (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) :

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Arvind Kumar, Ld. DR

Section 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 69C

…-12 reduce his true profits. As seen earlier in the case of Vijay Proteins (supra), this is a case which calls for the disallowance as above as the payment by account payee cheque is not sufficient to establish the genuineness of the purchases [ Kachwala Gems 288 ITR 10 (SC)]. Accordingly, the ground raised is partly allowed. 4. The Ld. Departmental representative [DR] placed reliance on the order of Ld. AO to contend that the assessee failed to substantiate the purchases made by him in any manner and mere production of documents was not sufficient to prove the actual delivery of goods. The assessee failed to pro…

Suresh L. Satyani, Mumbai vs. ITO 23(3)(4), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 3452/MUM/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Apr 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: Shri Biren GabhawalaFor Respondent: Shri B.S. Bist, DR

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…factual matrix of the case and cannot be arbitrarily applied at the discretion of authorities . We have gone through the case laws relied upon by the assessee. Reference is drawn to decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Kachwala Gems v. JCIT (2007) 288 ITR 10(SC) , wherein Hon’ble Lordships held as under : “4. The facts of the case are in a short compass. The appellant-assessee deals in precious and semi-precious stones. In the course of assessment, the Assessing Officer noticed the following defects in the books of account of the assessee : "1. The assessee has not maintained and kept any quantitativ…

ITO WD 1(5), Kalyan vs. Gopal Ramshish Tripathi, Bhiwandi

In the result, the appeal for all three years, are PARTLY

ITA 6559/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Apr 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am

Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 148Section 69C

…ayee Cheque is not sacrosanct it would root make otherwise non-genuine transaction genuine. CIT Vis. Precision Finance Pvt. Ltd. 208 ITR 465 (Cal). CO No.61 & 62/Mum/2017 Gopal Ramshish Tripathi - Even in the case of M/s. Kanchwala Gems VIs JCIT upheld by SC 288 ITR 10 (SC), Hon'ble ITA T had held that even Account Payee Cheque is not sufficient to establish the genuineness of the purchases. In the case of CIT Vs Motor General Finance Ltd. 254 ITR 449 (Del), it was held that since the assessee, despite several opportunities granted, did not produce the relevant documents, an adverse inference had to be drawn aga…

Ratnagiri Stainless P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO 5(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 4463/MUM/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Apr 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 4463/Mum/2016 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10) M/S Ratnagiri Stainless Pvt. Income Tax Officer 5(3)(1), बनाम/ Ltd., Mumbai. V. 21/23, Laxmi Niwas, 2 Nd Parsiwada Lane, Opp V.P. Road Police Station, Mumbai – 400 004. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Aadcr2993P (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri N.M. PorwalFor Respondent: Ms. Pooja Swaroop,DR

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 234A

…ase and cannot be arbitrarily applied at the discretion of authorities . We have gone through the case laws relied upon by the assessee. Reference is ITA 4463/Mum/2016 32 drawn to decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Kachwala Gems v. JCIT (2007) 288 ITR 10(SC) , wherein Hon’ble Lordships held as under : “4. The facts of the case are in a short compass. The appellant-assessee deals in precious and semi-precious stones. In the course of assessment, the Assessing Officer noticed the following defects in the books of account of the assessee : "1. The assessee has not maintained and kept any quantitativ…

Sanjeev A Chheda, Mumbai vs. ITO WD 30(3)(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 4466/MUM/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Mar 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 4466/Mum/2016 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2010-11) Sanjeev Amritlal Chheda, Income Tax Officer बनाम/ T-6, Seksaria Industrial Ward 30(3)(2), V. Estate, C13, Room No. 610, S.V. Road, Malad (West), 6 Th Floor, Mumbai – 400 064. Pratyakshkar Bhavan, Bandra (East), Mumbai.400 051. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Aabpc8631Q .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Haresh P. ShahFor Respondent: Shri B.S. Bist, D.R

