Mumbai), DCIT v. Vipin Aggarwal

82 ITD 85Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2002#368 most cited

What is Mumbai), DCIT v. Vipin Aggarwal authority for?

Evidence corroborating entries of payments or loan/interest advancements found in seized material from a third party must specifically show the actual transfer of money from the third party to the recipient to be admissible.

237

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,368 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2026.

Also referred to as

DCIT v. Vipin Aggarwal · 82 ITD 85 · section 132 · section 153A · seized material · third party evidence · corroboration of entries · onus of proof · actual transfer of money · cash credits

Sections most often in play

Section 153ASection 132Section 143(3)Section 292CSection 132(4)Section 132(4A)Section 69Section 142(1)

Issues it is cited on

buyback of shareshundi transactionsection 23(3)section 132(4a)dumb documentssection 292csection 158bbsection 158b(b)third party informationonus of proofsection 65bsection 269t

Judgments citing Mumbai), DCIT v. Vipin Aggarwal

Parige Venkat Ram Reddy, Kamareddy vs. ACIT, Central Circle-2(3), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of assessee in ITA

ITA 19/HYD/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad28 Feb 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarsl.No.

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 153CSection 69

…(2007) 107 TTJ (Chennai) 200, Regency Mahavir Properties Vs ACIT [2018] 169 ITD 35 (ITAT-Mumbai), ACIT Vs. Katrina Rosemary Turcotte [2017] 190 TTJ 681 (ITAT- Mumbai), DCIT Vs. Vipin Aggarwal [2017] 83 taxmann.com 6 (ITAT Chandigarh), S.P Goyal Vs DCIT [2002] 82 ITD 85 (TM) ITAT, T.S Venkatesan Vs ACIT [2000] 74 ITD 298 (Cal) and Monga Metals (P) Ltd Vs ACIT [2000] 67 TTJ 247 (All). In particular, it is of critical importance that the evidence to corroborate the entries indicating payments in the seized material found with a third party is available with specific reference to the fact regarding actual transfer of…

Parige Venkat Ram Reddy, Hyderabad vs. ACIT, Central Circle-2(3), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of assessee in ITA

ITA 18/HYD/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad28 Feb 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarsl.No.

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 153CSection 69

…(2007) 107 TTJ (Chennai) 200, Regency Mahavir Properties Vs ACIT [2018] 169 ITD 35 (ITAT-Mumbai), ACIT Vs. Katrina Rosemary Turcotte [2017] 190 TTJ 681 (ITAT- Mumbai), DCIT Vs. Vipin Aggarwal [2017] 83 taxmann.com 6 (ITAT Chandigarh), S.P Goyal Vs DCIT [2002] 82 ITD 85 (TM) ITAT, T.S Venkatesan Vs ACIT [2000] 74 ITD 298 (Cal) and Monga Metals (P) Ltd Vs ACIT [2000] 67 TTJ 247 (All). In particular, it is of critical importance that the evidence to corroborate the entries indicating payments in the seized material found with a third party is available with specific reference to the fact regarding actual transfer of…

Guduri Venkata Raju, Hyderabad vs. ACIT, Central Circle-2(3), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of assessee in ITA

ITA 17/HYD/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad28 Feb 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarsl.No.

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 153CSection 69

…(2007) 107 TTJ (Chennai) 200, Regency Mahavir Properties Vs ACIT [2018] 169 ITD 35 (ITAT-Mumbai), ACIT Vs. Katrina Rosemary Turcotte [2017] 190 TTJ 681 (ITAT- Mumbai), DCIT Vs. Vipin Aggarwal [2017] 83 taxmann.com 6 (ITAT Chandigarh), S.P Goyal Vs DCIT [2002] 82 ITD 85 (TM) ITAT, T.S Venkatesan Vs ACIT [2000] 74 ITD 298 (Cal) and Monga Metals (P) Ltd Vs ACIT [2000] 67 TTJ 247 (All). In particular, it is of critical importance that the evidence to corroborate the entries indicating payments in the seized material found with a third party is available with specific reference to the fact regarding actual transfer of…

Gudduri Venkata Raju, Hyderabad vs. ACIT, Central Circle-2(3), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of assessee in ITA

ITA 16/HYD/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad28 Feb 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarsl.No.

