How many judgments cite Kim Pharma (P) Ltd. v. CIT?

47 judgments on BharatTax cite Kim Pharma (P) Ltd. v. CIT (35 Taxmann.com 456), spanning 2018 to 2025.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Kim Pharma (P) Ltd. v. CIT come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 115BBE, Section 133A, Section 69, Section 69B, Section 143(3), Section 69A.

Kim Pharma (P) Ltd. v. CIT

35 Taxmann.com 456High Court2013#2489 most cited

What is Kim Pharma (P) Ltd. v. CIT authority for?

Where an amount surrendered during a survey is not reflected in the assessee's books of account and the source of the income is not declared, it is assessable as deemed income under section 69A, not as business income.

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,314 Indian tax judgments — from 2018 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Kim Pharma · section 69A · surrendered income · survey · unexplained income · deemed income · books of account · source of income

Also reported as

258 CTR 454

Sections most often in play

Section 115BBE Section 133A Section 69 Section 69B Section 143(3)Section 69A Section 142(1)Section 144B

Issues it is cited on

section 71 section 69d section 40(b)set off of losses surrender of income preponderance of probability section 69b survey under section 133a sundry creditors section 115bb section 115b loose papers

Judgments citing Kim Pharma (P) Ltd. v. CIT

Shri Rajesh Chachwani, Jaipur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-6-4, Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 628/JPR/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur29 Oct 2019AY 2008-09

For Appellant: Shri S.L. Poddar (Advocate)For Respondent: Smt. Runi Pal (JCIT)

Section 115BSection 139(1)Section 147Section 148Section 56Section 68

…e the assessee has a bank account and been operating it. Further the ratio of the following decision also supports the view that income assessed under section 68 cannot be set off against the loss claimed by the appellant. Kim Pharma (P) Ltd. vs. CIT, (2013) 35 Taxmann.com 456 (Punjab & Haryana) 6. The Tribunal had relied upon a decision of the Gujarat High Court in Fakir Mohmed Haji Hasan v. CIT [2001] 247 ITR 290/[2002] 120 Taxman 11. In that case, interpreting the scope and describing the scheme of ss. 69, 69A, 69B and 69C of the Act, it was observed : 14 Shri Rajesh Chachwani, Jaiupr. "The scheme of ss. 6…

ACIT Circle 1(1), Ujjain vs. A One Enclave, Ujjain

In the result, grounds taken by Revenue are dismissed

ITA 828/IND/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Indore26 Jul 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Hon'Ble Kul Bharat & Hon'Ble Manish Boradassessment Year 2012-13 Acit, Circle-1(1), V/S M/S. A One Enclave, Ujjain 3687/1, Hariphatak Road, Ujjain

Section 115BSection 133ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 68

…ITR 290), the decision of DCIT vs Radhe Developers India Ltd (329 ITR 1) and decision of Madras High Court in case of CIT vs Chensing Ventures (291 ITR 258). It was further submitted that the Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in case of Kim Pharma (P) ltd (258 CTR 454) has in fact relied on the decision of Gujarat High Court in case of Fakir Mohmed HajiHasan 13 A One Enclave (supra) which has subsequently been explained in subsequent decision of Radhe Developers India Ltd (supra). 7. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the material available on record, the factual matrix and various decisions rel…

Sh. Sanjay Bairathi, Jaipur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Jaipur

In the result, grounds taken by Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1343/JPR/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur13 Jun 2019AY 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal (CA)For Respondent: Shri B.K. Gupta (CIT)

Section 115BSection 132Section 132(4)Section 251

…18 Shri Sanjay Bairathi, Jaipur. e) AO has relied on the decision of cases decided by Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in Kim Pharma Pvt. Ltd. (cited supra) and liberty India (cited supra). It is submitted that in case of Kim Pharma (P.) limited report in 258 CTR 454 amounts surrendered in course of survey was not reflected in books of accounts and no source from where it was derived was declared by the assessee and therefore it was held that the same cannot be assessed as business income. In this case the decision of Karnataka high Court in case of CIT V. S.K. Srigiri and Bros 298 ITR 13 relied by the Assess…

