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 367,154 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

Hermon Educational Society, Visakhapatnam vs. Income Tax Officer (Exemption Ward), Visakhapatnam

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 347/VIZ/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam19 Mar 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri G. Manjunatha & Shri K. Narasimha Chary

For Appellant: Shri C. Subrahmanyam, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. AR
Section 10Section 68

…68 Even prior to the insertion of the said section or its predecessor, there were ample authorities to the same effect as section 68. In this regard, one may profitably refer to the judgment of the Apex Court in case of Kale Khan Mohammad Hanif vs. CIT [1963] 50 ITR 1 (SC), wherein the Court has held as under : "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 liability for tax, it is for him to show either that the receipt was not income or that if it was, it was exempt from taxation under the provisions of the Act.…

Ridhiraj Builders, Jaipur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-6, Ncrb, Jaipur

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

ITA 1167/JPR/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur18 Mar 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Surendra Sha, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Dinesh Badgujar, Addl.CIT a
Section 115BSection 127Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 68

…o, the assessee is required to prove the same. The onus is on the assesse to explain and substantiate the source. [Roshan Di Hatti v. Commissioner of Income-tax [1977] 107 ITR 938 (SC)[08-03-1977], Kale Khan Mohammad Hanif v. Commissioner of Income-tax [1963] 50 ITR 1 (SC)[08-02-1963]] Further unaccounted investment cannot be presumed to be from business income of the year as the sources can be numerous. It has also not been shown with sources details that it is only the earlier earned (during the same year) business income (manner of earning and source of earning of such income) which has been invested in the ex…

ACIT, Central Circle, Alwar vs. Sh. Tara Chand Gupta, Alwar

In the result the appeal filed by the revenue in ITA no

ITA 514/JPR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur10 Mar 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM आयकर अपील सं./ITA. Nos.447 to 449/JP/2024 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Years : 2015-16 to 2017-18 Shri Tarachand Gupta 9 Keshav Nagar Sch 13, Alwar बनाम ACIT, Vs. Central Circle, Alwar स्थायी लेखा सं./ जीआईआर सं./PAN/GIR No.: AAYPC 5777 E अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent आयकर अपील सं./ITA. No. 514/JP/2024 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year : 2017-18 ACIT, Central Circle, Alwar बनाम Shri Tarachand Gupta 9 Kesh

For Appellant: Sh. P. C. Parwal, C.AFor Respondent: Sh. Arvind Kumar, CIT-DR a
Section 143(3)Section 68Section 69C

…. Sh. Tarachand Gupta In the case of Roshan Di Hatti v. Commissioner of Income-tax [1977] 107 ITR 938 (SC)[08-03-1977] it is held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court as under:- x x x x 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:- x x x x As per judgements of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. M.Ganapathi Mudaliar [1964] 53 ITR 623 (SC)/A. Govindarajulu Mudaliar v. CIT [1958] 34 ITR 807 (SC), where the assessee has failed to prove satisfactorily the source and nature of a credit entry in his books,…

Sh. Tarachand Gupta, Alwar vs. ACIT, Central Circle, Alwar

In the result the appeal filed by the revenue in ITA no

ITA 449/JPR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur10 Mar 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM आयकर अपील सं. / ITA. Nos.447 to 449/JP/2024 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Years : 2015-16 to 2017-18 Shri Tarachand Gupta 9 Keshav Nagar Sch 13, Alwar बनाम Vs. ACIT, Central Circle, Alwar स्थायी लेखा सं./ जीआईआर सं./PAN/GIR No.: AAYPC 5777 E अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent आयकर अपील सं./ITA. No. 514/JP/2024 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year : 2017-18 ACIT, Central Circle, Alwar बनाम Shri Tarachand Gupta 9 Ke

For Appellant: Sh. P. C. Parwal, C.AFor Respondent: Sh. Arvind Kumar, CIT-DR a
Section 143(3)Section 68Section 69C

