Lalchand Bhagat Ambica Ram v. CIT

37 ITR 288Supreme Court of India1959#110 most cited

What is Lalchand Bhagat Ambica Ram v. CIT authority for?

Where an assessee maintains regular books of account, and these books are not rejected or found defective by the Assessing Officer, any cash deposits or available cash shown in the cash book, if sufficient to cover the transaction, cannot be treated as unexplained income or an addition under sections 68 or 69A.

570

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2009 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Lalchand Bhagat Ambica Ram v. CIT · unexplained cash deposit · cash credit section 68 · unexplained money section 69A · rejection of books of account section 145(3) · acceptance of books · sufficiency of cash balance · assessment addition · cash book balance · mercantile system of accounting

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 68Section 115BBESection 142(1)Section 147Section 132Section 143(2)Section 69A

Issues it is cited on

section 132(4a)dumb documentsrejection of books of accountsection 69bsection 292csection 145(3)section 34loose paperson-moneysection 10(38)penny stockaddition u/s 68

Judgments citing Lalchand Bhagat Ambica Ram v. CIT

ACIT Central Circle 1(4) Mumbai, Mumbai vs. Kalyanee Fortune Constructions, Mumbai

In the result, all the above appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 5779/MUM/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Dec 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: Shri Neelkanth Khandelwal, ARFor Respondent: Ms. Kavitha Kaushik, (Sr. DR)
Section 131Section 132(1)Section 133ASection 143(3)

…evidence on account of law, but in making assessment under section 23(3) of 1922 Act he is not entitled to make a pure guess and make an assessment without reference to any evidence or any material at all - Held, yes. Lalchand Bhagat Ambica Ram v. CIT [1959] 37 ITR 288 (SC) In this case, Hon’ble Supreme Court observed that both ITO and ITAT arriving in their conclusions had indulged in suspicions, conjectures and surmises and acted without any evidence or upon a view of facts which could not reasonably be entertained or finding was perverse which could not be sustained and therefore Supreme Court was entitled to…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle 1(4), Mumbai vs. Kalyanee Fortune Constructions, Mumbai

In the result, all the above appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 4448/MUM/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: Revenue byFor Respondent: Date of Hearing
Section 131Section 132(1)Section 133ASection 143(3)

…evidence on account of law, but in making assessment under section 23(3) of 1922 Act he is not entitled to make a pure guess and make an assessment without reference to any evidence or any material at all - Held, yes. Lalchand Bhagat Ambica Ram v. CIT [1959] 37 ITR 288 (SC) In this case, Hon'ble Supreme Court observed that both ITO and ITAT arriving in their conclusions had indulged in suspicions, conjectures and surmises and acted without any evidence or upon a view of facts which could not reasonably be entertained or finding was perverse which could not be sustained and therefore Supreme Court was entitled to…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Mumbai vs. Kalyanee Fortune Constructions, Mumbai

In the result, all the above appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 4445/MUM/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: Shri Neelkanth Khandelwal, ARFor Respondent: Ms. Kavitha Kaushik, (Sr. DR)
Section 131Section 132(1)Section 133ASection 143(3)

…evidence on account of law, but in making assessment under section 23(3) of 1922 Act he is not entitled to make a pure guess and make an assessment without reference to any evidence or any material at all - Held, yes. Lalchand Bhagat Ambica Ram v. CIT [1959] 37 ITR 288 (SC) In this case, Hon’ble Supreme Court observed that both ITO and ITAT arriving in their conclusions had indulged in suspicions, conjectures and surmises and acted without any evidence or upon a view of facts which could not reasonably be entertained or finding was perverse which could not be sustained and therefore Supreme Court was entitled to…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle 1 4 Mumbai, Mumbai vs. Ms. Kalyanee Fortune Constructions, Mumbai

