How many judgments cite Khandelwal Constructions v. CIT?

49 judgments on BharatTax cite Khandelwal Constructions v. CIT (227 ITR 900), spanning 2015 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Khandelwal Constructions v. CIT come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 68, Section 142(1), Section 143(3), Section 147, Section 133A, Section 250.

Khandelwal Constructions v. CIT

227 ITR 900High Court1997#2333 most cited

What is Khandelwal Constructions v. CIT authority for?

The Assessing Officer has the power under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 to inquire into cash credits and add them as income if not genuine. However, before rejecting the assessee's explanation, the AO must conduct proper inquiries regarding the genuineness of the transaction and the creditworthiness of the creditor, as additions cannot be sustained otherwise.

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,005 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Khandelwal Constructions v. CIT · Section 68 Income Tax Act 1961 · cash credit addition · Assessing Officer inquiry duty · genuineness of transaction · creditworthiness of creditor · proper inquiries by AO · onus of proof cash credit · unexplained cash credit · rejection of assessee explanation

Sections most often in play

Section 68 Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147 Section 133A Section 250 Section 1961 Section 69C

Issues it is cited on

creditworthiness of the creditor onus of proof retracted statement audi alteram partem permanent account number paper company addition under section 68 addition u/s 68 genuineness of the transaction section 127 section 260a beneficial owner

Judgments citing Khandelwal Constructions v. CIT

Income Tax Officer Ward-1 (1), Jalandhar vs. Shri Anil Kumar Wason, Jalandhar

In the result, the appeal of the revenue bearing ITA No

ITA 164/ASR/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar09 Nov 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjeei.T.A. No. 164/Asr/2023 Assessment Year: 2014-15

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250

…Year: 2014-15 from relevant factor and on the basis of proper enquiry. [ Rajshree Synthetics v. CIT (2002) 256 ITR 331 (Raj.)] Further the enquiry envisaged u/s 68 of the Act is an enquiry which is reasonable and just. [Khandelwal Construction v. CIT (1997) 227 ITR 900 (Gau.)]. Further, ITAT-Ranchi in M/s. Gulf Steel & Minerals Vs ITO in ITA No. 57/Ran/16 held that the AO is wrong in making the impugned addition on account of sundry creditor, which are related to purchases and the same also accepted by the AO as genuine. Without rejecting the purchases, the sundry creditors cannot be treated as income of assess…

Santosh Chopra, Raipur vs. Income Tax Officer, Circle-3(4), Raipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed in terms of my aforesaid observations

ITA 220/RPR/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur11 May 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Ravish Soodआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 220/Rpr/2022 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13 Santosh Chopra, D-3, Faristha Complex, G.E Road, Raipur (C.G.)-492 001 Pan : Acipj9443J .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer, Circle-3(4), Raipur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Praveen Jain &For Respondent: Shri Piyush Tripathi, Sr. DR

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 145(3)

…to substantiate such shout and re-iteration raising allegation wrongly against the AO defining the same as incorrect and unjustified. 6.3.7 The appellant has cited certain decisions in para 3 such as Khandelwal Constructions Vs. CIT [1998] 145 ITR 65: [1997] 227 ITR 900 (Gau) wherein it was held that there was no proper inquiry to ascertain whether the explanation was genuine. The Tribunal also had totally overlooked the matter and therefore the addition made by the ITO for the assessee Firm doubting the genuineness of transaction had to be deleted. In this connection, the appellant emphasized on the proper inqu…

DCIT, CC - 7(3), Mumbai vs. Shri Khimji Karamshi Patel, Mumbai

Accordingly, the ground nos. 1 to 3 of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 3039/MUM/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Feb 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm

For Appellant: Shri. Rushabh Mehta, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Madhumalti Ghosh, CIT DR

