Smt. Shanta Devi v. CIT

171 ITR 532High Court1988#2235 most cited

What is Smt. Shanta Devi v. CIT authority for?

Section 68, dealing with unexplained cash credits, applies only when an amount is found credited in the books of account maintained by the assessee. If the assessee does not maintain books or the credit is not found in their books, an addition under Section 68 cannot be made.

51

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,315 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Smt. Shanta Devi v. CIT · 171 ITR 532 · Section 68 · unexplained cash credit · books of account · credit in books · no books of account · applicability of Section 68 · Bhaichand N. Gandhi · addition under Section 68

Sections most often in play

Section 1961Section 68Section 69Section 115BBESection 153DSection 234BSection 234CSection 250

Issues it is cited on

source of sourceaddition u/s 68addition under section 68unexplained cash creditsection 44absection 68genuineness of the transactionundisclosed incomesection 115bbsection 69section 250(6)section 263

Judgments citing Smt. Shanta Devi v. CIT

Lakhpat Trading and Industrys Pvt. Ltd., Jodhpur vs. ACIT, Circle-3, Jodhpur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 600/JODH/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur26 Feb 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Mitha Lal Meena, Hon’Ble & Shri Sudhir Pareek, Hon’Blelakhpat Trading & Acit, Circle-3 Industryspvt. Ltd. Jodhpur G-72/73 79/80, 1St Phase, Boranada, Jodhpur - 342001 Pan No. Aaccl 5668 C Assessee By Shri Rajendra Jain, Advocate & Smt. Raksha Birla, Ca (Physical) Smt. Runi Pal, Cit-Dr (Virtual) Revenue By Date Of Hearing 29.01.2026. Date Of Pronouncement 26.02.2026. Order Dr. Mitha Lal Meena, A.M.: This Appeal Is Filed By Assessee Against The Order Of National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As Nfac/ Cit(A)] Dated 26.06.2025 With Respect To Assessment Year 2017-18 Challenging Therein The Rejection Of Its Books Of Accounts U/S 145(3), Estimation Of Income & Reducing Genuine Sales.

Section 115BSection 145(3)Section 68Section 69C

…e which has been duly recorded can be doubted unless and until contrary material is brought on record. So far as the meaning of expression "books" with respect to section 68 is concerned, the Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of Smt. Shantadevi; 171 ITR 532 held that such books denotes books of assessee himself and not of other assessee, therefore, the assessee is responsible for his books only and not of the books of other parties. Detailed findings recorded by CIT(A) is as per material on record, therefore, do not warrant any interference. In this view of the matter,we find no infirmity in the ord…

New Surroad Ginning and Pressing Factory, Sabarkantha vs. The ITO, Ward-2, Himatnagar

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed, whereas, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 930/AHD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Annapurna Gupta1.आयकर अपील सं /Ita No.930/Ahd/2024 2.आयकर अपील सं /Ita No.924/Ahd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2017-18) 1. New Surroad Ginning & 1. The Ito बनाम/ Pressing Factory Ward-2, V/S. At Post Surroad Himatnagar 383 001 Tal: Idar Himatnagar – 383 430 Dist. Sabarkantha 2. The Ito 2. New Surroad Ginning & Ward-1, Himatnagar Pressing Factory Himatnagar – 383 430 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aakfn 5184 C (अपीलाथ(/ Appellant) ()* यथ(/ Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Tej Shah, Ar Revenue By : Shri Rignesh Das, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 17/12/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 30/01/2026

For Appellant: Shri Tej Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rignesh Das, CIT-DR
Section 115Section 234Section 250Section 68

…nation about the nature and source of the same or the explanation offered by him is not satisfactory in the opinion of A.O., the sum so credited may be charged to income tax as the income of the assessee of that previous year. In Smt Shanta Devi v. CIT [1998] 171 ITR 532 (P&H), it was held that a perusal of section 68 would shows that the expression books has been used with reference to the word assessee. In other words, such books of account have to be books of the assessee himself and not of any other assessee. Thus books of account of a partnership firm cannot be considered to be the books of account of the pa…

Income Tax Officer Ward-1 Himatnagar, Himatnagar vs. New Surroad Ginning and Pressing Factory, Idar

