Kale Khan Mohammad Hanif v. CIT

50 ITR 1Supreme Court of India1963#103 most cited

What is Kale Khan Mohammad Hanif v. CIT authority for?

The assessee bears the onus of proving the source and nature of any sum of money or receipt found to have been received by them. If the assessee fails to satisfactorily explain the receipt, the Income-tax Officer is entitled to treat it as taxable income.

581

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2009 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Kale Khan Mohammad Hanif v. CIT · Kale Khan 50 ITR 1 · onus of proof assessee · unexplained cash credits · Section 68 addition · source of money explanation · genuineness of transaction · creditworthiness of creditor · unexplained income · taxable receipts · burden of proof cash credits · Section 69A

Sections most often in play

Section 68Section 143(3)Section 115BBESection 69ASection 147Section 142(1)Section 250Section 148

Issues it is cited on

creditworthiness of the creditoronus of proofsource of sourceshare capital and share premiumsurvey under section 133aaddition u/s 68addition under section 68share application moneygenuineness of the transactionsection 69blive linkentry operator

Judgments citing Kale Khan Mohammad Hanif v. CIT

Ankit Garg, Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-35(3), Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5507/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shris.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Anubhav Sharmaankit Garg, Vs. Ito, Ward 35 (3), L – 153, Shastri Nagar, New Delhi. Delhi – 110 052. (Pan : Amhpg1493N) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By :Shri V.K. Sabharwal, Advocate Shri Rajiv Kumar, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Ajay Kumar Arora, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 28.10.2025 Date Of Order : 14.11.2025 Order Per S. Rifaur Rahman: 1. The Assessee Has Filed Appeal Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [“Ld. Cit(A)”, For Short] Dated 03.10.2024For The Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are, The Assessee Is An Individual, Engaged In The Business Of Manufacturing, Trading, Sales Of Socks, Fabrics & Hosiery Etc. The Assessee Filed His Return Of Income On 25.01.2018 For A.Y. 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri V.K. Sabharwal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Kumar Arora, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 40Section 68

…are entitled to look into the surrounding circumstances to find out the reality and the matter has to be considered by applying the test of human probabilities. 4.2 In the case of Roshan Di Hatti Vs CIT(SC)107' ITR 938 and Kale Khan Mohammad Hani Vs CIT (SC) 50 ITR 1, Hon'ble Supreme Court held that the onus of proving the source of a sum of money found to have been received by an assessee is on him. When the nature and source of a receipt, whether it be of money or other property, cannot be satisfactorily explained by the assessee, it is open to the Revenue to hold that it is the income of the 5 assessee and no…

Shital Nilesh Parakh, Ahilyanagar vs. ITO, Ward-2, Ahilyanagar

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

ITA 182/PUN/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune12 Nov 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.182/Pun/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2020-21 Shital Nilesh Parakh, Vs. Ito, Ward-2, 1, Main Road, Vambori, Ahilyanagar. Tal. Rahuri, Dist. Ahilyanagar- 413704. Pan : Aptpp5302G Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Prasad Bhandari Revenue By : Shri Shashank Ojha Date Of Hearing : 19.08.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 12.11.2025 आदेश / Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 27.11.2024 Passed By Ld. Cit(A)/Nfac For The Assessment Year 2020-21. 2. The Appellant Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “1. On The Facts & In The Prevailing Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Learned Cit(A)-Nfac Erred In Not Accepting The Agriculture Income Of Rs. 89,50,214 Without Appreciating The Submission Made By The Assessee. Hence, The Impugned Order

For Appellant: Shri Prasad BhandariFor Respondent: Shri Shashank Ojha
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 44ASection 69C

…e extent of Rs.12.36,575/- by way of receipt from undisclosed sources. Reliance in this regard is also placed on the decision of the Honourable Supreme Court in the case of Roshan Di Hatti vs CIT (107 ITR 938) & in the case of Kale Khan Mohammad Hanif Vs CIT (50 ITR 1). 4.15 Accordingly, the AO is directed to allow exemption of agriculture income amounting to Rs. 5817639/- and add an amount of Rs. 12.36,575/- (Rs.31,32,575/-(-) Rs. 18.95,999/-) as unexplained expenditure u/s 69C of the Act. Thus, the grounds of appeal filed by the appellant on this issue is partly allowed. 5. The grounds of appeal filed by the ap…

Kishor Rameshbhai Mehta, Surat vs. ITO, Ward-1(5), Bharuch

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

ITA 60/SRT/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Surat10 Nov 2025AY 2013-14