…. Sh. Tarachand Gupta In the case of Roshan Di Hatti v. Commissioner of Income-tax [1977] 107 ITR 938 (SC)[08-03-1977] it is held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court as under:- x x x x 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:- x x x x As per judgements of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. M.Ganapathi Mudaliar [1964] 53 ITR 623 (SC)/A. Govindarajulu Mudaliar v. CIT [1958] 34 ITR 807 (SC), where the assessee has failed to prove satisfactorily the source and nature of a credit entry in his books,…

Sh. Tarachand Gupta, Alwar vs. ACIT, Central Circle, Alwar

In the result the appeal filed by the revenue in ITA no

ITA 448/JPR/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur10 Mar 2025AY 2016-17
For Appellant: Sh. P. C. Parwal, C.AFor Respondent: Sh. Arvind Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 68Section 69C

…regard during the appeal. In the case of Roshan Di Hatti v. Commissioner of Income-tax [1977] 107 ITR 938 (SC)[08-03-1977] it is held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court as under:- X X X X 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:- X X X X As per judgements of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. M.Ganapathi Mudaliar [1964] 53 ITR 623 (SC)/A. Govindarajulu Mudaliar v. CIT [1958] 34 ITR 807 (SC), where the assessee has failed to prove satisfactorily the source and nature of a credit entry in his books, a…

Rahul Jabarmal Jain, Mumbai vs. Assistant. Commissioner of Income Tax -19(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is accordingly partly allowed for statistical purposes in the above terms

ITA 3525/MUM/2024[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Mar 2025AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri B R Baskaran & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhanrahul Jabarmal Jain Vs. Acit 19(3) 1204/B 12 Floor, Pratiksha Tower, R. 5Th Floor, Piramal Chamber, S. Nimkar Marg, Mumbai Central, Lalbaug, Mumbai-400 012 Mumbai-400 008 Pan: Aempj8236K (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 37

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “D”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI B R BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER Rahul Jabarmal Jain Vs. ACIT 19(3) 1204/B 12 floor, Pratiksha Tower, R. 5th floor, Piramal Chamber, S. Nimkar Marg, Mumbai Central, Lalbaug, Mumbai-400 012 Mumbai-400 008 PAN: AEMPJ8236K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented by : Shri Rajkumar Singh, Ld. AR Department Represented by : Ms. Monika H. Pande, Ld. DR Date of conclusion of Hearing : 06.12.2024 Date of Pronouncement : 05.03.2025 O R D E R PER RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN (J.M.): 1. This appeal is filed by…

The Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax -Central -1 vs. Jaguar Buildcon Pvt. Ltd

ITA/530/2023HC Delhi03 Mar 2025

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHWANT VARMA,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH VAIDYANATHAN SHANKAR

Section 133(1)(d)Section 133(6)Section 68

…OnLine Cal 384 : (1994) 208 ITR 465] : • Proof of identity of the creditors; • Capacity of creditors to advance money; and • Genuineness of transaction This Court in the landmark case of Kale Khan Mohd. Hanif v. CIT [Kale Khan Mohd. Hanif v. CIT, (1963) 50 ITR 1] and, Roshan Di Hatti v. CIT [Roshan Di Hatti v. CIT, (1977) 2 SCC 378 : 1977 SCC (Tax) 292 : (1977) 107 ITR 938] laid down that the onus of proving the source of a sum of money found to have been received by an assessee, is on the assessee. Once the assessee has submitted the documents relating to identity, genuineness of the transaction, and…

The Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax -Central -1 vs. Jaguar Buildcon Pvt. Ltd

ITA/531/2023HC Delhi03 Mar 2025

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH VAIDYANATHAN SHANKAR,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHWANT VARMA