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 153CSection 69

…(2007) 107 TTJ (Chennai) 200, Regency Mahavir Properties Vs ACIT [2018] 169 ITD 35 (ITAT-Mumbai), ACIT Vs. Katrina Rosemary Turcotte [2017] 190 TTJ 681 (ITAT- Mumbai), DCIT Vs. Vipin Aggarwal [2017] 83 taxmann.com 6 (ITAT Chandigarh), S.P Goyal Vs DCIT [2002] 82 ITD 85 (TM) ITAT, T.S Venkatesan Vs ACIT [2000] 74 ITD 298 (Cal) and Monga Metals (P) Ltd Vs ACIT [2000] 67 TTJ 247 (All). In particular, it is of critical importance that the evidence to corroborate the entries indicating payments in the seized material found with a third party is available with specific reference to the fact regarding actual transfer of…

Tricities Security and Allied Services Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. ACIT, Central Circle-2(3), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of assessee in ITA

ITA 15/HYD/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad28 Feb 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarsl.No.

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 153CSection 69

…(2007) 107 TTJ (Chennai) 200, Regency Mahavir Properties Vs ACIT [2018] 169 ITD 35 (ITAT-Mumbai), ACIT Vs. Katrina Rosemary Turcotte [2017] 190 TTJ 681 (ITAT- Mumbai), DCIT Vs. Vipin Aggarwal [2017] 83 taxmann.com 6 (ITAT Chandigarh), S.P Goyal Vs DCIT [2002] 82 ITD 85 (TM) ITAT, T.S Venkatesan Vs ACIT [2000] 74 ITD 298 (Cal) and Monga Metals (P) Ltd Vs ACIT [2000] 67 TTJ 247 (All). In particular, it is of critical importance that the evidence to corroborate the entries indicating payments in the seized material found with a third party is available with specific reference to the fact regarding actual transfer of…

Tricities Security and Allied Services Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. ACIT, Central Circle-2(3), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of assessee in ITA

ITA 14/HYD/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad28 Feb 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarsl.No.

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 153CSection 69

…(2007) 107 TTJ (Chennai) 200, Regency Mahavir Properties Vs ACIT [2018] 169 ITD 35 (ITAT-Mumbai), ACIT Vs. Katrina Rosemary Turcotte [2017] 190 TTJ 681 (ITAT- Mumbai), DCIT Vs. Vipin Aggarwal [2017] 83 taxmann.com 6 (ITAT Chandigarh), S.P Goyal Vs DCIT [2002] 82 ITD 85 (TM) ITAT, T.S Venkatesan Vs ACIT [2000] 74 ITD 298 (Cal) and Monga Metals (P) Ltd Vs ACIT [2000] 67 TTJ 247 (All). In particular, it is of critical importance that the evidence to corroborate the entries indicating payments in the seized material found with a third party is available with specific reference to the fact regarding actual transfer of…

Sanjay Garudapally, Hyderabad vs. ACIT, Central Circle-2(3), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of assessee in ITA

ITA 13/HYD/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad28 Feb 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarsl.No.

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 153CSection 69

…(2007) 107 TTJ (Chennai) 200, Regency Mahavir Properties Vs ACIT [2018] 169 ITD 35 (ITAT-Mumbai), ACIT Vs. Katrina Rosemary Turcotte [2017] 190 TTJ 681 (ITAT- Mumbai), DCIT Vs. Vipin Aggarwal [2017] 83 taxmann.com 6 (ITAT Chandigarh), S.P Goyal Vs DCIT [2002] 82 ITD 85 (TM) ITAT, T.S Venkatesan Vs ACIT [2000] 74 ITD 298 (Cal) and Monga Metals (P) Ltd Vs ACIT [2000] 67 TTJ 247 (All). In particular, it is of critical importance that the evidence to corroborate the entries indicating payments in the seized material found with a third party is available with specific reference to the fact regarding actual transfer of…

Sanjay Garudapally, Hyderabad vs. ACIT, Central Circle-2(3), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of assessee in ITA

ITA 12/HYD/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad28 Feb 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarsl.No.