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

Section 194ASection 194CSection 2(24)Section 250Section 253(3)Section 36(1)(iii)Section 40Section 68Section 69A

…dated 15.03.2016. In response, the assessee had submitted his reply, but neither any documentary evidences/explanation had furnished. The AO relied upon various decision, viz. (i) Sumati Dayal vs. CIT, 214 ITR 801 (SC), (ii) Kale Khan Mohammad Hanif vs. CIT, 50 ITR 1 (SC), (iii) Roshan Di Hatti vs. CIT, 107 ITR 938 (SC), (iv) CIT vs. M. Ganapathi Mudaliar, 53 ITR 623 (SC), (v) A. Govindarajulu Mudaliar vs. CIT, 34 ITR 807 (SC), (vi) Shankar Industries vs. CIT, ITA 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…

Mehul Hasmukh Shah, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer Circle 17(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 4333/MUM/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Nov 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankarmehul Hasmukh Shah V/S. Income Tax Officer, Circle- Plot No. 26, Dev Ashish 4 Th बनाम 17(1) Floor, Ns Road No. 5, Opp. Kautilya Bhavan, G-Block Police Chowky Jvpd Sch Bkc, Bandra Kurla Hatkesh Soc Ville Parle East, Complex, Bandra (East), Mumbai – 400 049, Mumbai – 400051, Maharashtra Maharashtra स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Afxps8632J Appellant/अपीलार्थी .. Respondent/प्रतिवादी

For Appellant: Shri Pranav Bhansali,ARFor Respondent: Shri Annavaran Kosuri, Sr. AR &
Section 115BSection 143(3)Section 68

…acts and circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A) erred in disregarding binding judicial precedents, notably CIT vs. Bhaichand H. Gandhi (1983) 141 ITR 67 (Bom), Padam Chand Jain v. CIT (299 ITR 225), and Kale Khan Mohammad Hanif v. CIT (1963) 50 ITR 1 (SC), which explicitly state that duly disclosed opening cash balances cannot be rejected without tangible adverse evidence. 7. Under the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A) erred in ignoring recent relevant judicial pronouncements, including:  Mahesh Subhash Shukla vs. ITO (ITAT Mumbai, June 2025), holding that Secti…

Shri V. Natarajan (Individual), Rasipuram vs. ACIT, Central Circle, Salem

In the result, both the appeals of assessee in ITA No

ITA 1801/CHNY/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 Oct 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1535 & 1801/Chny/2024 ननिाारण वर्ा/Assessment Years: 2016-17 & 2015-16 V. Varadappan Natarajan/ The Acit, V. Natarajan (Individual), Central Circle, No.64-C, Rotary Nagar, Salem. Rasipuram Tamil Nadu-637 408. [Pan: Acgpn1477Q] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Mr.T.S. Lakshmi Venkataraman, Fca (Virtual) प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Respondent By : Mr.Shiva Srinivas, Cit सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 09.10.2025 घोर्णाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 31.10.2025

For Appellant: Mr.T.S. LakshmiFor Respondent: Mr.Shiva Srinivas, CIT
Section 115BSection 143(3)Section 153ASection 250Section 250(6)Section 37Section 68

…ith respect to the issue of genuineness of transaction, it is for the assessee to prove by cogent and credible evidence, that the investments made in share capital are genuine borrowings, since the facts are exclusively within the assessee's knowledge. [1963] 50 ITR 1 (SC) [1977] 107 ITR (SC) The Delhi High Court in CIT v. Oasis ITA Nos.1535 & 1801/Chny/2024 (AYs 2016-17 & 2015-16) Varadappan Natarajan/ V. Natarajan (Individual) :: 25 :: Hospitalities Pvt.Ltd.5, held that: The initial onus is upon the assessee to establish three things necessary to obviate the mischief of Section 68. Those are: (i) identity of…

Varadappan Natarajan, Rasipuram vs. ACIT, Central Circle, Salem

In the result, both the appeals of assessee in ITA No

ITA 1535/CHNY/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 Oct 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1535 & 1801/Chny/2024 ननिाारण वर्ा/Assessment Years: 2016-17 & 2015-16 V. Varadappan Natarajan/ The Acit, V. Natarajan (Individual), Central Circle, No.64-C, Rotary Nagar, Salem. Rasipuram Tamil Nadu-637 408. [Pan: Acgpn1477Q] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Mr.T.S. Lakshmi Venkataraman, Fca (Virtual) प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Respondent By : Mr.Shiva Srinivas, Cit सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 09.10.2025 घोर्णाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 31.10.2025

