How many judgments cite Lakshmi Rice Mills v. CIT?

69 judgments on BharatTax cite Lakshmi Rice Mills v. CIT (97 ITR 258), spanning 2021 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Lakshmi Rice Mills v. CIT come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 68, Section 115BBE, Section 143(3), Section 69A, Section 143(2), Section 142(1).

Lakshmi Rice Mills v. CIT

97 ITR 258High Court1974#1641 most cited

What is Lakshmi Rice Mills v. CIT authority for?

When an assessee's books of account are accepted as genuine and reflect a cash balance sufficient to cover high denomination notes or other cash deposits, the source of such cash is deemed explained. In such cases, no addition can be made under Section 68 or Section 69A if the cash is duly recorded in the books and declared as income.

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2021 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Lakshmi Rice Mills v. CIT · Section 68 · Section 69A · unexplained cash · high denomination notes · genuine books of account · cash balance · source of funds · undisclosed income · addition · declared income · books of account accepted

Sections most often in play

Section 68 Section 115BBE Section 143(3)Section 69A Section 143(2)Section 142(1)Section 145(3)Section 44AB

Issues it is cited on

section 131(1)addition under section 68 section 44ab addition u/s 68 rejection of books of account section 31 section 145(3)preponderance of probability section 44a double taxation section 115bbe section 115bb

Judgments citing Lakshmi Rice Mills v. CIT

M/S Banke Bihari Foods (P) Ltd, Patna vs. Pr. CIT-1, Patna

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 27/PAT/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Patna13 Mar 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumar

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263

…erspective under the ratio of law laid down in various authoritative pronouncements namely- (i) CIT –vs.- Gabriel India reported in 203 ITR 108 (Bom.); (ii) Malabar Industries –vs.- CIT reported in 243 ITR 83 (SC); (iii) Laxmi Rice Mills –vs.- CIT reported in 97 ITR 258 (Patna). He submitted that the impugned order is not sustainable. 8 Assessment Year: 2017-2018 M/s. Banke Bihari Foods (P) Limited 10. On the other hand, ld. CIT(DR) contended that no finding is discernable qua verification of these details at the end of ld. Assessing Officer in the impugned assessment order. Therefore, ld. Commissioner has eve…

Arif, Shimoga vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1, Shimoga

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

ITA 976/BANG/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 Jan 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojarishri Arif Vs Acit, Circle - 1 Nehru Nagar, Sagar I.T. Office, No.75, 100Ft Road Shimoga 577401 Gopal Gowda Extension Pan – Adapa8762G Shimoga 577201 (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Nitesh Ranjan, Ca Revenue By: Shri Ganesh R. Ghale, Standing Counsel Date Of Hearing: 16.01.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 16.01.2023 O R D E R Per: Chandra Poojari, A.M. This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Learned Cit(A),/Ncac, Delhi Dated 10.08.2022 For Ay 2017-18. 2. The Assessee Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: - “I The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre("Nfac") Dated 10-Aug-2022, Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 ("The Act") Insofar It Is Against The Appellant, Is Opposed To The Law, Weight Of Evidence, Facts & Circumstances Of The Appellant'S Case. Ii The Order Is Passed In Haste, Without Providing Sufficient & Reasonable Opportunity Of Being Heard. Iii The Order Is Passed Against The Principle Of Natural Justice & Thus Liable To Be Quashed. Iv The Learned Cit (Appeal) Erred By Confirming The Addition Of Rs.11,66,999/-, Even Though The Appellant Furnished Evidence In Support Of His Claim.