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed, whereas, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 924/AHD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Annapurna Gupta1.आयकर अपील सं /Ita No.930/Ahd/2024 2.आयकर अपील सं /Ita No.924/Ahd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2017-18) 1. New Surroad Ginning & 1. The Ito बनाम/ Pressing Factory Ward-2, V/S. At Post Surroad Himatnagar 383 001 Tal: Idar Himatnagar – 383 430 Dist. Sabarkantha 2. The Ito 2. New Surroad Ginning & Ward-1, Himatnagar Pressing Factory Himatnagar – 383 430 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aakfn 5184 C (अपीलाथ(/ Appellant) ()* यथ(/ Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Tej Shah, Ar Revenue By : Shri Rignesh Das, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 17/12/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 30/01/2026

For Appellant: Shri Tej Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rignesh Das, CIT-DR
Section 115Section 234Section 250Section 68

…nation about the nature and source of the same or the explanation offered by him is not satisfactory in the opinion of A.O., the sum so credited may be charged to income tax as the income of the assessee of that previous year. In Smt Shanta Devi v. CIT [1998] 171 ITR 532 (P&H), it was held that a perusal of section 68 would shows that the expression books has been used with reference to the word assessee. In other words, such books of account have to be books of the assessee himself and not of any other assessee. Thus books of account of a partnership firm cannot be considered to be the books of account of the pa…

Sh. Yash Paul Khanna Prop., Jalandhar vs. Income Tax Officer, Jalandhar

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

ITA 211/ASR/2007[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar07 Oct 2025AY 2001-02

Bench: Sh. Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta

For Appellant: Sh. Y. K. Sud, C.A
Section 143(3)Section 234Section 250(6)Section 263

…High Court judgment in the 15 I.T.A. No. 211/Asr/2007 Assessment Year: 2001-02 case of CIT v. Salek Chand Agarwal [2008] 300 ITR 426 (Alld. HC) and upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of Smt. Shanta Devi v. CIT reported 171 ITR 532 (P&H) and stated that the cash credit entry in the book of firm in the name of partner cannot be assessed as income from undisclosed source of the individual partner. 24. As such, relying on the above judgments, the ld. AR of the assessee submitted that in the instant case, since, there is no evidence at all that the amount of Rs.11,50,000/- w…

Ashish Garg, Noida vs. ACIT Central Circle -2, New Delhi

In the result, appeals of the assessee are partly allowed as

ITA 1726/DEL/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jun 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri M Balaganeshआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A Nos.1725 & 1726/Del/2024 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years:2018-19 & 2019-20 बनाम Ashish Garg Acit B-16, Sector-2, Noida, Vs. Central Circle-2, Uttar Pradesh. Third Floor, Room No.363, Pan No.Aejpg9666H Ara Centre, Jhandewalan Extn., New Delhi. अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 153DSection 68

…leted in those cases. In such a situation the addition cannot be made in the hands of the assessee. Ld. Counsel placed reliance on the following cases in support of the above contentions: • CIT Vs. P. Mohankala (2007) 291 ITR 278; • Smt. Shanta Devi Vs. CIT 171 ITR 532 (P&H); • DCIT Vs. M/s Jogia Properties Ltd. [2022] (10 TMI 1047 ITAT, Mumbai); • DCIT Vs. Basant R. Aggarwal [2023] (5) TMI 634-ITAT- Ahmedabad. 5. The Ld. Counsel further submitted that in assessee’s own case for the AY 2017-18 the Tribunal in ITA 1018/Del/2023 dated 31.01.2025 accepted the contention of the assessee that when the sums are not…

Ashish Garg, Noida vs. ACIT Central Circle -2, New Delhi

In the result, appeals of the assessee are partly allowed as

ITA 1725/DEL/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jun 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri M Balaganeshआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A Nos.1725 & 1726/Del/2024 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years:2018-19 & 2019-20 बनाम Ashish Garg Acit B-16, Sector-2, Noida, Vs. Central Circle-2, Uttar Pradesh. Third Floor, Room No.363, Pan No.Aejpg9666H Ara Centre, Jhandewalan Extn., New Delhi. अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 153DSection 68