For Appellant: Mr.T.S. LakshmiFor Respondent: Mr.Shiva Srinivas, CIT
Section 115BSection 143(3)Section 153ASection 250Section 250(6)Section 37Section 68

…ith respect to the issue of genuineness of transaction, it is for the assessee to prove by cogent and credible evidence, that the investments made in share capital are genuine borrowings, since the facts are exclusively within the assessee's knowledge. [1963] 50 ITR 1 (SC) [1977] 107 ITR (SC) The Delhi High Court in CIT v. Oasis ITA Nos.1535 & 1801/Chny/2024 (AYs 2016-17 & 2015-16) Varadappan Natarajan/ V. Natarajan (Individual) :: 25 :: Hospitalities Pvt.Ltd.5, held that: The initial onus is upon the assessee to establish three things necessary to obviate the mischief of Section 68. Those are: (i) identity of…

Rupesh Tambi, Jaipur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is Partly allowed

ITA 1470/JPR/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur29 Oct 2025AY 2015-16
For Appellant: Shri S. R. Sharma, CA &For Respondent: Shri Gautam Singh Choudhary, Addl. CIT
Section 1Section 132Section 133ASection 153ASection 271Section 271A

…satisfactorily explained, and the business income estimated by him under section 13 of the Income-tax Act, after rejecting the books of account of the assessee as unreliable. This was so decided in Kale Khan Mohammad Hanif v. Commissioner of Income-tax [1963] 50 ITR 1 (SC). Whether in a given case the Income-tax Officer may tax the cash credit entered in the books of account of the business, and at the same time estimate the profit must, however, depend upon the facts of each case. The High Court, in disposing of the application under section 66(2). expressed the view that because the amount of Rs.20,000 was ente…

Anshuman Auto Impex Private Limited, New Delhi vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(1), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal is dismissed

ITA 4152/DEL/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Oct 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Naveen Chandraassessment Year: 2016-17 Vs. Income Tax Officer, Anshuman Auto Impex Pvt. Ltd., Ward-2(1), 2126/59, Laxmi Bhawan, New Delhi Naiwala, Karol Bagh, New Delhi Pan: Aaaca0872H (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By None Department By Sh. Manish Gupta, Sr. Dr

Section 147Section 148

…-03-1977], Hon'ble Supreme Court held that if assessee fails to discharge the onus by producing cogent evidence and explanation, the AO would be justified in making addition Same view was taken in the case of 5 | P a g e Kale Khan Mohammad Hanif Vs CIT (1963) 50 ITR 1(SC) by the Hon'ble Apex Court Reliance is also placed on the decision of Delhi High Court in case of CIT VS Oasis Hospitalities (2011) 9 Taxmann 179 (Delhi), in which it was held "The initial onus is upon the assessee to establish three things. Those are: (i) identity of the creditor; (ii) their creditworthiness/investments; and (iii) genuineness of…

Kemox Corporation, Bhiwandi vs. DCIT-CC-3, Thane

ITA 221/MUM/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Oct 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: Ms. Simran Dhawan, Ld. A.RFor Respondent: Shri Ritesh Misra, Ld. D.R
Section 131Section 131(1)(d)Section 142Section 250Section 68

…hat the sum credited, is income of the assessee and no further burden lies on the revenue. For this proposition reliance is placed on the decision of Hon. Supreme Court in the case of Roshan Di Hatti vs CIT 107 ITR 938 (SC) and Kale Khan Mohammad Hanif vs CIT 50 ITR 1 (SC). 11. It is also a well settled legal position that in order to discharge his onus u/s 68, the assessee must prove the identity of creditors, capacity of creditors to advance money and genuineness of transaction by filing documents such as confirmation, copies of bank statement, copy of financial statements, copy of ITRs, etc. Once the assessee…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(2), Kolkata vs. Somani Services Private Limited, Kolkata

ITA 2220/KOL/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 Oct 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: the Hon'ble ITAT, Kolkata.

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 14ASection 250

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH, KOLKATA SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. Nos. 2219 & 2220/Kol/2024 Assessment Year : 2012-13 Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(2), Kolkata, R. No. 310, 3rd Floor, Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, 110, Shanti Pally, Kolkata – 700107 ……..…...…………….... Appellant vs. Somani Services Private Limited, 16C, Synagouge Street, Kolkata, Kolkata – 700001, West Bengal [PAN : AAICS2046K] ................................ Respondent Appearances by: Assessee represented by : Rakesh Jain, AR Department represented by :…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(2), Kolkata vs. Somani Services Private Limited, Kolkata

ITA 2219/KOL/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 Oct 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: the Hon'ble ITAT, Kolkata.