Section 133(1)(d)Section 133(6)Section 68

…OnLine Cal 384 : (1994) 208 ITR 465] : • Proof of identity of the creditors; • Capacity of creditors to advance money; and • Genuineness of transaction This Court in the landmark case of Kale Khan Mohd. Hanif v. CIT [Kale Khan Mohd. Hanif v. CIT, (1963) 50 ITR 1] and, Roshan Di Hatti v. CIT [Roshan Di Hatti v. CIT, (1977) 2 SCC 378 : 1977 SCC (Tax) 292 : (1977) 107 ITR 938] laid down that the onus of proving the source of a sum of money found to have been received by an assessee, is on the assessee. Once the assessee has submitted the documents relating to identity, genuineness of the transaction, and…

Paras Mal Jain, Jaipur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1469/JPR/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur26 Feb 2025AY 2014-15
For Appellant: Shri R.K. Bhatra, CAFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Kumar, CIT-DR (Thru' V.C.)
Section 132(1)Section 142(1)Section 143Section 143(3)Section 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…

Kiran Fine Jewellers Private Limited, Jaipur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Jaipur

In the result ground no 2 raised by the assessee is allowed

ITA 648/JPR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur25 Feb 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Sh. S. R. Sharma, CA &For Respondent: Sh. P. P. Meena, CIT-Th. V.H
Section 115BSection 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 68Section 69A

…rce and nature of certain amount of cash received during the accounting year, the Income-tax Officer is entitled to draw the inference that the receipts are of an assessable nature." 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…

Vijeta Trading Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi

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

ITA 206/MUM/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Feb 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankarvs. Cit, (Appeals), Vijeta Trading Pvt. Ltd. Nfac, Office No.64,3Rd Floor Poddar Chambers, 23 Parsi Bazar Street, Fort Mumbai – 4000001. Pan/Gir No. Aabcv1137H (Applicant) (Respondent)

Section 143Section 143(3)Section 250Section 254Section 55A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “F” BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI PRABHASH SHANKAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Vs. CIT, (Appeals), Vijeta Trading Pvt. Ltd. NFAC, Office No.64,3rd Floor Poddar Chambers, 23 Parsi Bazar Street, Fort Mumbai – 4000001. PAN/GIR No. AABCV1137H (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee by None Revenue by Ms. Nidhi Agarwal, Sr. DR सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date of Hearing 13.01.2025 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date of Pronouncement 26.01.2025 आदेश / ORDER PER SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM: The present appeal has been filed by the assessee challenging the impugned order dated 20.12.2023, passed u/s…

ITO., Ward-16(1), Hyderabad vs. Phoenix Infraventures and Projects Private Limited, Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 867/HYD/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad24 Feb 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon’Bleassessment Year: 2022-23 The Income Tax Officer, Vs. Phoenix Infraventures & Projects Private Limited, Ward – 16(1), Hyderabad. Hyderabad. Pan No.Aafcp5499L. (Assessee) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri R. Mohan Kumar, Advocate Revenue By: Shri B. Bala Krishna, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 24.12.2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 24.02.2025

For Appellant: Shri R. Mohan Kumar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri B. Bala Krishna, CIT-DR
Section 139(1)Section 68

…refore disbelieved mere fact that there is no evidence contrary to it, does not compel Tribunal to record finding in favour of party on whom burden lies. Similarly, in the case of Roshan Di Hatti vs CIT(SC) 107 ITR 938 and Kale Khan Mohammad Hanif vs CIT (SC) 50 ITR 1 it has been held that 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 satisfactory explained by the assessee, it is open to the revenue to hold that it is the income of the assessee and no further burden lie…

DCIT, Jaipur vs. Amrapali Jewels Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur

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

ITA 740/JPR/2024[2021]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur19 Feb 2025

Bench: Him.