…leted in those cases. In such a situation the addition cannot be made in the hands of the assessee. Ld. Counsel placed reliance on the following cases in support of the above contentions: • CIT Vs. P. Mohankala (2007) 291 ITR 278; • Smt. Shanta Devi Vs. CIT 171 ITR 532 (P&H); • DCIT Vs. M/s Jogia Properties Ltd. [2022] (10 TMI 1047 ITAT, Mumbai); • DCIT Vs. Basant R. Aggarwal [2023] (5) TMI 634-ITAT- Ahmedabad. 5. The Ld. Counsel further submitted that in assessee’s own case for the AY 2017-18 the Tribunal in ITA 1018/Del/2023 dated 31.01.2025 accepted the contention of the assessee that when the sums are not…

ACIT, CC- 18, New Delhi vs. Snerea Properties Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

Appeals of the Revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 5181/DEL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Feb 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar Us & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

Section 148

…delete the addition of Rs. 75,00,00,000/-. Ground No. 3 is accordingly allowed.” 6.2 The applicability of Section 68 of the Act by the AO was questioned placing reliance on the decision of Hon’ble Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of Smt. Santa Devi 171 ITR 532 and Hon’ble Mumbai High Court in the case of Bhaichand N. Gandhi [1983] 141 ITR 67. The Ld. AR contended that the Ld. CIT(A) had rightly held that the reopening of the cases was not proper as there was no proper satisfaction note recorded Snerea Properties P. Ltd. Shrey Properties P. ltd. under section 147 of the Act. Further, the AO did not pr…

Kalpana Mishra, Bhubaneswar vs. ITO, Ward 5(4), Bhubaneswar

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

ITA 491/CTK/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack28 Jan 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Manish Agarwalआयकर अपील संसंसंसं/Ita No.491/Ctk/2024 (िनधा"रण िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Year : 2016-2017) वष" Kalpana Mishra, Vs Ito Ward-5(4), Bhubaneswar Plot No.B-87/A, Chandaka Industrial Estate, Patia, Bhubaneswar-751024 Pan No. :Alfpm 2864 E (अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ" /Appellant) अपीलाथ" (""यथ" ""यथ" ""यथ" / Respondent) ""यथ" .. िनधा"रती िनधा"रती क" िनधा"रती िनधा"रती क" क" ओर क" ओर ओर सेसेसेसे /Assessee By ओर : Shri B.R.Pattnaik, Ca राज"व राज"व क" राज"व राज"व क" क" ओर क" ओर ओर सेसेसेसे /Revenue By ओर : Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 28/01/2025 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 28/01/2025 आदेश आदेश / O R D E R आदेश आदेश Per Bench : This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 07.03.2024, Passed By The Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi In Din & Order No.Itba/Nfac/S/250/2023- 24/1062168195(1) For The Assessment Year 2016-2017, On The Following Grounds :- 1. Hon'Ble Cit(Appeals), Nfac Has Erred In Law & On Facts In Confirming The Action Of The Learned Ao Even Though The Learned Ao Has Exceeded His Jurisdiction In A Limited Scrutiny Case Selected Under Cass Only To Examine Whether The Investment & Income Relating To Securities Transactions Are Duly Disclosed Or Not & Added A Sum Of Rs.44,00,000.00 U/S 68 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961, Without Obtaining Prior Administrative Approval Of The Concerned Pr. Cit/Cit As Prescribed In Circular F. No. 225/402/2018/Ita.Ii, Dated 28- 11-2018 & Instruction No.5/2016 [F.No.225/269/2015-

Section 68

…e High Court that a passbook supplied by the bank to the assessee could not be regarded as a book of the assessee and accordingly no addition can be made u/s 68 based on any entry found in the bank passbook. 3.2.6. In the case of Smt Shanta Devi v. CIT [1988] 171 ITR 532/37 Taxman 104 (Punjab & Haryana) it has been held that addition can't be made u/s 68 based on an entry in the books of the partnership firm of which the assessee is a partner because the books of accounts of the partnership firm can't be treated as the books of a partner. 3.2.7. Following the Smt Shanta Devi case (Supra), Hon'ble High Court of Ga…