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 14ASection 250

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH, KOLKATA SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. Nos. 2219 & 2220/Kol/2024 Assessment Year : 2012-13 Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(2), Kolkata, R. No. 310, 3rd Floor, Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, 110, Shanti Pally, Kolkata – 700107 ……..…...…………….... Appellant vs. Somani Services Private Limited, 16C, Synagouge Street, Kolkata, Kolkata – 700001, West Bengal [PAN : AAICS2046K] ................................ Respondent Appearances by: Assessee represented by : Rakesh Jain, AR Department represented by :…

Sanjay Kumar Karnani, Jaipur vs. ACIT, Central Circle-3, Jaipur

In the result, all appeals of the assessee are disposed off in terms of

ITA 673/JPR/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur15 Oct 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: AO on 12-04-2021 18. Reply filed before AO on 15-07-2021 19. Additional Written Submissions filed before CIT(A) for AY 2014-15 on 11-11-2024 20. Written Submissions filed before CIT(A) for AY 2014-15 21. Written Submissions filed before CIT(A) for AY 2015-16 on 10-10-2024 22. Written Submissions filed before CIT(A) for AY 2016-17 on 10-10-2024 23. Written Submissions filed before CIT(A) for AY 2017-18 on 15-10-2024 24. Written Submissions filed before CIT(A) for AY 2018-19 on 15-10-2024 25.

For Appellant: Shri Deepak Sharma, AdvFor Respondent: Mrs. Alka Gautam, CIT
Section 153ASection 250Section 68

…tisfactorily the nature and source of these assets, the revenue could legitimately hold that these assets represented the undisclosed income of the assessee....." (emphasis supplied) In the case of Kale Khan Mohammad Hanif v. Commissioner of Income-tax [1963] 50 ITR 1 (SC) [08-02-1963] it is held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court as under:- "It seems to us that the answer to this question must be in the affirmative and that is how it was answered by the High Court. It is well established that the onus of proving the source of a sum of money found to have been received by the assessee is on him. If he disputes liabilit…

Sanjay Kumar Karnani, Jaipur vs. ACIT, Central Circle-3, Jaipur

In the result, all appeals of the assessee are disposed off in terms of

ITA 672/JPR/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur15 Oct 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Deepak Sharma, AdvFor Respondent: Mrs. Alka Gautam, CIT
Section 153ASection 250Section 68

…tisfactorily the nature and source of these assets, the revenue could legitimately hold that these assets represented the undisclosed income of the assessee....." (emphasis supplied) In the case of Kale Khan Mohammad Hanif v. Commissioner of Income-tax [1963] 50 ITR 1 (SC) [08-02-1963] it is held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court as under:- "It seems to us that the answer to this question must be in the affirmative and that is how it was answered by the High Court. It is well established that the onus of proving the source of a sum of money found to have been received by the assessee is on him. If he disputes liabilit…

Shri Ambica Garments, Jodhpur vs. ACIT, Central Circle-3, Jaipur

In the result, all appeals of the assessee are disposed off in terms of

ITA 61/JPR/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur15 Oct 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Deepak Sharma, AdvFor Respondent: Mrs. Alka Gautam, CIT
Section 153ASection 250Section 68

…tisfactorily the nature and source of these assets, the revenue could legitimately hold that these assets represented the undisclosed income of the assessee....." (emphasis supplied) In the case of Kale Khan Mohammad Hanif v. Commissioner of Income-tax [1963] 50 ITR 1 (SC) [08-02-1963] it is held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court as under:- "It seems to us that the answer to this question must be in the affirmative and that is how it was answered by the High Court. It is well established that the onus of proving the source of a sum of money found to have been received by the assessee is on him. If he disputes liabilit…

Shri Ambica Garments, Jodhpur vs. ACIT, Cental Circle-3, Jaipur, Jodhpur

In the result, all appeals of the assessee are disposed off in terms of

ITA 59/JPR/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur15 Oct 2025AY 2017-18
For Appellant: Shri Deepak Sharma, AdvFor Respondent: Mrs. Alka Gautam, CIT
Section 153ASection 250Section 68

…tisfactorily the nature and source of these assets, the revenue could legitimately hold that these assets represented the undisclosed income of the assessee....." (emphasis supplied) In the case of Kale Khan Mohammad Hanif v. Commissioner of Income-tax [1963] 50 ITR 1 (SC) [08-02-1963] it is held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court as under:- "It seems to us that the answer to this question must be in the affirmative and that is how it was answered by the High Court. It is well established that the onus of proving the source of a sum of money found to have been received by the assessee is on him. If he disputes liabilit…