Section 131Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 57Section 68

…satisfaction of AO thereafter is subjective and requires more efforts/inquiry on the part of the AO to give a finding in the order that lender is not credit worthy. The AO must make proper enquiry before making any addition. In Khandelwal Constructions v. CIT 227 ITR 900 (Gau.), it has been held that section 68 empowers the Assessing officer to make enquiry. If he is satisfied that these entries are not genuine he has every right to add these as income from other sources. But before rejecting the assessee’s explanation, A.O. must make proper enquiries and in the absence of proper enquiries, addition cannot be sus…

DCIT 7(3), Mumbai vs. Shri. Khimji Karamshi Patel, Mumbai

Accordingly, the ground nos. 1 to 3 of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 4038/MUM/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Feb 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm

For Appellant: Shri. Rushabh Mehta, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Madhumalti Ghosh, CIT DR

Section 131Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 57Section 68

DCIT, CC - 7(3), Mumbai vs. Shri Khimji Karamshi Patel, Mumbai

Accordingly, the ground nos. 1 to 3 of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 3117/MUM/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Feb 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm

For Appellant: Shri. Rushabh Mehta, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Madhumalti Ghosh, CIT DR

Section 131Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 57Section 68

Srinivasulu Naidu Anchuru, Nellore vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-5, Nellore

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

ITA 1667/HYD/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad18 Oct 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri K. Narasimha Charyassessment Year: 2011-12 Shri Srinivasulu Naidu Vs. Income Tax Officer Anchuru, Ward 5 Nellore Nellore Pan:Agtpa5413A (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri V.V.S C Muralidhar Rao Revenue By: Shri Kumar Aditya, Dr Date Of Hearing: 13/10/2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 18/10/2022 Order Per R.K. Panda, A.M This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 4.9.2019 Of The Learned Cit (A)-Tirupati, Relating To A.Y.2011-12. 2. Although A Number Of Grounds Have Been Raised By The Assessee, However, These All Relate To The Order Of The Learned Cit (A) In Confirming The Addition Of Rs.60,50,000/- Made By The Assessing Officer As Unexplained Cash Deposit U/S 143(3) Of The I.T. Act.

For Appellant: Shri V.V.S C Muralidhar RaoFor Respondent: Shri Kumar Aditya, DR

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…the assessee before him made the addition which is not justified. Referring to the decision of the Hon'ble Guwahati High Court in the case of Page 4 of 7 ITA 1667 of 2019 Srinivasulu Naidu Anchuru Nellore Khandelwal Constructions vs. CIT reported in (1998) 227 ITR 900, he submitted that the Hon'ble High Court in the said decision has held that the Assessing Officer surely have the jurisdiction to look into the cash credit and make necessary inquiry and come to a finding on such an inquiry in a proper and fair manner. Since in that case the inquiry was not properly made, the Hon'ble High Court held that the Ass…

Asst CIT 27(2), Navi Mumbai vs. Merit Magnum Construction, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 6657/MUM/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Sept 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Gagan Goyal

For Appellant: Sh. Paresh ShapariaFor Respondent: Sh. Mahiita Nair, CIT-DR

Section 292CSection 68Section 69CSection 801BSection 801B(10)Section 80I

…reafter, it is for the Assessing Officer to scrutinize the same and in case he nurtures any doubt about the veracity of these documents, to prove the matter further the AO must make proper enquiry before making any addition. In Khandelwal Constructions v. CIT 227 ITR 900 (Gau.), it has been held that empowers the Assessing officer to make enquiry. If he is satisfied that these entries are not genuine he has every right to add these as Income from other sources. But before rejecting the assessee's explanation, A.O. must make proper enquiries and in the absence of proper enquiries, addition cannot be sustained. The…

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Kanpur vs. Shri Mohammad Asfand Akhtar, Kanpur

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue stands dismissed

ITA 99/LKW/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow05 Aug 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain & Shri T. S. Kapoor

Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 145Section 147

…nference on facts is that the assessee’s explanation is probable, the onus will shift to the revenue to disprove it and the assessee’s explanation in such case cannot be rejected on mere surmises. Further, it was held in Khandelwal Constructions v. CIT (1997) 227 ITR 900 (Gau.) that since the satisfaction of the Assessing Officer is the basis for invocation of the powers u/s 68, such satisfaction must be derived from relevant factors on the basis of I.T.A. No.99/Lkw/2022 Assessment Year:2017-18 26 proper inquiry by the Assessing Officer and such inquiry must be reasonable and just. 7.29 According to Section 68…

ITO 25 (3)(3), Mumbai vs. Rahul Kantilal Shah, Mumbai

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

ITA 6805/MUM/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Jul 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri M Balaganesh, Accountat Member & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaleita No. 6805 /Mum/2018 (A.Y: 2012-13 ) Ito- 25(3)(3) Vs. Rahul Kantilal Shah Room No. 606, 6Th Floor 701, Saroj Bldg, C-10, Pratyakshakar Sardar Vallabhbhai Bhavan, Bkc, Bandra (E) Patel Road, Mumbai -400051. Vile Parle (W) Mumbai-400056. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaips0543C Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Mr.T.Shankar.Dr Respondent By : Mr.Anuj Kishnadwala.Ar Date Of Hearing 09.05.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 26.07.2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm: This Appeal Is Filed The By The Revenue Against The Separate Orders Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-77, Mumbai Passed U/S 143(3) & 250 Of The Act.

For Appellant: Mr.T.Shankar.DRFor Respondent: Mr.Anuj Kishnadwala.AR

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 57

…satisfaction of AO thereafter is subjective and requires more efforts/inquiry on the part of the AO to give a finding in the order that lender is not credit worthy. The AO must make proper enquiry before making any addition. In Khandelwal Constructions v. CIT 227 ITR 900 (Gau.), it has been held that empowers the Assessing officer to make enquiry. If he ITA No. 6505 /Mum/2018 Rahul Kantilal Shah., Mumbai. is satisfied that these entries are not genuine he has every right to add these as income from other sources. But before rejecting the assessee's explanation, A.O. must make proper enquiries and in the absence…

Narasimha Reddy Kotta, Secunderabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-8(2), Hyderabad

ITA 575/HYD/2019[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad29 Jun 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2007-08 Narasimha Reddy Kotta V Ito,Ward-8(2) Plot No.21 & 22 S. Hyderabad Flat No.302, 2Nd Floor Lahari Residency Shobana Colony West Maredpally Secunderabad-500 026

For Appellant: Shri K.C.Devdas, CAFor Respondent: Shri K.P.R.R.Murthy, Sr.AR

Section 133(6)

…IT vs. Orissa Corporation (P) Ltd. 159 ITR 78, Anis Ahmad & sons vs CIT 297 ITR 441(SC), Tek Ram vs CIT 357 ITR 133(SC),, DCIT vs. Rohini Builders 256 ITR 360(Guj.HC), Addl.CIT vs. Bahri Brothers(P) Ltd. 154 ITR 244(Patna.HC), Khandelwal constructions vs. CIT 227 ITR 900 (Gauhati HC) and CIT vs. Text Hundred India(P) Ltd. (Del.HC) decisions in support of the case. 7. Further Ld.AR for the assessee had drawn our attention to the written submission filed by the assessee in support of the case on merit, it was submitted by the Ld.AR in the written submission that “2. Brief background leading to filing of appeal: Be…

Joint Commissioner of Income-Tax, Special Range, Kanpur vs. M/S.Asfand Akhtar, Kanpur

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and the Cross Objections of the assessee are also dismissed being infructuous

ITA 703/LKW/2018[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow06 Apr 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain & Shri T. S. Kapoor

Section 145Section 148

…nference on facts is that the assessee's explanation is probable, the onus will shift to the revenue to disprove it and the assessee's explanation in such case cannot be rejected on mere surmises. Further, it was held in Khandelwal Constructions v. CIT (1997) 227 ITR 900 (Gau.) that since the satisfaction of the AO is the basis for invocation of the powers u/s I.T.A. Nos.701, 702, 582 & 703/Lkw/2018 42 C.O. No.3,4,17 & 5/Lkw/2019 Assessment. Yrs:2013-14 to 2016017 68, such satisfaction must be derived from relevant factors on the basis of proper inquiry by the AO and such inquiry must be reasonable and Just. Acc…