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 153CSection 69

…(2007) 107 TTJ (Chennai) 200, Regency Mahavir Properties Vs ACIT [2018] 169 ITD 35 (ITAT-Mumbai), ACIT Vs. Katrina Rosemary Turcotte [2017] 190 TTJ 681 (ITAT- Mumbai), DCIT Vs. Vipin Aggarwal [2017] 83 taxmann.com 6 (ITAT Chandigarh), S.P Goyal Vs DCIT [2002] 82 ITD 85 (TM) ITAT, T.S Venkatesan Vs ACIT [2000] 74 ITD 298 (Cal) and Monga Metals (P) Ltd Vs ACIT [2000] 67 TTJ 247 (All). In particular, it is of critical importance that the evidence to corroborate the entries indicating payments in the seized material found with a third party is available with specific reference to the fact regarding actual transfer of…

Garudapally Shruthi Gupta, Hyderabad vs. ACIT, Central Circle-2(3), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of assessee in ITA

ITA 11/HYD/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad28 Feb 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarsl.No.

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 153CSection 69

…(2007) 107 TTJ (Chennai) 200, Regency Mahavir Properties Vs ACIT [2018] 169 ITD 35 (ITAT-Mumbai), ACIT Vs. Katrina Rosemary Turcotte [2017] 190 TTJ 681 (ITAT- Mumbai), DCIT Vs. Vipin Aggarwal [2017] 83 taxmann.com 6 (ITAT Chandigarh), S.P Goyal Vs DCIT [2002] 82 ITD 85 (TM) ITAT, T.S Venkatesan Vs ACIT [2000] 74 ITD 298 (Cal) and Monga Metals (P) Ltd Vs ACIT [2000] 67 TTJ 247 (All). In particular, it is of critical importance that the evidence to corroborate the entries indicating payments in the seized material found with a third party is available with specific reference to the fact regarding actual transfer of…

Garudapally Shruthi Gupta, Hyderabad vs. ACIT, Central Circle-2(3), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of assessee in ITA

ITA 10/HYD/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad28 Feb 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarsl.No.

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 153CSection 69

…(2007) 107 TTJ (Chennai) 200, Regency Mahavir Properties Vs ACIT [2018] 169 ITD 35 (ITAT-Mumbai), ACIT Vs. Katrina Rosemary Turcotte [2017] 190 TTJ 681 (ITAT- Mumbai), DCIT Vs. Vipin Aggarwal [2017] 83 taxmann.com 6 (ITAT Chandigarh), S.P Goyal Vs DCIT [2002] 82 ITD 85 (TM) ITAT, T.S Venkatesan Vs ACIT [2000] 74 ITD 298 (Cal) and Monga Metals (P) Ltd Vs ACIT [2000] 67 TTJ 247 (All). In particular, it is of critical importance that the evidence to corroborate the entries indicating payments in the seized material found with a third party is available with specific reference to the fact regarding actual transfer of…

M/S. Srinivas Institute of Medical Science and Research Centre, Mangalroe vs. The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (Central), Bengaluru

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

ITA 533/BANG/2022[N/A]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Dec 2022

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariassessment Year: N.A.

For Appellant: Shri V. Srinivasan, A.RFor Respondent: Dr. G. Manoj Kumar, D.R
Section 10Section 11Section 12ASection 269S

…disclosed in the regular books of accounts by assessee. We place reliance on the following judgements in support of our above findings: (i) CIT vs D.K.Gupta 174 Taxman 476 (Delhi) (ii) Ashwini Kumar vs ITO 39 ITD 183 (Delhi) (iii) S.P.Goyal vs DCIT (Mum) (TM) 82 ITD 85 (MUM) (iv) D.A.Patel vs DCIT 72 ITD 340 (Mum) (v) Amarjeet Singh Bakshi (HUF) vs ACIT 86 ITD 13 (Delhi) (TM) (vi) Nagarjuna Construction Co Ltd vs DCIT 23 Taxman.com 239 (vii) CIT vs C.L.Khatri 174 Taxman 652 (viii) T.S.Venkatesan vs ACIT 74 ITD 298 (ix) CIT vs Atam Valves Pvt Ltd 184 Taxman 6 (P&H) 5.11. Thus, we are agreeing with the contention o…

Mangi Lal Kandoi, Jaipur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle – 2, Jaipur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 322/JPR/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur13 Oct 2022AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Shri S. L. Poddar, AdvFor Respondent: Smt. Runi Pal, Addl. CIT
Section 127Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 245D(4)Section 271A