In the result, all the above appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 4444/MUM/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Dec 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: Shri Neelkanth Khandelwal, ARFor Respondent: Ms. Kavitha Kaushik, (Sr. DR)
Section 131Section 132(1)Section 133ASection 143(3)

…nce on account of law, but in making assessment under section 23(3) of 1922 Act. ITO is not entitled to make a pure guess without any reference to any evidence or volitional material at all." (Held: Fictitious claims). Lalchand Bhagat Ambica Ram v. CIT [1959] 37 ITR 288 (SC) In this case, Hon'ble Supreme Court observed that both ITO and ITAT arriving at their conclusions had indulged in suspicions, conjectures and surmises and acted without any evidence or upon a review of facts which could not reasonably be entertained for finding was perverse. Hence, could not be sustained and therefore Supreme Court ordered to…

Kdjp Steels Private Limited, Delhi vs. National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi

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

ITA 5900/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumarassessment Year : 2017-18 Kdjp Steels Private Limited, Vs. National Faceless Appeal Centre, Plot No.50, Flat No.A-201, Delhi. Parshav Vihar, Patpar Ganj, Delhi – 110 092. Pan: Aacck6905F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Salil Agarwal, Sr. Advocate; Shri R.P. Mall, Advocate; Shri Shailesh Gupta, Ca & Shri Madhur Agarwal, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Om Parkash, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 27.10.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 23.12.2025

For Appellant: Shri Salil Agarwal, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Om Parkash, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250

…represented the turnover of the assessee which turnover had duly been accepted. Reliance is placed on following judicial pronouncements: a) CIT vs. Associated Transport (P.) Ltd. reported in 212 ITR 417 (Cal) b) Lalchand Bhagat Ambica Ram vs. CIT reported in 37 ITR 288 (SC) c) S.R. Venkataraman vs. CIT reported in 127 ITR 807 (Kar) 5.2 Ld. AO having accepted the books of accountsof assessee cannot even discard a part of trading account i.e. cash sales in the instant case. Ld. AO has not even disputed such cash sales, had it been so then he would have reduced the declared turnover by Rs.44,08,165/-. In absence…

Worldview Education Services Private Lmited, Hyderabad vs. ITO., Ward-17(1), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 1056/HYD/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad19 Dec 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1056/Hyd/2025 Assessment Year 2021-2022 Worldview Education Services Private Limited, The Income Tax Officer, Vs. Hyderabad – 500 016. Ward-17(1), Telangana. Hyderabad. Pan Aaacw9480F (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती "ारा /Assessee By: Ca C. Maheshwar Reddy राज" व "ारा /Revenue By: G Saratha, Sr. Ar सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 27.11.2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 19.12.2025 आदेश/Order

For Appellant: CA C. Maheshwar ReddyFor Respondent: G Saratha, Sr. AR
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 37

…nd grounds of appeal. Both the respondent and the Tribunal have based their orders on preconceived notions, conjunctures and surmises, manifestly misread the facts and twisted them to justify their conclusions. 62. In Lalchand Bhagat Ambica Ram v. CIT [1959] 37 ITR 288 (SC), held at Page 295 as follows: '"Where the fact finding authority has acted without any evidence or upon a view of the facts which could not reasonably be entertained or the facts found were such that no person acting judicially and properly instructed as to the relevant facts could have found, the court is entitled to interfere… " 29 ITA.N…

Imran Rafikbhai Motanwala, Junagadh vs. ITO, Ward-3, Junagadh

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed in above terms

ITA 217/RJT/2024[2017-18]Status: HeardITAT Rajkot15 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं/.Ita No.217/Rjt/2024 "नधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year: 2017-18 Imran Rafikbhai Motanwala The Ito, Ward-3 बनाम Shop No. 22/23, Sardar Patel Junagadh Marketing Yard, Dolatpara, Vs. Junagadh-362037 Pan : Aevpm6429E (अपीलाथ"/Assessee) : (""यथ"/Respondent) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri Darshit Ranpura, Ld.Ar राज"व क" ओर से/Revenue By : Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Sr-Dr