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh Ranjan, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh R. Ghale, Standing Counsel

Section 250Section 68

…assessee: - i. Smt. Charu Aggarwal vs. DCIT (2022) 140 taxmann.com 588 (Chandigarh) ii. Bansal Rice Mills vs. ITO (2022) 120 Taxman 155 (Chandigarh) iii. PCIT vs. Agson Global (P.) Ltd. (2022) 134 taxmann.com 256 (Delhi) iv. Lakshmi Rice Mills vs. CIT (1974) 97 ITR 258 (Pat.) v. CIT vs. Akshit Kumar (2021) 124 taxmann.com 123/277 Taxman 423 (Delhi) 5. The learned D.R. relied on the orders of the lower authorities. 6. I have heard the rival contentions and perused the material on record. In this case the main contention of the learned A.R. is that the Assessing Officer (AO) is precluded from making addition unde…

Dy CIT-CC-1(1), Mumbai vs. Shree Mangal Jewels P. Ltd., Mumbai

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

ITA 1408/MUM/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Oct 2022AY 2017-18

Section 131Section 133ASection 68

…e Assessing officer. If the entries in the books of accounts are genuine and the balance in cash is matching with the books, it can be said that the assessee has explained the nature and source of such deposit. In the case of Lakshmi Rice Mills v. CIT [1974] 97 ITR 258 (Pat.) Hon'ble Patna High court held as under: "It is, in my view, a fundamental principle governing the taxation of any undisclosed income or secreted profits that the income or the profits as such must find sufficient explanation at the hands of the assessee. If the balance at hand on the relevant date is sufficient to cover the value of the hig…

Sita Ram Rastogi, Lakhimpur Kheri vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 3(5), Lakhimpur Kheri

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 23/LKW/2022[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow08 Sept 2022AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri. A. D. Jainassessment Year: 2017-18 Sita Ram Rastogi V. The Ito Prop. M/S Shyam Jewellers Ward 3(5) Lakhimpur Kheri Lakhimpur Kheri Tan/Pan:Agapr6341R (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri K. R. Rastogi, C.A. Respondent By: Shri Harish Gidwani, D.R. Date Of Hearing: 05 09 2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 08 09 2022 O R D E R This Is Assessee’S Appeal Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A), Nfac, New Delhi, Dated 26.11.2021, For The Assessment Year 2017-18, Raising The Following Grounds Of Appeal: 1. That The Learned Income Tax Officer Made An Addition Of Rs.19,10,000/- As Un Explained Cash Deposit In The Books Maintained By The Assessee Whereas There Is No Such Single Deposit In The Books. 2. That The Additions Of Rs.15,688/- & Rs.5,693/- Have Been Made Without Any Basis Which Are Simply The Guess Work & Therefore Not Justified. 3. That The Learned Income Tax Officer Has Not Pointed Out Any Mistake Or Discrepancy In The Books Of Account As Is Evident From His Order In Paras 3 To 6 & Straight Away Made Up His Mind To Make Addition As Is Evident From His Observation Below Para 6 Of His Order. 4. That The Appellant Had Explained The Availability Of Funds (Old Sbn'S), Which Was Accepted By The Assessing Officer.

For Appellant: Shri K. R. Rastogi, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Harish Gidwani, D.R

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)

…nsel for the assessee has placed reliance on the following decisions: 1. ‘ACIT vs. M/s Hirapanna Jewellers’, ITA 253/VIZ/2020, order dated 12.5.2021 2. ‘CIT vs. Associated Transport (P) Ltd.’ [1996] 84 Taxman 146 (Cal.) 3. ‘Lakshmi Rice Mills vs. CIT’, [1974] 97 ITR 258 (Pat.) 4. ‘Lalchand Bhagat Ambica Ram vs. CIT’ [1959] 37 ITR 288 (SC). 5. ‘Shri Shubhash Chandra Sharma vs. ITO-2(2)’, ITA No No. 327/Agra/2017, order dated 31.5.2019. 6. ‘M/s Premier Car Sales Ltd. vs. ACIT’, ITA No.450/LKW/2018, order dated 26.4.2019. 7. ‘Shri Suresh Khatri vs. ITO’, ITA No.781/LKW/2017, order dated 26.6.2020. 11. On the other h…

R.S. Diamonds India Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT 5(3) (1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2017/MUM/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Jul 2022AY 2017-18

Section 68

…y view, there is no question of treating the said deposits as unexplained cash deposit as opined by the Assessing Officer. 5. The Ld A.R relied on certain case laws which are relevant to the issue under consideration. In the case of Lakshmi Rice Mills (1974) 97 ITR 258 (Patna), it has been held that, when books of account of the assessee were 3 R.S. Diamonds India Private Limited accepted by the revenue as genuine and cash balance shown therein was sufficient to cover high denomination notes held by the assessee, then the assessee was not required to prove source of receipt of said high denomination notes which…