Section 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…guess work should be fair , honest and rational keeping in view factual matrix of the case and cannot be arbitrarily applied at the discretion of authorities . Reference is drawn to decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Kachwala Gems v. JCIT (2007) 288 ITR 10(SC) , wherein Hon’ble Lordships held as under : “4. The facts of the case are in a short compass. The appellant-assessee deals in precious and semi-precious stones. In the course of assessment, the Assessing Officer noticed the following defects in the books of account of the assessee : "1. The assessee has not maintained and kept any quantitativ…

Harish Radeshyam Khandelwal, Mumbai vs. ITO 30(1)(4), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 5515/MUM/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Mar 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.5515/Mum/2016 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10) Shri Harish Radeshyam The Income Tax Officer – बनाम/ Khandelwal, 30(1)(4), V. C/O D.C. Jain & Co., C-13, 6 Th Floor, 75, Bombay Mutual Bldg. Pratyakshakar Bhavan, 293, Room No. 604, Dr. D.N. Road, Fort, Bandra Kurla Complex, Mumbai – 400 001. Bandra (E), Mumbai – 400 051. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Aabpk6531H (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri D.C. JainFor Respondent: Ms. Pooja Swaroop, DR

Section 131Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 145Section 147Section 148

…O that mere filing of purchase bills and payment by account payee cheques was not sacrosanct and was not sufficient to establish genuineness of these purchases. The A.O. relied on decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Kachwal Gems v. Jt. CIT (2007) 288 ITR 10(SC) and decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Mcdowell and Co. Limited v. CIT 154 ITR 148(SC). Thus, the A.O. held that assessee was a beneficiary of accommodation entries through bogus bills issued by these four parties whereby there were no actual delivery of the goods. The AO observed that onus is on the assessee to prove genuineness…

ITO WD 1(3), Mumbai vs. Ruchi Menthol P.Ltd, Dombivali

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 4487/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Feb 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao

For Appellant: Ms. Beena Santosh, DRFor Respondent: Shri Ketan C Vajani

…n purpose, grounds raised by the Revenue in its appeal for the AY 2010-2011 are extracted as under:- “1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, Ld CIT (A) has erred in relying on the decision of Supreme Court in the case of Kanchwala Gems vs. JCIT 288 ITR 10 (SC) and Hon’ble High Court’s decision in the case of Vijay Protein, Sanjay Oil Cake Industries etc. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Hon’ble CIT (A) erred in not following the order of the ITAT, Pune in ITA No. 1411-1415 dated 20.02.2015 in the case of M/s. Kolte Patil Developers Ltd wherein 100% addition of bo…

Mohan P. Gokulkar, Bhiwandi vs. ITO WD 1(2), Kalyan

In the result, appeal of assessee is partly allowed by sustaining the addition to the extent of Rs

ITA 380/MUM/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Jan 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No.380/Mum/2016 (ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2009-10) बनधम/ Shri Mohan P Gokulkar, Income Tax Officer-Ward 1(2), Shreeji Apartment Block No.3, Kalyan, Vs. Shree Complex, 1St Floor, Ajit Petrol Pump, Kon Village, Bhivandi-421311 स्थधयी ऱेखध सं./ Pan :Aazpg8856B अपीऱार्थी ओर से / Appellant By Ms.Vrinda Agrawal & Shri Bhupendra Agrawal प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से/Respondent By Shri B.S Bist सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 9.11.2016 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement :11.1.2017 आदेश / O R D E R Per Rajesh Kumar, Am The Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 22.12.2015, Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax(A)-2, Thane, Mumbai U/S 143(3) R.W.S.147 Of The Income Tax Act For The Assessment Year 2009-10 Confirming The Addition Of Rs.26,34,520/- As Made By The Ao On Account Of Unproved Purchases & Not Genuineness Purchases On The 2 Basis Of Information Received From The Sales Tax Department, Government Of Maharashtra.

Section 131Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 148

…992/- less GP declared- 14,69,471/-), by booking hawala purchases, for which the Ld.AR could not offer any satisfactory explanation. In this regard, the reliance is placed on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Mls Kanchwala Gems Vs JCIT, 288 ITR 10 (SC), which the estimation of GP was held, as justified. 5.9 In view of these facts, the appellant was requested to furnish present mailing addresses, confirmation of these hawala parties and was also requested to produce them before the department, for examination in person. The appellant, however, had shown his inability to comply with the above…