For Appellant: Shri Darshit Ranpura, ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Sr-DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, राजकोट "यायपीठ, राजकोट। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT BEFORE DR. ARJUN LAL SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI DINESH MOHAN SINHA, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं/.ITA No.217/RJT/2024 "नधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year: 2017-18 Imran Rafikbhai Motanwala The ITO, Ward-3 बनाम Shop No. 22/23, Sardar Patel Junagadh Marketing Yard, Dolatpara, Vs. Junagadh-362037 PAN : AEVPM6429E (अपीलाथ"/Assessee) : (""यथ"/Respondent) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee by : Shri Darshit Ranpura, ld.AR राज"व क" ओर से/Revenue by : Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Sr-DR सुनवाई क" तार"ख /Date of Hearing : 25/11/…

Krishna Mohan, Patna vs. ACIT, Circle-14, Patna

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 476/PAT/2025[2017-18]Status: HeardITAT Patna09 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vp & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am Krishna Mohan Prop-M/S Maa Ambey Traders, Acit, Circle-14, Patna Maurari Complex, Karbigahiya, Patna, Bihar Vs. Patna-800001, Bihar (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Ahupm5205C Assessee By : Shri Manish Rastogi, Ar Revenue By : Shri Md. Ah Chowdhary, Dr Date Of Hearing: 27.11.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 09.12.2025

For Appellant: Shri Manish Rastogi, ARFor Respondent: Shri Md. AH Chowdhary, DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 69A

…tently held by various Hon’ble Courts that there must be some matter more than their suspicion to support the assumption made u/s. 143(3) of the Act. We find force from the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Lalchand Bhagat Ambica Ram v. CIT [1959] 37 ITR 288 (SC) wherein it was held as under – “The mere possibility of the appellant earning considerable amounts in the year under consideration was a pure conjecture on the part of the Income-tax Officer and the fact that the appellant indulged in speculation (in Kalai account) could not legitimately lead to the inference that the profit in a single trans…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-3(1), Kolkata vs. Rajshri Iron Industries Private Limited, Kolkata

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 2388/KOL/2024[2013]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Nov 2025

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shrisonjoy Sarma, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Soumitra Choudhury, ARFor Respondent: S/Shri Praveen Kishore &
Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 69C

…e books of Accounts. It is further respectfully submitted that suspicion however strong cannot take the place of proof. . For this proposition one may refer to decisions in Dhakeswari Cotton Mills Ltd. v. CIT 26 ITR 775 (SC), Lalchand Bhagat Ambica Ram v. CIT 37 ITR 288 (SC), CIT v. East Coast Commercial Co. Ltd.63 ITR 449 (SC) and Anil Tibrewala v. ITO(2004) 1 SOT 90 (Mum); CIT v. Daulatram Rawatmull 53 ITR 574 (SC); Umacharan Shaw & Bros. v. CIT 37 ITR 271 (SC); Pr. CIT v. Ajay Surendrabhai Patel(2016) 69 taxmann.com 309 (Guj.). 24. It is further submitted that the findings of the AO in the concluding portion o…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-3(1), Kolkata vs. Rajshri Iron Industries Private Limited, Kolkata

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 2385/KOL/2024[2018]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Nov 2025

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shrisonjoy Sarma, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Soumitra Choudhury, ARFor Respondent: S/Shri Praveen Kishore &
Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 69C

…e books of Accounts. It is further respectfully submitted that suspicion however strong cannot take the place of proof. . For this proposition one may refer to decisions in Dhakeswari Cotton Mills Ltd. v. CIT 26 ITR 775 (SC), Lalchand Bhagat Ambica Ram v. CIT 37 ITR 288 (SC), CIT v. East Coast Commercial Co. Ltd.63 ITR 449 (SC) and Anil Tibrewala v. ITO(2004) 1 SOT 90 (Mum); CIT v. Daulatram Rawatmull 53 ITR 574 (SC); Umacharan Shaw & Bros. v. CIT 37 ITR 271 (SC); Pr. CIT v. Ajay Surendrabhai Patel(2016) 69 taxmann.com 309 (Guj.). 24. It is further submitted that the findings of the AO in the concluding portion o…