Joint Commissioner of Income-Tax, Special Range, Kanpur vs. M/S.Asfand Akhtar, Kanpur

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and the Cross Objections of the assessee are also dismissed being infructuous

ITA 702/LKW/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow06 Apr 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain & Shri T. S. Kapoor

Section 145Section 148

Joint Commissioner of Income-Tax, Special Range, Kanpur vs. M/S.Asfand Akhtar, Kanpur

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and the Cross Objections of the assessee are also dismissed being infructuous

ITA 701/LKW/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow06 Apr 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain & Shri T. S. Kapoor

Section 145Section 148

Joint Commissioner of Income-Tax, Special Range, Kanpur vs. M/S.Asfand Akhtar, Kanpur

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and the Cross Objections of the assessee are also dismissed being infructuous

ITA 582/LKW/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow06 Apr 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain & Shri T. S. Kapoor

Section 145Section 148

Rubberwala Hospitality Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO 5 (3)91), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 299/MUM/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Nov 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Shri Mani Jain, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Raghuveer Madana, D.R

Section 132Section 133(6)Section 143Section 143(1)Section 68

…satisfaction of AO thereafter is subjective and requires more efforts/inquiry on the part of the AO to give a finding in the order that lender is not credit worthy. The AO must make proper enquiry before making any addition. In Khandelwal Constructions v. CIT 227 ITR 900 (Gau.), it has been held that empowers the Assessing officer to make enquiry. If he is satisfied that these entries are not genuine he has every right to add these as income from other sources. But before rejecting the assessee's explanation, A.O. must make proper enquiries and in the absence of proper enquiries, addition cannot be sustained. 7.…

Mahendra H. Shah, Mumbai vs. ITO - Ward- 4 (1)(3), Mumbai

ITA 6892/MUM/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Sept 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon’Bleshri Mahendra H. Shah V. Income Tax Officer – 4(1)(3) 6Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan C/O. The Presscopper Industries M.K. Road, Mumbai - 400020 175, Kika Street Mumbai – 400004 Pan: Aafps0929R (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Vimal PunmiyaFor Respondent: Smita Verma

Section 132(4)Section 133(4)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 68

…he assessee’s explanation is probable, dthe onus will shift to the revenue to disprove it and the assessee’s explanation in such case cannot be rejected on mere surmises. Other similar judiciary rulling are as under: - • Khandelwal Constructions v. CIT (1997) 227 ITR 900 (Gau.) • CIT v. Orissa corporation Pvt. Ltd., 158 ITR 78 (SC) • CIT v. Rohini Builders 256 ITR 360 (Guj.). • Jurisdictional Hon'ble ITAT, Mumbai for an identical case i.e. Arceli Realty Limited Vs. The Income Tax Officer 15(1) (1), Mumbai pronounced on 21.04.2017 ITA- 6492/Mum/2016-17, the summary of the case is outlined as under:- "........A.O.…

Shri. Kushal Virendra Tandon, Mumbai vs. ACIT 16 (1), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is allowed in terms of our observations recorded hereinabove

ITA 7572/MUM/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Sept 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman () & Shri Ravish Sood () Shri Kushal Virendra Tandon Acit -16(1) 802, Rustomjee Enclave, Vs. Room No. 439, 4Th Floor, Upper Juhu, Behind Dn Nagar Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Police Station, Andheri West, Churchgate, Mumbai – 400 058 Mumbai – 400 020 Pan No. Adxpt7623G (Assessee) (Revenue) Assessee By : Shri Vimal Punmiya, A.R Revenue By : Shri Gurbinder Singh, D.R

For Appellant: Shri Vimal Punmiya, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Gurbinder Singh, D.R

