Narayandas Kedarnath v. CIT

22 ITR 18High Court1952#7749 most cited

What is Narayandas Kedarnath v. CIT authority for?

Amounts contributed by partners as capital to a firm cannot be treated as a "credit" to be explained under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act if the department is satisfied they are indeed partner contributions and not undisclosed profits of the firm.

14

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,315 Indian tax judgments — from 2022 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Narayandas Kedarnath v. CIT · Section 68 · partner's capital contribution · unexplained cash credit · genuineness of transaction · books of account · creditworthiness of creditor · source of source · undisclosed profits

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 115BBESection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 68Section 10(23FB)Section 143(3A)Section 143(3B)

Issues it is cited on

creditworthiness of the creditorsource of sourcesection 132(4a)rule 46agenuineness of the transactionsection 115bbsection 115bunexplained cash creditsection 132asection 115bbescrutiny assessmentsection 131

Judgments citing Narayandas Kedarnath v. CIT

Mkf International, Mumbai vs. DCIT Circle 17(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 7726/MUM/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Feb 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokarmkf International Dcit Circle 17(1), 1903/1905, Aarus Wing, Kautilya Bhavan, Wallace Fortuna, Shivdas Vs. Bkc, Mumbai – Chapsi Marg, Opp-Fazlani 400 051 School, Chinchbunder Ho, Mumbai-400 009 Pan/Gir No. Abhfm5244N (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Dharmesh Shah A/W Ms. Mitali Parekh, Ld. Ars Revenue By Shri Umashankar Prasad, Ld. Dr Date Of Hearing 10.02.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 12.02.2026

Section 115BSection 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 270ASection 68

…d counsel for the appellant placed reliance upon the judgment of the Patna High Court in CIT v. Anupam Udyog [1983] 142 ITR 133/15 Taxman 259. The Tribunal rested its conclusions upon the judgment of the Bombay High Court in Narayandas Kedarnath v. CIT [1952] 22 ITR 18 and that of Allahabad High Court in CIT v. Jaiswal Motor Finance [1983] 141 ITR 706. 8. Section 68 of the Act no doubt directs that if an assessee fails to explain the nature and source of credit entered in the books of account of any previous year, the same can be treated as income. In this case, the amount, that is sought to be treated as income…

Dev Bullion, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 23(1), Mumbai

ITA 3962/MUM/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jan 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am

For Appellant: Mr. Poojan Mehta, ARFor Respondent: Assessee by
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 69C

…d submissions, it is the prayed by ld. AR that any addition in the hands of partnership firm cannot made 4 Dev Bullion for unexplained capital brought in by the partner/firm. The ld. AR placed his reliance on the following judgments: 1. Narayandas Kedarnath 22 ITR 18 (Bom - HC) 2. India Rice Mills 85 Taxmann 227 (All-HC) 3. Shivam Developers 4. Arham Star 5. Mohammed Haji Adam & Co. 103 Taxmann.com 459 (Bom-HC) 5. Alternatively, Ld. AR, without prejudice to the aforesaid contentions, submitted that, even if the stock brought by the partner is considered to be unexplained on the part of assessee, which though w…

Spa Constructions, Hyderabad vs. ITO, Ward-8(1), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1132/HYD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad28 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1132/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18) Spa Constructions Vs. Income Tax Officer Hyderabad Ward 8(1) Pan:Adffs5436E Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Advocate S. Rama Rao राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri Ranjan Agrawala, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 20/11/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 28/11/2025 आदेश/Order Per Madhusudan Sawdia, A.M.: This Appeal Is Filed By Spa Constructions (“The Assessee”), Feeling Aggrieved By The Order Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi (“Ld. Cit(A)”) Dated 14.06.2025 For The A.Y 2017-18. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

For Appellant: Advocate S. Rama RaoFor Respondent: : Shri Ranjan Agrawala, Sr. DR
Section 115BSection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 69A

…d counsel for the appellant placed reliance upon the judgment of the Patna High Court in CIT v. Anupam Udyog [1983] 142 ITR 133/15 Taxman 259. The Tribunal rested its conclusions upon the judgment of the Bombay High Court in Narayandas Kedarnath v. CIT [1952] 22 ITR 18 and that of Allahabad High Court in CIT v. Jaiswal Motor Finance [1983] 141 ITR 706. 8. Section 68 of the Act no doubt directs that if an assessee fails to explain the nature and source of credit entered in the books of account of any previous year, the same can be treated as income. In this case, the amount, that is sought to be treated as income…