Gupta Subhash & Sons HUF, Delhi vs. ITO, Ward 34(3), Delhi, Civic Centre

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

ITA 610/DEL/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRIS.RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI VIMAL KUMAR (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Lakshya Budhiraja, CAFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, Sr. DR

…demonetization lacks substantive evidence and relies solely on suspicion, conjecture, and unsubstantiated assumptions. 8.5 Reliance in this regard is placed on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Lalchand Bhagat Ambica Ram v. CIT, [1959] 37 ITR 288 (SC), wherein under similar facts and circumstances the Hon’ble Court has held that: 15. It is in the light of these observations that In the present case, the we have to determine the question arising Appellant has been before us in the present appeals It is clear on maintaining duly audited the record that the appellant maintained its books of…

Dipika Singh, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward 50(2), Now Ward 50(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 194/KOL/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata11 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm Ito, Ward 50(2) Dipika Singh Now Word 50(1), Bhatendra East Raypara Uttarpan, Manicktala Civic Rajarhat, Barasat, Vs. Centre, Kolkata-700067, Kolkata-700135, West Bengal West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Bllps4355P Assessee By : S/ Shri Soumitra Choudhury & Anirban Gupta, Ars Revenue By : Ms. Ruchika Sharma, Dr Date Of Hearing: 04.11.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 11.11.2025

For Appellant: S/ Shri Soumitra Choudhury &For Respondent: Ms. Ruchika Sharma, DR
Section 145(3)Section 69A

…tently held by various Hon’ble Courts that there must be some matter more than their suspicion to support the assumption made u/s. 143(3) of the Act. We find force from the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Lalchand Bhagat Ambica Ram v. CIT [1959] 37 ITR 288 (SC) wherein it was held as under – “The mere possibility of the appellant earning considerable amounts in the year under consideration was a pure conjecture on the part of the Income-tax Officer and the fact that the appellant indulged in speculation (in Kalai account) could not legitimately lead to the inference that the profit in a single trans…

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Kota vs. Motion Education Pvt. Ltd., Kota

In the result, the appeals of the revenue stands dismissed, and the

ITA 472/JPR/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur31 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, आयकर अपील सं. / ITA Nos.472 & 455/JP/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Years : 2017-18 & 2018-19 DCIT, Central Circle, Kota बनाम Vs. Motion Education Limited, 394, Rajeev Gandhi Nagar, Kota Private स्थायी लेखा सं. / जीआईआर सं./PAN/GIR No.: AAICM4637L अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent Motion Limited, CO. Nos.20 & 21/JP/2025 (Arising out of ITA. Nos.472 & 455/JP/2025) निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Years : 2017-18 &

For Appellant: Mrs. Raksha Birla CA (V.C)For Respondent: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT-DR
Section 153A

…ncials submitted before the Id AD have been controverted and as such, they stood accepted by the At AQ When entries in books stood accepted, the availability of cash could not have been disputed Reliance is placed on Laichand Bhagat Ambica Ram vs. CIT (1959) 37 ITR 288 (SC) (1)ACIT vs. Hirapanna Jewellers (2021) 189 170 608 (Vishakha pabram) ACIT vs. Nitin Sankhla in ITA No. 98/RPR/2020 vide order cit 08.06.2023 (v) ITO vs. Parmanand Gupta in ITA no. 82/RPR/2017 dated 04.08.2022 It is stated that cash deposits are accounted in regular books as business receipts. Such business tumover is accepted by the id. A…

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Kota vs. Motion Education Pvt. Ltd., Kota