Smt. Vimladevi Parasmal Jain, Mumbai vs. ITO 17(3)(5), Mumbai

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 5047/MUM/2024[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jan 2025AY 2011-2012

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosainvs. Ito, 17(3)(5) Smt Vimladevi Parasmal Aayakar Bhavan Jain Mk Road, 1301, 13Th Floor, Cosmos Mumbai – 400020. Sunshain, Panjrapole 3Rd Gulalwadi – 400004. Pan/Gir No. Adipj7472L (Applicant) (Respondent)

Section 10(38)Section 148Section 250Section 68Section 69A

…ned books of accounts and the same is not found credited in the books of accounts. For this proposition, I rely upon the following case laws: 1. Cit Vs Bhaichand N Gandhi, 141 ITR 67 (BOM) 2. Anand Ram Raitani Vs. CIT, 223 ITR 544 3. Smt Shanti Devi Vs. CIT, 171 ITR 532 4. Smt Manasi Mahendra Pitkar, ITA no. 4223 of 2015 5. ITO Vs. Kamal Kumar Mishra ITA No. 398/LKW/2012. 10. I also found that no amount Rs. 10,12,375/- has been found credited in the books of account, therefore, no addition could have been made under section 68 of the act by the Ld.AO. Even otherwise Ld. CIT(A) while dealing with the appeal of th…

Jade Granites Industries, Ahmedabad vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1)(1), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 81/AHD/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad15 Jul 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench, Ahmedabad Which Has Arisen From The Appellate Order Dated 23-11-2023 In Din & Order No. Itba/Nfac/S/250/2023-24/1058173176(1)

For Appellant: Shri Mehul K. Patel, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Jain, Sr. D.R
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 68

…. (Cal) 232 ITR 820 it is held that Mere filing of income tax file number is not enough to prove genuineness of cash credit. In the cases of CIT Vs Shiv Shakthi Timbers (M.P) 229 ITR 505, Anand Ram Raitani Vs. CIT (Gau) 223 ITR 544, Shanta Devi Vs. CIT (P&H) 171 ITR 532, CIT Vs Kishorilal Sontishilal (Raj) 216 ITR 9, Hardwarmal Onkarmal Vs CIT (Pat) 102 ITR 779 and CIT Vs Deepak iron and Steel Rolling Mills (P&H) 336 ITR 307 it was held that Firm's books showing cash credit in names of partners-No satisfactory explanation - will be deemed to be income of firm. 4. The assessee has also relied upon various judgme…

DCIT Central Circle-26, New Delhi vs. Dhaneshwari Wood Products Ltd, Assam

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 729/DEL/2021[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 May 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. Kul Bharatdr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. P. J. Bhide, CA &For Respondent: Ms. Sapna Bhatia, CIT-DR
Section 68

…ooks of the assessee' appearing in section 68 refers to the assessee whose books shown the credit entry. A perusal of this section would show that in relation to the expression 'books' assessee himself and not of any other assessee. {Shanta Devi vs. CIT(1998) 171 ITR 532: Anand Ram Raitani vs. CIT(1997) 223 ITR 544. Where such credits occur, the section enacts that the assessee should explain to the Assessing Officer satisfactorily the nature and source of the sum so credited, and establish that the sum may be included in the total income of the assessee. It is well settled that in order to discharge the onus, t…

DCIT Central Circle-26, New Delhi vs. Dhaneshwari Wood Products Ltd, Assam

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 728/DEL/2021[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 May 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. Kul Bharatdr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. P. J. Bhide, CA &For Respondent: Ms. Sapna Bhatia, CIT-DR
Section 68

…ooks of the assessee' appearing in section 68 refers to the assessee whose books shown the credit entry. A perusal of this section would show that in relation to the expression 'books' assessee himself and not of any other assessee. {Shanta Devi vs. CIT(1998) 171 ITR 532: Anand Ram Raitani vs. CIT(1997) 223 ITR 544. Where such credits occur, the section enacts that the assessee should explain to the Assessing Officer satisfactorily the nature and source of the sum so credited, and establish that the sum may be included in the total income of the assessee. It is well settled that in order to discharge the onus, t…

