Laxmim Narain Gupta v. CIT

148 ITR 474High Court1984#16344 most cited
6

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2025.

Sections most often in play

Section 154Section 69ASection 115BBESection 133ASection 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 144C

Issues it is cited on

section 115bbsection 115bsection 133section 133aunexplained investmentsection 115bbesection 115section 69section 68section 11previous yearprescribed

Judgments citing Laxmim Narain Gupta v. CIT

M/S. 9TH STREET ARCHITECTS,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-4(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

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

ITA 1463/AHD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad17 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri S. N. Divatia & Shri Samir Vora, ARsFor Respondent: Shri Abhijit, Sr. DR
Section 115BSection 133ASection 154Section 250Section 69A

…d cash or credits may be taxed as deemed income under sections 69 or 69B, and that it is not necessary for the revenue to identify the precise section if the assessee fails to explain the source. Further reliance was placed on Dr. Prakash Tiwari v. CIT (1984) 148 ITR 474 (MP), Namdev Arora v. CIT (2016) 72 taxmann.com 124 (P&H), Rajmeet Singh v. ITO (2024) 160 taxmann.com 83 (Jharkhand), and Shri Arif v. ACIT (ITA No. 976/Bang/2022, ITAT Bangalore) to support the view that when the source of income is not explained, such income is taxable under deeming provisions. On examining the case laws cited by the assessee,…

NILESH PURSHOTTAM GHODASARA,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CIRCLE INT TAX 1(3)(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 297/DEL/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Jul 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh[Assessment Year: 2015-16]

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 144CSection 144C(1)Section 144C(15)Section 147Section 148Section 69Section 92C

…,67,535/- as unexplained investment u/s 69 of the Act in the draft assessment order u/s 144C of the Act dated 15.03.2022. In this regard, the Assessing Officer also observed that Hon’ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of Dr. Dr. Prakash Tiwari vs CIT 148 ITR 474 has held that where the assessee has not maintained books of accounts and unexplained investment are discovered, addition u/s 69 of the Act was justified. 4. Aggrieved with the draft assessment order, the assessee filed his objections with ld. DRP. The ld. DRP on the basis of submission made by the assessee called for a remand report from the…

M/S SATWANT AGRO ENGINEERS,BHAWANIGARH vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, PATIALA

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

ITA 753/CHANDI/2022[AY 2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh03 May 2024

Bench: SHRI. AAKASH DEEP JAIN (Vice President), SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Deepak Anand, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Dharamvir, JCIT, Sr. DR
Section 115BSection 133ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 68Section 69Section 69A

…whereas for section 68, there should be credit entry in books of account, for section 69 there should not be entry the books of account.' i. In Laxmim Narain Gupta Vs CIT 124 ITR 94 ii. In Banshidhar Aggarwal Vs CIT 148 ITR 523 iii. In Prakash Tiwari Vs CIT 148 ITR 474 iv. In Shanta Devi Vs CIT 171 ITR 532 (Pb & Haryana High Court) v. In CIT Vs Shiv Shakti Timbers 229 ITR 505 vi. In Chatna Enterprises Vs ITO 23 8 ITR (AT) 103 Held in all decided cases that, "The income from undisclosed source, if credited in books of account maintained by the assessee is liable to be assessed u/s 68 of Income Tax Act 1961 but i…

TARLOCHAN SINGH ,BHAWANIGARH vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, PATIALA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 754/CHANDI/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh12 Jan 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: SHRI. AAKASH DEEP JAIN (Vice President), SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Deepak Anand, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Dharam Vir, JCIT, Sr. DR
Section 133Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 14jSection 68Section 69

…at whereas for section 68, there should be credit entry in books of account, for section 69 there should not be entry the books of account' i. In Laxmim Narain Gupta Vs CIT 124 ITR 94 ii. In Banshidhar Aggarwal Vs CIT 148 ITR 523 iii. In Prakash Tiwari Vs CIT 148 ITR 474 iv. In Shanta Devi Vs CIT 171 ITR 532 (Pb & Haryana High Court) v. In CIT Vs Shiv Shakti Timbers 229 ITR 505 vi. In Chatna Enterprises Vs ITO 238 ITR (AT) 103 Held in all decided cases that, "The income from undisclosed source, if credited in books of account maintained by the assessee is liable to be assessed u/s 68 of Income Tax Act 1961 but i…

VYAVASAYA SEVA SAHAKARA BANK LTD,CHIKKAMAGALURU vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, CHIKKAMAGALURU

ITA 22/BANG/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore05 Jun 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri George George Kassessment Year : 2017-18 M/S. Vyavasaya Seva Sahakara Bank Ltd., The Income Tax, (Primary Agricultural Credit Co-Op. Ward – 1, Court Road, Society Ltd.,), Vs. Chikkamagaluru, Banakal, Mudigere Taluk, Chikkamagaluru Dist. – 577 101. Chikkamagaluru Dist – 577 113. Pan : Aadfv 8209 P Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri. Mahesh R. Uppin, Advocate Revenue By : Shri. Ganesh R Ghale, Advocate Standing Counsel For Revenue. Date Of Hearing : 05.06.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 05.06.2023

For Appellant: Shri. Mahesh R. Uppin, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Ganesh R Ghale, Advocate Standing Counsel for Revenue
Section 143(3)Section 250

…6-2022 in Prathamika Krishi Pattina Sahakari Sangha Ltd. Itagi vs. ITO, Ward-5, Davangere. 6. The Additions made as Unexplained investments is not sustainable as it is opposed to the order of Hon. Madhya Pradesh High Court in Dr. Prakash Tiwari vs. CIT [1984] 148 ITR 474 (MP) as the appellant being a PACS has been maintaining its books of account ever since its inception ; and 7. The appellant craves leave to add, delete, to amend, modify and / or to alter any of the foregoing grounds and also urge such other grounds at the time of hearing 6. Brief facts of the case are as follows: Assessee is a society registe…

ACIT CIR 1, MUMBAI vs. KARNAWAT & ASSOCIATES, THANE

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1781/MUM/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Jun 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Pawan Singhassessment Year: 2008-09 Acit, Circle1-1, M/S Karnawat & Associates, Ashar I.T. Park, 6Th Floor, 2Nd Floor, Ramgumpha Apartments, ‘B’ Wing, Room No.22, Lohar Ali, Nr. Railway Station, Vs. Wagle Industrial Estate, Thane. Road No.16Z, Thane-400604. Pan: Aaefk7239D (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Ravi K. MulchandaniFor Respondent: Shri B.D. Naik (DR)
Section 68

…nation is offered by the assessee or the explanation offered by the assessee is not satisfactory. Thus, section 68 gets activated only when any sum is found credited in the books of the assessee. [Banshidher Agarwal Panna vs. CIT (1983) 36 CTR (MP) 94: (1984) 148 ITR 523 (MP) : TC42R.1071]. Where the relevant amount is not credited in the assessee's books, section 68 does not come into play [Baladin Ram vs. CIT (1969) 71 ITR 427 (SC): TC42R.1072 and Laxmi Narain Gupta vs. CIT (1980) 15 CTR (Pat) 306 : (1980) 124 ITR 94 (Pat) : TC42R.1076]. 6.7. All the reasons given by the AD to add back the amount of Rs. 40,00,0…

Laxmim Narain Gupta v. CIT (148 ITR 474) — Cited in 6 Judgments | BharatTax