ACIT Central Circle-1(2), Hyderabad vs. Satty and Associates, Hyderabad

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 236/HYD/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad12 Dec 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.162 & 163/Hyd/2022 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2015-16 & 2018-19) Satty & Associates Vs. Assistant Commissioner Hyderabad Of Income Tax [Pan : Aawfs8350D] Central Circle-1(2) Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.236/Hyd/2022 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2016-17) Assistant Commissioner Of Satty & Associates Hyderabad Income Tax [Pan : Aawfs8350D] Central Circle-1(2) Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Cross Objection No.13/Hyd/2022 (Arising Out Of Ita No.236/Hyd/2022) Assistant Commissioner Of Satty & Associates Hyderabad Income Tax [Pan : Aawfs8350D] Central Circle-1(2) Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri S Rama Rao, Ar (Appeared Through Virtual Mode)& Ms.S.Sandhya, Ar रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By: Shri Srinath Sadanala, Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 03/12/2024 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of 12/12/2024 Pronouncement:

For Appellant: Shri S Rama Rao, ARFor Respondent: Shri Srinath Sadanala, DR
Section 132Section 153A

…d counsel for the appellant placed reliance upon the judgment of the Patna High Court in CIT v. Anupam Udyog [1983] 142 ITR 133/15 Taxman 259. The Tribunal rested its conclusions upon the judgment of the Bombay High Court in Narayandas Kedarnath v. CIT [1952] 22 ITR 18 and that of Allahabad High Court in CIT v. Jaiswal Motor Finance [1983] 141 ITR 706. 8. Section 68 of the Act no doubt directs that if an assessee fails to explain the nature and source of credit entered in the books of account of any previous year, the same can be treated as income. In this case, the amount, that is sought to be treated as income…

Satty and Associates, Hyderabad vs. ACIT, Central Circle-1(2), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 163/HYD/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad12 Dec 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.162 & 163/Hyd/2022 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2015-16 & 2018-19) Satty & Associates Vs. Assistant Commissioner Hyderabad Of Income Tax [Pan : Aawfs8350D] Central Circle-1(2) Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.236/Hyd/2022 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2016-17) Assistant Commissioner Of Satty & Associates Hyderabad Income Tax [Pan : Aawfs8350D] Central Circle-1(2) Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Cross Objection No.13/Hyd/2022 (Arising Out Of Ita No.236/Hyd/2022) Assistant Commissioner Of Satty & Associates Hyderabad Income Tax [Pan : Aawfs8350D] Central Circle-1(2) Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri S Rama Rao, Ar (Appeared Through Virtual Mode)& Ms.S.Sandhya, Ar रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By: Shri Srinath Sadanala, Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 03/12/2024 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of 12/12/2024 Pronouncement:

For Appellant: Shri S Rama Rao, ARFor Respondent: Shri Srinath Sadanala, DR
Section 132Section 153A

…d counsel for the appellant placed reliance upon the judgment of the Patna High Court in CIT v. Anupam Udyog [1983] 142 ITR 133/15 Taxman 259. The Tribunal rested its conclusions upon the judgment of the Bombay High Court in Narayandas Kedarnath v. CIT [1952] 22 ITR 18 and that of Allahabad High Court in CIT v. Jaiswal Motor Finance [1983] 141 ITR 706. 8. Section 68 of the Act no doubt directs that if an assessee fails to explain the nature and source of credit entered in the books of account of any previous year, the same can be treated as income. In this case, the amount, that is sought to be treated as income…

Satty and Associates, Hyderabad vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(2), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 162/HYD/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad12 Dec 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.162 & 163/Hyd/2022 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2015-16 & 2018-19) Satty & Associates Vs. Assistant Commissioner Hyderabad Of Income Tax [Pan : Aawfs8350D] Central Circle-1(2) Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.236/Hyd/2022 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2016-17) Assistant Commissioner Of Satty & Associates Hyderabad Income Tax [Pan : Aawfs8350D] Central Circle-1(2) Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Cross Objection No.13/Hyd/2022 (Arising Out Of Ita No.236/Hyd/2022) Assistant Commissioner Of Satty & Associates Hyderabad Income Tax [Pan : Aawfs8350D] Central Circle-1(2) Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri S Rama Rao, Ar (Appeared Through Virtual Mode)& Ms.S.Sandhya, Ar रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By: Shri Srinath Sadanala, Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 03/12/2024 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of 12/12/2024 Pronouncement:

For Appellant: Shri S Rama Rao, ARFor Respondent: Shri Srinath Sadanala, DR
Section 132Section 153A

…d counsel for the appellant placed reliance upon the judgment of the Patna High Court in CIT v. Anupam Udyog [1983] 142 ITR 133/15 Taxman 259. The Tribunal rested its conclusions upon the judgment of the Bombay High Court in Narayandas Kedarnath v. CIT [1952] 22 ITR 18 and that of Allahabad High Court in CIT v. Jaiswal Motor Finance [1983] 141 ITR 706. 8. Section 68 of the Act no doubt directs that if an assessee fails to explain the nature and source of credit entered in the books of account of any previous year, the same can be treated as income. In this case, the amount, that is sought to be treated as income…

Nitin Suwalal Shingavi, Ahmednagar vs. DCIT, Central Circle-1(2), Pune

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 880/PUN/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Jul 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.880/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19 Nitin Suwalal Shingavi, V The Dcit, 2830, Nandanvan, Gujrathi S Central Circle-1(2), Pune. Lane, Ahmednagar, Maharashtra – 414001. Pan: Aeyps6054A Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Suhas P. Bora – Ar Revenue By Shri Rajesh Gawali – Addl.Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 20/06/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 29/07/2024 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By Assessee Nitin Suwalal Shingavi Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeal) Pune Dated 10/04/2024 Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, Emanating From The Assessment Order Dated 21/04/2021 For A.Y.2018-19. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal : “1. The Learned Cit(A)-11, Pune Has Erred In Law & On Facts In Confirming The Action Of The Ao Of Taxing The Amount Of Excess Stock Of Rs.25,10,000/- Declared In The Survey U/Sec 133 A Of The Act As Deemed Nitin Suwalal Shingavi [A]

Section 115BSection 133ASection 250Section 69B

…।आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण ”एस एम सी” "ायपीठ पुणेम"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCHES “SMC” :: PUNE BEFORE DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VINAY BHAMORE, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.880/PUN/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19 Nitin Suwalal Shingavi, V The DCIT, 2830, Nandanvan, Gujrathi s Central Circle-1(2), Pune. Lane, Ahmednagar, Maharashtra – 414001. PAN: AEYPS6054A Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee by Shri Suhas P. Bora – AR Revenue by Shri Rajesh Gawali – Addl.CIT(DR) Date of hearing 20/06/2024 Date of pronouncement 29/07/2024 आदेश/ ORDER PER DR.…

Shri Ganesh Urban Cooperative Credit Society Limited, Aurangabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1), Aurangabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 196/PUN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune21 Jun 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.196/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year:2017-18 Shri Ganesh Urban V The Income Tax Officer, Cooperative Credit Society S Ward-1(1), Aurangabad. Limited, Main Market, Sarafa Galli, Sillod, Auranbabad – 431112. Pan: Aagas6006D Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By None Revenue By Shri Arvind Desai – Dr Date Of Hearing 13/06/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 21/06/2024 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)[Nfac] Under Section 250 Of The Act, Dated 05.12.2023 For The A.Y.2017-18. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal : “Being Aggrieved By The Order Of Ld. Cit (A), Income Tax Department, Nfac U/S. 250 Of The It Act, 1961 Vide Order No.Itba/Nfac/S/250/2023-24/1058480083(1), Dated 05/12/2023. The Said Order Is Passed By Dismissing Appeal Filed By The Appellant Society Against The Order Passed By The Assessing Officer Ward 1(4), Aurangabad, [Now Ward 1(1), Aurangabad] Hence The Appellant Society Shri Ganesh Urban Cooperative Credit Society Limited [A]

Section 143(3)Section 234BSection 250Section 69ASection 80Section 80P(2)(a)