…stan Steel Ltd. vs State of Orissa (1972) 83 ITR 26 (SC) 9. Other favourable case laws – (i) National Textiles vs CIT 249 ITR 125 (Guj.) It is not enough for the purpose of penalty that the amount in question has been assessed as income (ii) S.P.Goel vs DCIT 82 ITD 85 (Bom) Mere entry on a loose sheet of paper does not indicate undisclosed income unless circumstantial evidence in the form of extra cash, jewellery or investment outside books is found. (iii) Ashwini Kumar vs ITO 39 ITD 183 (Del) In the case of dumb document, revenue should collect necessary evidence that the figures represent incomes earned by th…

Mangi Lal Kandoi, Jaipur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle – 2, Jaipur

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 321/JPR/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur13 Oct 2022AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Shri S.L. Poddar ( Adv.)For Respondent: Ms. Runi Pal (Addl.CIT)a
Section 127Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)

…stan Steel Ltd. vs State of Orissa (1972) 83 ITR 26 (SC) 4. Other favourable case laws – (i) National Textiles vs CIT 249 ITR 125 (Guj.) It is not enough for the purpose of penalty that the amount in question has been assessed as income (ii) S.P.Goel vs DCIT 82 ITD 85 (Bom) Mere entry on a loose sheet of paper does not indicate undisclosed income unless circumstantial evidence in the form of extra cash, jewellery or investment outside books is found. (iii) Ashwini Kumar vs ITO 39 ITD 183 (Del) In the case of dumb document, revenue should collect necessary evidence that the figures represent incomes earned by th…

Mangi Lal Kandoi, Jaipur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle – 2, Jaipur

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 320/JPR/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur13 Oct 2022AY 2011-12
For Appellant: Shri S.L. Poddar ( Adv.)For Respondent: Ms. Runi Pal (Addl.CIT)a
Section 127Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)

…stan Steel Ltd. vs State of Orissa (1972) 83 ITR 26 (SC) 4. Other favourable case laws – (i) National Textiles vs CIT 249 ITR 125 (Guj.) It is not enough for the purpose of penalty that the amount in question has been assessed as income (ii) S.P.Goel vs DCIT 82 ITD 85 (Bom) Mere entry on a loose sheet of paper does not indicate undisclosed income unless circumstantial evidence in the form of extra cash, jewellery or investment outside books is found. (iii) Ashwini Kumar vs ITO 39 ITD 183 (Del) In the case of dumb document, revenue should collect necessary evidence that the figures represent incomes earned by th…

Mangi Lal Kandoi, Jaipur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle – 2, Jaipur

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 319/JPR/2022[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur13 Oct 2022AY 2010-11
For Appellant: Shri S.L. Poddar ( Adv.)For Respondent: Ms. Runi Pal (Addl.CIT)a
Section 127Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)

…stan Steel Ltd. vs State of Orissa (1972) 83 ITR 26 (SC) 4. Other favourable case laws – (i) National Textiles vs CIT 249 ITR 125 (Guj.) It is not enough for the purpose of penalty that the amount in question has been assessed as income (ii) S.P.Goel vs DCIT 82 ITD 85 (Bom) Mere entry on a loose sheet of paper does not indicate undisclosed income unless circumstantial evidence in the form of extra cash, jewellery or investment outside books is found. (iii) Ashwini Kumar vs ITO 39 ITD 183 (Del) In the case of dumb document, revenue should collect necessary evidence that the figures represent incomes earned by th…

M/S. Kanak Agro Infrastructure, Khandwa vs. The ITO Ward-1, Khandwa

In the result, assessee’s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 911/IND/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Indore29 Sept 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh Mehta & ApurvaFor Respondent: Shri P. K. Mitra, CIT.D.R
Section 115BSection 133ASection 133A(1)Section 143(3)Section 40Section 68Section 69

…me beyond doubt and the documents relied upon in making addition should be a speaking one. On this count the appellant relied upon the judgement passed by the Mumbai Bench in the case of S. P. Goyal versus Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, reported in (2002) 82 ITD 85, the judgement passed by the Delhi High Court, in the case of CIT vs. Girish Choudary, reported in(2008) ITR 619(Delhi), the order passed by the Hon’ble ITAT Bench, Ahmedabad in the case of Nishant Construction Private Ltd. Vs. ACIT in ITA No. 1502/AHD/2015 dated 14.02.2017 and finally the ITA Nos.910 & 911/Ind/2019 (Saaras Agro & Anr.) A.Y.– 2016-…