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 271(1)(c)Section 35(1)(ii)Section 37(1)Section 68

…nexplained cash credit under Sec. 68 of the Act i.e without making any proper enquiry/verification cannot be sustained. Our aforesaid view is supported by the judgment of the Hon‟ble High Court of Gauhati in the case of Khandelwal Constructions Vs. CIT (1997) 227 ITR 900 (Gau). In the backdrop of the facts as were involved in the case before them, it was observed by the Hon‟ble High Court that the A.O without making a proper enquiry could not have held the creditors as fictitious and added the same as an unexplained cash credit within the meaning of Sec. 68 of the Act. 21. In the backdrop of our aforesaid deliber…

Nisa Industrial Services Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. ACIT- WD -10(3)(1), Mumbai

ITA 3171/MUM/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Nov 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri C. N. Prasad, Jm & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am

For Appellant: Respondent byFor Respondent: Ms. Kavita P. Kaushik, DR

Section 131Section 133Section 133ASection 143Section 143(2)

…the assessee's explanation is probable, the onus will shift to the revenue to disprove it and the assessee1 s explanation in such case cannot be rejected on mere surmises. Other similar judiciary ruling are as under :- • Khandelwal Constructions v. CIT (1997) 227 ITR 900 (Gau.) • CIT v. Orissa Corporation Pvt. Ltd. 158 ITR 78 (SC) • CIT v. Rohini Builders 256 ITR 360 (Guj.). h. It is also settled law that it is mandatory for the CIT(A) to confront the assessee with any material collected by the CIT (A) at the back of the assessee, and in case of statement of third party recorded at the back of the assessee, oppo…

I.T.O. - 25(2)(5), Mumbai vs. Smt. Leena Haresh Harde, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 6429/MUM/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jul 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Hon'Ble & Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Bleincome Tax Officer – 25(2)(5) V. Smt Leena Haresh Harde Room No. 506, C-10, 5Th Floor 502, 5Th Floor, Padmawati Palace Pratyakshakar Bhavan Nanda Patkar Road Bandra Kurla Complex Vile Parle (E), Mumbai – 400 057 Bandra (E), Mumbai - 400 051 Pan: Aaxph1737Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Rushabh Mehta Department By : Shri Michael Jerald

For Appellant: Shri Rushabh MehtaFor Respondent: Shri Michael Jerald

Section 132Section 133(6)Section 145(3)Section 148Section 68

…satisfaction of AO thereafter is subjective and requires more efforts/inquiry on the part of the AO to give a finding in the order that lender is not credit worthy. The AO must make proper enquiry before making any addition. In Khandelwal Constructions v. CIT 227 ITR 900 (Gau.), it has been held that empowers the Assessing officer to make enquiry. If he is satisfied that these entries are not genuine he has every right to add 16 Smt Leena Haresh Harde these as income from other sources. But before rejecting the assessee's explanation, A.O. must make proper enquiries and in the absence of proper enquiries, additi…

ACIT-4(2)(1), Mumbai vs. M/S.Vgc Diamond Private Limited, Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is allowed, and appeal of the Assessing Officer is dismissed

ITA 7004/MUM/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Jul 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm& Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 7004/Mum/2017 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2014-15)

For Appellant: Mrs. SamathaFor Respondent: Shri Vimal Punamiya, AR

Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 68

…the assessee's explanation is probable, the onus will shift to the revenue to disprove it and the assessee's explanation in such case cannot be rejected on mere surmises. Other similar judiciary ruling are as under:- • Khandelwal Constructions v. CIT (1997) 227 ITR 900 (Gau.) • CIT v. Orissa Corporation Pvt. Ltd. 158 ITR 78 (SC) • CIT v. Rohini Builders 256 ITR 360 (Guj.). 16 I.T.A. No. 7004/Mum/2017 M/s VGC Diamond Pvt. Ltd iii. It is also settled law that where the assessee provides identity and details pertaining to the lenders/creditors investor of share application money and is unable to produce them an…