Shri Ambica Garments, Jodhpur vs. ACIT, Cental Circle-3, Jaipur

In the result, all appeals of the assessee are disposed off in terms of

ITA 57/JPR/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur15 Oct 2025AY 2015-16
For Appellant: Shri Deepak Sharma, AdvFor Respondent: Mrs. Alka Gautam, CIT
Section 153ASection 250Section 68

…tisfactorily the nature and source of these assets, the revenue could legitimately hold that these assets represented the undisclosed income of the assessee....." (emphasis supplied) In the case of Kale Khan Mohammad Hanif v. Commissioner of Income-tax [1963] 50 ITR 1 (SC) [08-02-1963] it is held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court as under:- "It seems to us that the answer to this question must be in the affirmative and that is how it was answered by the High Court. It is well established that the onus of proving the source of a sum of money found to have been received by the assessee is on him. If he disputes liabilit…

Shri Ambica Garments, Jodhpur vs. ACIT, Cental Circle-3, Jaipur

ITA 56/JPR/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur15 Oct 2025AY 2014-15
For Appellant: Shri Deepak Sharma, AdvFor Respondent: Mrs. Alka Gautam, CIT
Section 153ASection 250Section 68

…satisfactorily explained, and the business income estimated by him under section 13 of the Income-tax Act, after rejecting the books of account of the assessee as unreliable. This was so decided in Kale Khan Mohammad Hanif v. Commissioner of Income-tax [1963] 50 ITR 1 (SC). Whether in a given case the Income-tax Officer may tax the cash credit entered in the books of account of the business, and at the same time estimate the profit must, however, depend upon the facts of each case. The High Court, in disposing of the application under section 66(2), expressed the view that because the amount of Rs. 20,000 was ent…

Sunil Kumar Agarwal, Jaipur vs. ACIT, Cen. Cir-2, Jaipur

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA no

ITA 513/JPR/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur14 Oct 2025AY 2016-17
For Appellant: Shri S. L. Poddar, AdvFor Respondent: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT, Sr-DR
Section 132Section 139Section 153ASection 234B

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”A” JAIPUR Mk0 ,l- lhrky{eh] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh jkBksM deys'k t;UrHkkbZ] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, vk;dj vihy la-@ITA Nos. 513 & 519 to 521/JP/2025 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years : 2016-17 & 2018-19 to 2020-21 cuke Sunil Kumar Agarwal ACIT, Vs. 395, Narnoli Mansion, Outside Central Circle-2, Sanganeri Gate, Jaipur Jaipur LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: ABRPA9601M vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent vk;dj vihy la-@ITSS No. 03/JP/2025 fu/kZkj.k…

M/S Ankur Developers & Realtors, Mumbai vs. DCIT CC-3(4), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is rejected

ITA 428/MUM/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Oct 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan () Assessment Year: 2014-15

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Mr. Surendra Mohan, Sr. DR
Section 131Section 132Section 68

…hat section 68 places the primary obligation upon the assessee to explain the nature and source of any sum credited in its books. It is well-settled by decisions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in A. Govindarajulu Mudaliar (34 ITR 804), Kale Khan Mohammad Hanif (50 ITR 1), Roshan Di Hatti (107 ITR 938) and P. Mohanakala (291 ITR 278), that the Revenue is not required to prove the precise source of the monies so credited once the assessee’s explanation is found unsatisfactory. In the present case, moreover, Shri Dinesh V. Shah had himself admitted that on-money receipts in cash were routed back into the group’s books…

M/S. Stupendors Traders Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir-5(1)., Kolkata

Appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes, having been remanded back to the file of Ld

ITA 326/KOL/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata13 Oct 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: The Ld. Cit(A) Also The Assessee Could Not Succeed & The 2 M/S Stupendors Traders Pvt. Ltd. Following Findings Of Ld. Cit(A) Would Summarize His Stand:

Section 131Section 250Section 68

…h normal banking channels, etc. In this case, the Hon'ble Apex Court has dealt with the issue from a legal perspective and some of the passages deserve to be extracted for reference: "This Court in the land mark case of Kale Khan Mohammad Hanif v. CIT (1963) 50 ITR 1 (SC) and, Roshan Di Hatti v. CIT [1977] 107 ITR 938 (SC) laid down that the onus of proving the source of a sum of money found to have been 7 M/s Stupendors Traders Pvt. Ltd. received by an assessee, is on the assessee. Once the assessee has submitted the documents relating to identity, genuineness of the transaction, and creditworthiness, then the…