Kalaneedhi Jewellers LLP, Patiala vs. DCIT-CC, Patiala

In the result, appeals of both the assesses are allowed

ITA 311/CHANDI/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh25 Mar 2022AY 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Priyanka Dhar, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)

…reported in 29 taxmann.com 402 (All) • Agson Global Pvt. Ltd. vs. PCIT (Central)-3, New Delhi in ITA No. 68/2021 & CM No. 9319/2021 dated 19.01.2022 (Del HC) • Bansal Rice Mills vs. ITO reported in 78ITD 326 (2001) Chd • Laxmi Rice Mills V/s. CIT reported in 97 ITR 258 (Pat) • Dewas Soya Ltd., Ujjain vs. Income Tax (Appeal No. 336/lnd/2012) order dt. 31/10/2012 (ITAT Indore) • Smt. Harshila Chordiavs vs. ITO (2008) 298 ITR 349 (Raj) • R. B. Jesaram Fatehchand (Sugar Dept.) vs. CIT Reported at (1970) 75 ITR 33 (Bom.) • M. Durai Raj vs. CIT reported at [1972] 83 ITR 484 (Kerala) • Ms. Sunny Jewellery House vs. IT…

Ssmt. Charu Aggarwal, Patiala vs. DCIT-CC, Patiala

In the result, appeals of both the assesses are allowed

ITA 310/CHANDI/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh25 Mar 2022AY 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Priyanka Dhar, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)

Pawan Kumar Mehta vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax

In the result, the substantial question of law Nos

ITA/561/2015HC Karnataka19 Jul 2021

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR

Section 131Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 260Section 260ASection 6

…1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF JULY 2021 PRESENT THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE AND THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR I.T.A. NO.561 OF 2015 BETWEEN: PAWAN KUMAR MEHTA NO.5, 2ND FLOOR, MIDDLE SCHOOL ROAD V.V.PURAM BANGALORE - 560 004 ... APPELLANT (BY SRI.A.SHANKAR SR. ADV. FOR SRI.ANNAMALAI S. ADV.) AND: THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(2) C.R.BUILDING, QUEEN'S ROAD BANGALORE - 560 001. ... RESPONDENT (BY SRI.K.V.ARAVIND, ADV.) - - - THIS I.T.A. IS FILED UNDER SEC. 260-A OF INCOME TAX ACT 1961, ARISING OUT OF ORDER…

The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Visakhapatnam vs. Hirapanna Jewellers, Visakhapatnam

In the result, appeal of the revenue as well as the cross objection of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 253/VIZ/2020[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam12 May 2021AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri N.K.Choudhry, Hon’Ble & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.253/Viz/2020 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2017-18) Asst.Commissioner Of Vs. M/S Hirapanna Jewellers Income Tax, D.No.48-19-5, Opp:Apsrtc Central Circle-1 Commercial Complex, Visakhapatnam Dwaraka Nagar Visakhapatnam [Pan : Aaifh2606M] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) Cross Objection No.02/Viz/2021 (Arising Out Of I.T.A. No.253/Viz/2020) (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2017-18) M/S Hirapanna Jewellers Vs. Asst.Commissioner Of D.No.48-19-5, Opp:Apsrtc Income Tax, Commercial Complex, Dwaraka Nagar Central Circle-1 Visakhapatnam Visakhapatnam [Pan : Aaifh2606M]

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N. Hari, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri D.K. Sonowal, CIT DR

Section 133ASection 68

…he Assessing officer. If the entries in the books of accounts are genuine and the balance in cash is matching with the books, it can be said that the assessee has explained the nature and source of such deposit. In the case of Lakshmi Rice Mills v. CIT [1974] 97 ITR 258 (Pat.) Hon’ble Patna High court held as under: “It is, in my view, a fundamental principle governing the taxation of any undisclosed income or secreted profits that the income or the profits as such must find sufficient explanation at the hands of the assessee. If the balance at hand on the relevant date is sufficient to cover the value of the hig…