For Appellant: Sh. Sanjay Jhanwar, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Mrs. Alka Gautam, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 153DSection 251Section 69B

…rit petition. These assessment orders have not become final. (xlviii) In the case of Roshan Di Hatti v. CIT [1977] 107 ITR 938 (SC) (08.03.1977) it is held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court as under:- x x x x In the case of Kale Khan Mohammad Hanif v. CIT [1963] 50 ITR 1 (SC) [08.02.1963] it is held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court as under:- x x x x As per judgments of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. M. Ganapathi Mudaliar (1964) 53 ITR 623 (SC)/A. Govindarajulu Mudaliar. V. CIT [1958] 34 ITR 807 (SC), where the assessee has failed to provide satisfactorily the source and nature of a credit entry in his bo…

Pr. Commissioner Oflncome Tax Delhi - 5 vs. Mrs. Rowena Sharma

ITA/1220/2018HC Delhi11 Feb 2025

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH VAIDYANATHAN SHANKAR,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHWANT VARMA

Section 68Section 69Section 69ASection 80

…OnLine Cal 384 : (1994) 208 ITR 465] : • Proof of identity of the creditors; • Capacity of creditors to advance money; and • Genuineness of transaction This Court in the landmark case of Kale Khan Mohd. Hanif v. CIT [Kale Khan Mohd. Hanif v. CIT, (1963) 50 ITR 1] and, Roshan Di Hatti v. CIT [Roshan Di Hatti v. CIT, (1977) 2 SCC 378 : 1977 SCC (Tax) 292 : (1977) 107 ITR 938] laid down that the onus of proving the source of a sum of money found to have been received by an assessee, is on the assessee. Once the assessee has submitted the documents relating to identity, genuineness of the transaction, and…

Jagdish Kumar Arora, Bhawanimandi vs. DCIT, Central Circle- Kota, Kota

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1195/JPR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur11 Feb 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member), SHRI NARINDER KUMAR (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Shrawan Kumar Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT-Sr. DR
Section 115BSection 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 234ASection 69

…ath [1969] 72 ITR 194 (SC) [01-08-1968] has held as under:- x x x x In the case of Roshan Di Hatti v. CIT [1997] 107 ITR 938 (SC) [08.03.1977] it is held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court as under:- x x x x In the case of Kale Khan Mohammad Hanif vs. CIT [1963] 50 ITR 1 (SC) [08.02.1963] it is held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court as under:- x x x x As per judgments of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. M. Ganpathi Mudaliar [1964] 53 ITR 623 (SC)/A. Govindarajulu Mudaliar v. CIT [1958] 34 ITR 807 (SC), where the assessee has failed to prove satisfactorily the source and nature of a credit entry in his books a…

Mr. Goopalliappa Narasimhaiah, Hosur vs. ITO, Ward-1, Hosur

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2775/CHNY/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Feb 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri George George Kand Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 2775/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18 Shri Goopalliappa Narasimhaiah, The Income Tax Officer, No.3/150, Avalapalli (Village & Post), Vs. Ward 1, Hosur – 635 109. Hosur. Pan: Afjpn 2116A (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri Ravi Shankar, Advocate (Through Virtual Mode) & Shri D.C. Koushick, C.A. ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. Anitha, Addl.Cit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 03.02.2025 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 05.02.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per George George K: This Appeal At The Instance Of The Assessee Is Directed Against Cit(A)/Nfac’S Order Dated 03.09.2024, Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Called ‘The Act’). The Relevant Assessment Year Is 2017-18. 2. The Solitary Issue Raised Is Whether The Cit(A) Is Justified In Confirming The Addition Of Rs.88,50,000/- U/S.69A R.W.S 115Bbe Of The Act.