Construction Protal Pvt. Ltd., Pune vs. Income-Tax Officer

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1608/PUN/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Pune06 Jun 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri D.Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos. 1607 & 1608/Pun/2014 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2005-06 & 2006-07

For Appellant: Shri Nilesh Khandelwal & Shri Rajiv ThakkarFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Modi, JCIT

Section 133ASection 69A

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, पुणे "ायपीठ “ए” पुणे म" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “A”, PUNE "ी डी "ी डी. क"णाकरा क"णाकरा राव लेखा सद"य सद"य "ी "ी क"णाकरा क"णाकरा राव , लेखा सद"य सद"य डी डी राव राव लेखा लेखा एवं "ी "ी िवकास िवकास अव"थी अव"थी, "याियक "याियक सद"य सद"य केकेकेके सम" सम" एवं "ी "ी अव"थी अव"थी "याियक "याियक सद"य सद"य सम" सम" एवं एवं िवकास िवकास BEFORE SHRI D.KARUNAKARA RAO, AM AND SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JM आयकर अपील सं. / ITA Nos. 1607 & 1608/PUN/2014 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2005-06 & 2006-07 Construction Portal Pvt. Ltd., M/s. MZSK & Associates, Chartered Accountants, Level 3, Riversi…

Construction Protal Pvt. Ltd., Pune vs. Income-Tax Officer, Pune

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1607/PUN/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Pune06 Jun 2018AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri D.Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos. 1607 & 1608/Pun/2014 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2005-06 & 2006-07

For Appellant: Shri Nilesh Khandelwal & Shri Rajiv ThakkarFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Modi, JCIT

Section 133ASection 69A

DCIT, Ludhiana vs. M/S Marshal Machines Pvt. Ltd., Ludhiana

ITA 57/CHANDI/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh22 May 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Dr. B.R.R. Kumarassessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Sh. Y.K. SudFor Respondent: Smt. Renu Amitabh

Section 133ASection 69

…me was also charged on the Income which is clear from the surrender letter reproduced on page 4 of the Assessment Order. Further the A 0 relied upon the judgment of Hon'ble Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of Kim Pharma Ltd vs CIT in ITA 106 of 2011 258 CTR 454 In fact this judgment supports the case of the assessee because in this case, the assessee had surrendered the amount without disclosing its source and therefore the Hon'ble High court held that where the Income is surrendered without disclosing the source the same would be assessable as Income from Other Sources. The assessee in that case had hi…

Radhesham Totaram Narayani, Nandurbar vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1491/PUN/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune21 Mar 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am

For Appellant: Smt. Deepa KhareFor Respondent: Dr. Vivek Aggarwal

Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 69A

…आयकर आयकर अपीलीय आयकर आयकर अपीलीय अपीलीय अिधकरण अपीलीय अिधकरण अिधकरण पुणे अिधकरण पुणे पुणे "यायपीठ पुणे "यायपीठ "यायपीठ “एक सद"य "यायपीठ एक सद"य एक सद"य” पुणे एक सद"य पुणे पुणे म"म"म"म" पुणे IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SMC BENCH, PUNE सु"ी सु"ी सुषमा सु"ी सु"ी सुषमा सुषमा चावला सुषमा चावला चावला, "याियक चावला "याियक "याियक सद"य "याियक सद"य सद"य एवं सद"य एवं एवं "ी एवं "ी "ी डी "ी डी डी. क"णाकरा डी क"णाकरा क"णाकरा राव क"णाकरा राव राव, लेखा राव लेखा लेखा सद"य लेखा सद"य सद"य केकेकेके सम" सद"य सम" सम" सम" BEFORE MS. SUSHMA CHOWLA, JM AND SHRI D. KARUNAKARA RAO, AM आय आयकर आय आय कर कर अपील कर अपील अपील संसं…