In the result, the appeals of the revenue stands dismissed, and the

ITA 455/JPR/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur31 Oct 2025AY 2018-19
For Appellant: Mrs. Raksha Birla CA (V.C)For Respondent: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT-DR
Section 153A

…bmitted before the Id. AO have been controverted and as such, they stood accepted by the Id. AO. When entries in books stood accepted, the availability of cash could not have been disputed. Reliance is placed on:- (i) Laichand Bhagat Ambica Ram vs. CIT (1959) 37 ITR 288 (SC) (ii) ACIT vs. Hirapanna Jewellers (2021) 189 1TD 608 (Vishakhapatnam) (iii) ACIT vs. Nitin Sankhla in ITA No. 98/RPR/2020 vide order cit 08.06.2023 (iv) ITO vs. Parmanand Gupta in ITA no. 82/RPR/2017 dated 04.08.2022 24 ITA Nos.472 & 455/JP/2025 DCIT vs. Motion Education Pvt. Ltd. 23. It is stated that cash deposits are accounted in regular b…

ITO, Ward-4(2)(3), Ahmedabad vs. Maheshwari Sales Corporation, Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue stands dismissed

ITA 1306/AHD/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 Oct 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyalआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.1306/Ahd/2025 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2018-19 The Ito Maheshwari Sales Corporation बनाम/ Ward-4(2)(3) C-111, Ganesh Meridin V/S. Ahmedabad Nr.Sola Bridge, Sola Ahmedabad-380 058 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aalfm 4917 H (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) ("" यथ"/ Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Mehul K. Patel, Ar Revenue By : Smt. Mamta Singh, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 01/09/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 30/10/2025 आदेश/O R D E R Per Siddhartha Nautiyal, Jm: This Appeal By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As “Cit(A)”], Dated 11/04/2025, Passed U/S.250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2018-2019. 2. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: Ito Vs. Maheshwari Sales Corporation Asst. Year : 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri Mehul K. Patel, ARFor Respondent: Smt. Mamta Singh, Sr.DR
Section 132Section 147Section 250Section 68

…on. Placing reliance on judicial precedents including Omar Salay Mohamed Sait v. CIT [1959] 37 ITR 151 (SC), CIT v. Daulat Ram Rawatmull [1973] 87 ITR 349 (SC), Umacharan Shaw & Bros. v. CIT [1959] 37 ITR 271 (SC), and Lalchand Bhagat Ambica Ram v. CIT [1959] 37 ITR 288 (SC), the CIT(A) held that suspicion, conjectures, and surmises cannot take the place of evidence. Accordingly, it was held that the Assessing Officer had made the addition merely on the basis of general suspicion without any corroborative evidence. The CIT(A), therefore, deleted the addition of Rs. 63,84,998/- made under section 68 of the Act, ho…

Lsl Tools (P) Ltd., Gurgaon vs. ACIT, CC-1, Faridabad

In the result, both the appeals are allowed

ITA 5644/DEL/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Oct 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Amisha S. Gupt, CIT DR
Section 127Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 153DSection 234CSection 40A(2)(b)

…mar Salay Mohammad Sait v CIT (extracted at page 266 of Paper Book) ii) 26 ITR 736 (SC) DhirajlalGirdharilal v ClT, Bombay (extracted at page 266 of Paper Book) iii) 26 ITR 775 (SC) Dhakeshwari Cotton Mills ltd. v CIT (extracted at page 266 of Paper Book) iv) 37 ITR 288 (SC) Lal Chand BhagatAmbica Ram v CIT (extracted at page 266 of Paper Book) 37 Even otherwise, it is submitted that the statement recorded u/s 132(4) of the Act in absence of any incriminating material unearthed during search shall have no evidentiary value; Reliance is placed upon following judicial pronouncements: i) 2024 SCC OnLine Del 4012 PCI…