Saaras Agro Industries, Khandwa vs. The ACIT, Khandwa

In the result, assessee’s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 910/IND/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Indore29 Sept 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh Mehta & ApurvaFor Respondent: Shri P. K. Mitra, CIT.D.R
Section 115BSection 133ASection 133A(1)Section 143(3)Section 40Section 68Section 69

…me beyond doubt and the documents relied upon in making addition should be a speaking one. On this count the appellant relied upon the judgement passed by the Mumbai Bench in the case of S. P. Goyal versus Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, reported in (2002) 82 ITD 85, the judgement passed by the Delhi High Court, in the case of CIT vs. Girish Choudary, reported in(2008) ITR 619(Delhi), the order passed by the Hon’ble ITAT Bench, Ahmedabad in the case of Nishant Construction Private Ltd. Vs. ACIT in ITA No. 1502/AHD/2015 dated 14.02.2017 and finally the ITA Nos.910 & 911/Ind/2019 (Saaras Agro & Anr.) A.Y.– 2016-…

Shri Naresh Jhanwar, Jaipur vs. DCIT, C.C.-3, Jaipur

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

ITA 260/JPR/2020[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur17 Aug 2022AY 2017-18
For Appellant: Sh. P. C. Parwal (CA)For Respondent: Shri Sanjay Dhariwal (CIT)
Section 139Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 199CSection 292CSection 68

…tatements for the relevant year. Any other documents, including, loose sheets, dairy, note book and other unconnected documents cannot be considered as books, unless the same is part of books of accounts maintained by the assessee. S.P. Goyal Vs. DCIT (2002) 82 ITD 85(Mum.)(Trib.) In this case the Hon'ble Tribunal held that loose sheet of paper torn out of a diary could not be construed as books for the purpose of section 68 and further held that addition could not be made simply on the basis of certain notings on loose sheets of a diary without any corroborative evidence in the form of extra cash, jewellery or…

Shri Naresh Jhanwar, Jaipur vs. DCIT, C.C.-3, Jaipur

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

ITA 259/JPR/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur17 Aug 2022AY 2016-17
For Appellant: Sh. P. C. Parwal (CA)For Respondent: Shri Sanjay Dhariwal (CIT)
Section 139Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 199CSection 292CSection 68

…tatements for the relevant year. Any other documents, including, loose sheets, dairy, note book and other unconnected documents cannot be considered as books, unless the same is part of books of accounts maintained by the assessee. S.P. Goyal Vs. DCIT (2002) 82 ITD 85(Mum.)(Trib.) In this case the Hon'ble Tribunal held that loose sheet of paper torn out of a diary could not be construed as books for the purpose of section 68 and further held that addition could not be made simply on the basis of certain notings on loose sheets of a diary without any corroborative evidence in the form of extra cash, jewellery or…

M/S. Devaraj Urs Educational Trust for Backward Classes (Regd), Kolar vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (Central), Bangalore

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 155/BANG/2022[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Jun 2022AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: Na

For Appellant: Sri Ramasubramaniyan, A.RFor Respondent: Sri Pradeep Kumar, D.R
Section 11Section 12ASection 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153A

…disclosed in the regular books of accounts by assessee. We place reliance on the following judgements in support of our above findings: (i) CIT vs D.K.Gupta 174 Taxman 476 (Delhi) (ii) Ashwini Kumar vs ITO 39 ITD 183 (Delhi) (iii) S.P.Goyal vs DCIT (Mum) (TM) 82 ITD 85 (MUM) (iv) D.A.Patel vs DCIT 72 ITD 340 (Mum) (v) Amarjeet Singh Bakshi (HUF) vs ACIT 86 ITD 13 (Delhi) (TM) (vi) Nagarjuna Construction Co Ltd vs DCIT 23 Taxman.com 239 (vii) CIT vs C.L.Khatri 174 Taxman 652 (viii) T.S.Venkatesan vs ACIT 74 ITD 298 (ix) CIT vs Atam Valves Pvt Ltd 184 Taxman 6 (P&H) 248. Thus, we are agreeing with the contention o…