For Appellant: Shri Ravi Shankar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Anitha, Addl.CIT
Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 250Section 69A

…upon the assessee and the assessee has failed in proving the genuineness of the cash deposited in bank accounts. In the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Roshan Di Hatti Vs CIT (1977) 107 ITR 938 (SC), Kale Khan Mohammed Hanif Vs CIT (1963) 50 ITR 1 (SC), where 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 assessee and no further burden lies on the revenue. In the instant case the assessee failed to prove the source for the cash deposits with evidenc…

ACIT Circle-22(1), Mumbai vs. Raheja Legacy Trust, Mumbai

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

ITA 2826/MUM/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jan 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Amarjit Singhassessment Year: 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri Bharat Raichandani & Bhagrati SahuFor Respondent: Smt. Sanyogita Nagpal, CIT/DR
Section 250Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH “D”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2018-19 Raheja Legacy Trust ACIT, Circle-22(1), Mumbai 5th Floor, Raheja Centre Point, vs. 294, C.S.T. Road, Santacruz (East), Mumbai-400098. PAN: AABTR 4447 F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2018-19 ACIT, Circle-22(1), Raheja Legacy Trust Mumbai 5th Floor, Raheja Centre Point, vs. 294, C.S.T. Road, Santacruz (East), Mumbai-400098. PAN: AABTR 4447 F (Appellant) (Respondent) Present for: Assessee by : Shri Bharat Raichandani & Bhagrati S…

Raheja Legency Trust, Mumbai vs. ACIT, Cir-22(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 2268/MUM/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jan 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Amarjit Singhassessment Year: 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri Bharat Raichandani & Bhagrati SahuFor Respondent: Smt. Sanyogita Nagpal, CIT/DR
Section 250Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH “D”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2018-19 Raheja Legacy Trust ACIT, Circle-22(1), Mumbai 5th Floor, Raheja Centre Point, vs. 294, C.S.T. Road, Santacruz (East), Mumbai-400098. PAN: AABTR 4447 F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2018-19 ACIT, Circle-22(1), Raheja Legacy Trust Mumbai 5th Floor, Raheja Centre Point, vs. 294, C.S.T. Road, Santacruz (East), Mumbai-400098. PAN: AABTR 4447 F (Appellant) (Respondent) Present for: Assessee by : Shri Bharat Raichandani & Bhagrati S…

Suresh Kumar Saini, Jaipur vs. NFAC, Delhi

16. For the foregoing discussion and findings, this appeal deserves to be allowed

ITA 1256/JPR/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur27 Jan 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member), SHRI NARINDER KUMAR (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Neeraj Gupta, C.AFor Respondent: Sh. Anup Singh, Addl.CIT
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 234ASection 250Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 69

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”B” JAIPUR Jh jkBkSM+ deys'k t;UrHkkbZ] ys[kk lnL; ,o Jh ujsUnz dqekj] U;kf;d lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM & SHRI NARINDER KUMAR, JM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No.1251/JPR/2024 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year :2012-13 Sh. Prem Chand Gupta cuke The ITO, Vs. D-83, Hasan Kha Mewat Nagar, Ward-2(3), Alwar. Alwar. LFkk;hys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AMFPG6481J vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksjls@Assesseeby :Sh. Neeraj Gupta, C.A. jktLo dh vksjls@Revenue by: Sh. Anup Singh, Ad…

Prem Chand Gupta, Alwar vs. ITO Ward 2(3), Alwar

16. For the foregoing discussion and findings, this appeal deserves to be allowed

ITA 1251/JPR/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur27 Jan 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member), SHRI NARINDER KUMAR (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Neeraj Gupta, C.AFor Respondent: Sh. Anup Singh, Addl.CIT
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 234ASection 250Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 69

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”B” JAIPUR Jh jkBkSM+ deys'k t;UrHkkbZ] ys[kk lnL; ,o Jh ujsUnz dqekj] U;kf;d lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM & SHRI NARINDER KUMAR, JM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No.1251/JPR/2024 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year :2012-13 Sh. Prem Chand Gupta cuke The ITO, Vs. D-83, Hasan Kha Mewat Nagar, Ward-2(3), Alwar. Alwar. LFkk;hys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AMFPG6481J vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksjls@Assesseeby :Sh. Neeraj Gupta, C.A. jktLo dh vksjls@Revenue by: Sh. Anup Singh, Ad…