…।आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण ”ए” "ायपीठ पुणेम"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCHES “A” :: PUNE BEFORE SHRI S.S.GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.196/PUN/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year:2017-18 Shri Ganesh Urban V The Income Tax Officer, Cooperative Credit Society s Ward-1(1), Aurangabad. Limited, Main Market, Sarafa Galli, Sillod, Auranbabad – 431112. PAN: AAGAS6006D Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee by None Revenue by Shri Arvind Desai – DR Date of hearing 13/06/2024 Date of pronouncement 21/06/2024 आदेश/ ORDER PER DR. DIPAK P. RIPOT…

Aabhushan, Dhamnod, Madhya Pradesh vs. ITO Dhar, Dhar

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 344/IND/2023[AY 2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Indore09 May 2024

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniaabhushan Dhamnod Ito, Dhar 1St Floor, Ganpati Market Ab Road Dhamnod Vs. Mp (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Abgfa0812K Assessee By Shri Pranay Goyal & Shri S.N. Goyal, Ars Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 10.04.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 09.05.2024 O R D E R

Section 115BSection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 68

…e finds it not satisfactory. From that, legally there is no obligation, on the Assessing Officer, to treat the fixed deposits as income of the assessee." 12. The Bombay High Court in case of Narayandas Kedarnath v. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central, [1952] 22 ITR 18 has, while dealing with the question as to whether certain amounts standing to the credit of some of the partners of the assessee firm could be treated as undisclosed profits of the firm itself, observed thus: "If the department was satisfied that moneys, although paid in in the names of the partners or strangers, were really undisclosed profits of…

M/S. Shivam Developers, Gandhinagar vs. The DCIT, Mehsana Circle, Mehsana

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

ITA 226/AHD/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad24 Apr 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Accountnat Member Assessment Year : 2012-13 M/S.Shivam Developers The Dy.Cit Plot No.C/1, 1301, Phase-I Vs Mehsana Circle Gidc, Chhatral, Tal.Kalol Mehsana Dist. Gandhinagar – 382 229 Pan: Abwfs 4815 N अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Hardik Vora, Ar & Shri Daivat Bhatt, Ar Revenue By : Shri Ashesh R. Rewar, Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 17/04/2024 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 24/04/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokarthe Present Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Gandhinagar, Ahmedabad [Hereinafter Referred To As “Cit(A)” In Short] Arising In The Matter Of Assessment Order Passed Under S. 143(3) R.W.S. 147 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As "The Act") Relevant To The Assessment Year (Ay) 2012-13. 2. The Assessee Has Raised Following Grounds Of Appeal: M/S.Shivam Developers Vs. Dcit Mehsana Asst. Year : 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Hardik Vora, AR &For Respondent: Shri Ashesh R. Rewar, Sr.DR
Section 148Section 69C

…n the said judgement, Hon’ble High Court applied the principles from the judgement of The Bombay High M/s.Shivam Developers vs. DCIT Mehsana Asst. Year : 2012-13 Court in case of Narayandas Kedarnath Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central reported at [1952] 22 ITR 18. The same is reproduced here – “13.Applying the aforesaid principles to the facts of the present case, it is apparent that the assessee had furnished the details which would discharge the onus which lay on the assessee. It is not the case of the revenue that the partners of the assessee firm are fictitious. The Income Tax Officer has not disputed t…

ACIT Central-2, Indore vs. M/S Mayur Industries, Fatepur

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 212/IND/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Indore15 Mar 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyaniit(Ss)A No.212/Ind/2021 (Assessment Year: 2018-19) Vs. Acit, Central-2, M/S. Mayur Industries, Indore Khandwa "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Abefm 4664 K (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Revenue By : Shri P. K. Mishra, Cit.D.R. Shri S.N. Agrawal, Ca Assessee By : 19.12.2022 Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement 15.03.2023 O R D E R Per Ms. Madhumita Roy - Jm: The Instant Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Dated 26.08.2021 Passed By The Ld. Cit(A)-3, Bhopal (M.P.) (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Ld. Cit(A)’) Arising Out Of The Order Dated 30.12.2019 Passed By The Dcit (Central)-2, Indore (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Ld. Ao’) Under Section 143(3) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) For Assessment Year (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘A.Y.’) 2018-19 With The Following Ground:

For Appellant: 19.12.2022For Respondent: Shri P. K. Mishra, CIT.D.R
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 68

