Kalyan Development Corporation v. ACIT

233 TTJ 413Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2025#23957 most cited
3

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2025 to 2025.

Sections most often in play

Section 132Section 153ASection 153CSection 251Section 69Section 69ASection 250

Issues it is cited on

jdasection 251income-tax officerunexplained investmentsection 153cincriminating materialsection 69asection 153section 153asection 69section 132previous year

Judgments citing Kalyan Development Corporation v. ACIT

SH. MOHIT AGARWAL,JAIPUR vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue mentioned (supra) are dismissed and the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed in above terms

ITA 788/JPR/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur15 Sept 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Dr. S. Seethalakshmi & Shri Gagan Goyal

For Appellant: Mr. P. C. Parwal, C.A, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Mrs. Alka Gautam, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 153ASection 153CSection 250Section 69Section 69A

…ven by Delhi High Court in case of PCIT V. Anand Kumar Jain HUF 432 ITR 384, ITAT Delhi Bench in case of Trilok Chand Choudhary Vs. ACIT ITA No. 5870/Del/2017 order dt. 20.08.2019 and ITAT Mumbai Bench in case of Kalyan Development Corporation vs. ACIT (2025) 233 TTJ 413. Hence, we do not file any infirmity in the order of Ld. CIT (A) which is upheld by dismissing the ground of the revenue. In ITA No.104/JP/2025 for A.Y. 2016-17, the ground raised by the revenue is same as in A.Y. 2014-15 and therefore, the finding given (supra) would mutatis-mutandis apply to A.Y. 2016-17 also. In the result both the appeals of…

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. MOHIT AGARWAL, JAIPUR

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue mentioned (supra) are dismissed and the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed in above terms

ITA 104/JPR/2025[2016]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur15 Sept 2025

Bench: Dr. S. Seethalakshmi & Shri Gagan Goyal

For Appellant: Mr. P. C. Parwal, C.A, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Mrs. Alka Gautam, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 153ASection 153CSection 250Section 69Section 69A

…ven by Delhi High Court in case of PCIT V. Anand Kumar Jain HUF 432 ITR 384, ITAT Delhi Bench in case of Trilok Chand Choudhary Vs. ACIT ITA No. 5870/Del/2017 order dt. 20.08.2019 and ITAT Mumbai Bench in case of Kalyan Development Corporation vs. ACIT (2025) 233 TTJ 413. Hence, we do not file any infirmity in the order of Ld. CIT (A) which is upheld by dismissing the ground of the revenue. In ITA No.104/JP/2025 for A.Y. 2016-17, the ground raised by the revenue is same as in A.Y. 2014-15 and therefore, the finding given (supra) would mutatis-mutandis apply to A.Y. 2016-17 also. In the result both the appeals of…

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. MOHIT AGARWAL, JAIPUR

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue mentioned (supra) are dismissed and the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed in above terms

ITA 103/JPR/2025[2014]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur15 Sept 2025

Bench: Dr. S. Seethalakshmi & Shri Gagan Goyal

For Appellant: Mr. P. C. Parwal, C.A, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Mrs. Alka Gautam, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 153ASection 153CSection 250Section 69Section 69A

…ven by Delhi High Court in case of PCIT V. Anand Kumar Jain HUF 432 ITR 384, ITAT Delhi Bench in case of Trilok Chand Choudhary Vs. ACIT ITA No. 5870/Del/2017 order dt. 20.08.2019 and ITAT Mumbai Bench in case of Kalyan Development Corporation vs. ACIT (2025) 233 TTJ 413. Hence, we do not file any infirmity in the order of Ld. CIT (A) which is upheld by dismissing the ground of the revenue. In ITA No.104/JP/2025 for A.Y. 2016-17, the ground raised by the revenue is same as in A.Y. 2014-15 and therefore, the finding given (supra) would mutatis-mutandis apply to A.Y. 2016-17 also. In the result both the appeals of…

Kalyan Development Corporation v. ACIT (233 TTJ 413) — Cited in 3 Judgments | BharatTax