Lsl Tools (P) Ltd, Gurugram vs. ACIT, Central Circle-1, Faridabad

In the result, both the appeals are allowed

ITA 5643/DEL/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Oct 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Amisha S. Gupt, CIT DR
Section 127Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 153DSection 234CSection 40A(2)(b)

…mar Salay Mohammad Sait v CIT (extracted at page 266 of Paper Book) ii) 26 ITR 736 (SC) DhirajlalGirdharilal v ClT, Bombay (extracted at page 266 of Paper Book) iii) 26 ITR 775 (SC) Dhakeshwari Cotton Mills ltd. v CIT (extracted at page 266 of Paper Book) iv) 37 ITR 288 (SC) Lal Chand BhagatAmbica Ram v CIT (extracted at page 266 of Paper Book) 37 Even otherwise, it is submitted that the statement recorded u/s 132(4) of the Act in absence of any incriminating material unearthed during search shall have no evidentiary value; Reliance is placed upon following judicial pronouncements: i) 2024 SCC OnLine Del 4012 PCI…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi vs. La Solitaire Jewels Private Limited, Delhi

The Appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 181/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishradeputy Commissioner Of Vs La Solitaire Jewels Income Tax, Private Limited Room No. 316A, C. R. 2706, Bank Street Road, Building, I. P. Estate, Karol Bagh, New Delhi- New Delhi 110005 Delhi Pan: Aaacl9483H Appellant Respondent Assessee By Sh. Mayankpatwari, Adv & Sh. Akashojha, Adv Revenue By Sh. Gouranga Chandra, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 27/08/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 30/10/2025

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 145Section 145(3)Section 68

…ncome from undisclosed sources. It is not a fit case for treating the amount of Rs. 81,000 as concealed income of the assessee and consequently imposition of penalty was also not justified in this case." In the case of Lalchand Bhagat Ambica Ram v. CIT [1959] 37 ITR 288 (SC), the Hon'ble Apex Court decided the matter in favour of assessee of the ground that it was clear on the record that the assessee maintained the books of accounts according to the mercantile system and there was sufficient cash balance in its cash books and the books of account of the assessee were not challenged by the Assessing officer. If t…

Sk. Rezzak, Birbhum vs. ITO, Ward 3(3), Suri

The appeal of the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 586/KOL/2025[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata27 Oct 2025AY 2017-2018

Bench: SHRI RAJESH KUMAR (Accountant Member)

Section 143(2)Section 250Section 253Section 69A

…tently held by various Hon’ble Courts that there must be some matter more than their suspicion to support the assumption made u/s. 143(3) of the Act. We find force from the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Lalchand Bhagat Ambica Ram v. CIT [1959] 37 ITR 288 (SC) wherein it was held as under – “The mere possibility of the appellant earning considerable amounts in the year under consideration was a pure conjecture on the part of the Income-tax Officer and the fact that the appellant indulged in speculation (in Kalai account) could not legitimately lead to the inference that the profit in a single trans…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Ludhiana vs. M/S Home Construction Co., Ludhiana

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 351/CHANDI/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh14 Oct 2025AY 2020-21
For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdocateFor Respondent: Smt. Tarundeep Kaur, CIT, DR
Section 147Section 65B

…by the assessee. 3.1 The CIT(A) held that the registered sale deeds represented the best evidence of consideration. Suspicion, however strong, cannot substitute proof. Reliance was placed on judicial precedents including: • CIT v. Lal Chand Bhagat Ambica Ram (37 ITR 288, SC), • Umacharan Shaw & Bros. v. CIT (37 ITR 271, SC), • CIT v. Mantri Share Brokers (96 taxmann.com 280, SC), • Maple Destinations and Dreambuild Pvt. Ltd. (162 taxmann.com 157, Delhi ITAT). 3.2 The CIT(A) concluded that the addition was based merely on conjectures and surmises, and in absence of incriminating material belonging to the assessee,…