…9 (SC) & Pr. CIT-4 v. Vaishnodevi Refoils & Solvex [2018] 89 taxmann.com 80 (Gujarat) (ii) CIT v. Metachem Industries [2000] 245 ITR 160 (Madhya Pradesh) (iii) CIT v. Jaiswal Motor Finance [1983] 141 ITR 706 (Allahabad) (iv) Narayandas Kedarnath v. CIT [1952] 22 ITR 18 (Bombay) SS 212 of 2021 9 Mayur Ind. (v) CIT Versus Pankaj Dyestuff Industries [Income Tax Reference No. 241 of 1993] (vi) CIT v. Taj Borewells [2007] 291 ITR 232 (Madras) (vii) Deluxe Enterprises v. ITO, Ward-1, Solan [2017] 184 TTJ 394 (Chandigarh - Trib.) (viii) Addl. CIT v. Unique Builders [2004] 2 SOT 589 (KOL.)(SMC) 10. It was further submi…

Jice Academy for Excellence Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer, NFAC, Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 704/BANG/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore19 Sept 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariassessment Year: 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Rajeev Nulvi, A.RFor Respondent: Shri K. Sankar Ganesh, D.R
Section 143(3)Section 269SSection 271DSection 273B

…s of the IT Act. He invited our attention to the decisions CIT vs. A.W. Figgies & Co. & Ors. (1953) 24 TTP 405 (SC), 200 ITR 505 (sic), Chief Controlling Revenue Authority vs. Manohar Lai Dudeja (1991) 189 ITR 186 (All)(FB), Narayandas Kedamath vs. CIT (1952) 22 ITR 18 (Bom) and CIT vs. R.Rangaswamy Naidu (1997) 140 CTR (Mad) 38 (1997) 224 ITR 113 (Mad). The assessee's counsel in reply submitted that s. 188A has been specifically brought into existence to clarify what has already been taken for granted in general law. He invited our attention to s. 48 of the Partnership Act. We are of the opinion that in view of…

The ACIT-24(1), Mumbai vs. Mumbai Shelter Housing Development, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the revenue in ITA no

ITA 2936/MUM/2022[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Mar 2022AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm The Acit-24(1) Mumbai Shelter Housing Development 401-402, Viraj Towers, Room No.601, Western Express Highway Near Piramal Chambers, Vs. Weh Metro Station, Jeejeebhoy Lane, Andheri (East) Lalbaug, Parel, Mumbai-400 093 Mumbai-400 012 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aagfm6042A

For Appellant: Shri Rushabh Mehta, ARFor Respondent: Smt. Mahita Nair, DR
Section 68

…. 68 of partner's contribution cannot be made in the hands of partnership firm. In this connection, the appellant has placed reliance on the decision of: jurisdictional Bombay High Court in the case of Narayandas Kedarnath v. Commissioner of Income-tax [1952] 22 ITR 18 (BOM.).It has been held that "During relevant accounting years, partners of assessee-firm brought in certain amounts by means of bank drafts. Mumbai Shelter Housing Development; A.Y. 2018-19 Tribunal found that those amounts were brought in by partners from their native place but no adequate explanation was forthcoming from persons themselves as to…

Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1, Karimnagar vs. Durga Granites, Karimnagar

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is allowed

ITA 1706/HYD/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad31 Jan 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony & Sri S.S. Godaraa.Y. 2014-15 Acit, Vs. Durga Granites, Circle-1, Karimnagar. Karimnagar. Pan: Aagfd 8247 C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Sri A. Srinivas Revenue By Sri Rohit Mujumdar, Sr. Ar Date Of Hearing: 02/12/2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 31/01/2022 Order

Section 143(3)Section 40Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCH “A”, HYDERABAD (Through Virtual Hearing) BEFORE SHRI A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SRI S.S. GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER A.Y. 2014-15 ACIT, Vs. Durga Granites, Circle-1, Karimnagar. Karimnagar. PAN: AAGFD 8247 C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Sri A. Srinivas Revenue by Sri Rohit Mujumdar, Sr. AR Date of hearing: 02/12/2021 Date of pronouncement: 31/01/2022 ORDER PER A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, A.M: This appeal is filed by the Revenue against the order of the Ld. CIT(A)-2, Hyderabad in appeal No. 0346/2016-17, dated 30/06/2017 passed U/s. 143(3) r.w.s 2…

Narayandas Kedarnath v. CIT (22 ITR 18) — Cited in 14 Judgments | BharatTax