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

…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 if such income from undisclosed sources…

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

…d 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 if such income from undisclosed sources…

Dinesh Kumar Chaurasia, Tonk vs. PCIT Central, Jaipur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 102/JPR/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur17 Jul 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Mahendra Gargieya (Adv.)For Respondent: Sh. Ajey Malik (CIT)
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 5

…account of a partnership cannot be treated as those of the individual partner. In the facts and in the circumstances, s. 68 had no application at all to this case.—Smt. Shanta Devi 15 Dinesh Kumar Chaurasia vs. PCIT vs. CIT (1988) 68 CTR (P&H) 52 : (1988) 171 ITR 532 (P&H) : TC 42R.1125 concurred with In this case it is admitted that no accounts were maintained hence, there was no question of invoking of S.68.Consequwntly the CIT was legally wrong to find error on this aspect. Though he has not mentioned S.68 but the purport was the same. The CIT alleged that even though the assessee denied maintenance of boo…

Jugraj Dhanraj Rathod, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer -21 (1) (5), Mumbai

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

ITA 103/MUM/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Mar 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Gagan Goyalassessment Year: 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Bhavesh Prafulbhai Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Anoop Hiwase, D.R
Section 131Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 68

…n findings returned by the AO, made general discussion on the modus operandi of bogus entry 6 Mr. Jugraj Dhanraj Rathod operators referred to in the bare act provision of section 68 and discussed the plethora of case laws viz. Smt. Shanta Devi vs. CIT (1988) 171 ITR 532 (Punj. & Har.), Agrawal Coal Corp. (P.) Ltd. vs. Asstt. CIT 63 DTR 201, CIT vs. Frostair (P.) Ltd. (2012) 26 taxmann.com 11 (Delhi), CIT vs. Hindon Forge (P.) Ltd. (2012) 25 taxmann.com 239 (All.), judgment of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in case of Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Nova Promoters & Finlease (P) Ltd. dated 15.02.2012, CIT vs. NR Portfol…

Trijal Enterprises, Bhubaneswar vs. ACIT, Circle- 4(1), Bhubaneswar

ITA 185/CTK/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack15 Nov 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: S/Shri George Mathan & Arun Khodpiaassessment Year : 2016-17 Trijal Enterprises, Hall No.6, Vs. Acit, Circle-4(1), Fourth Floor, Bmc Bhawani Bhubaneswar Coom. Complex, Saheed Nagar, Bhubaneswar. Pan/Gir No.Aakft 6687 L (Appellant) .. ( Respondent) Assessee By : Shri P.K.Mishra,Ca P.K.Panda, Ars Revenue By : Shri M.K.Gautam, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 15/11/2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 15/11/2022 O R D E R Per Bench This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld Cit(A)-1, Bhubaneswar Dated 22.6.2020 In Appeal No.0366/2018-19 For The Assessment Year 2016-17. 2. It Was Submitted By Ld Ar That The Assessee Is A Partnership Firm. The Partnership Firm Was Originally Constituted By Partnership Deed Dated 1.11.2015, Wherein, There Were Two Partners Namely; Shri Rajesh Polaki & Sri Malchit Chetan Kumar Patra. The Said Partnership Did Not Do Any Business. The Partnership Was Constituted For The Purpose Of Doing The Business Of Gold Jewellery. The Partnership Was Reconstituted On 1.3.2016, P A G E 1 | 37 Assessment Year : 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri P.K.Mishra,CA P.K.Panda, ARsFor Respondent: Shri M.K.Gautam, CIT DR
Section 131Section 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 68

…t Year : 2016-17 the opinion of the Assessing Officer, satisfactory, the sum so credited may be charged to income-tax as the income of the assessee of that previous year." 12. There is judicial mandate on this count as well in Smt. Shanta Devi vs. CIT [19881 171 ITR 532/37 Taxman 104 (Punj & Har.) wherein it was held that where a partner maintained no books of accounts and a credit entry appeared in the books of the firm in the name of the partner, the amount of the credit entry could not be assessed as income in the hands of the partner treating the books of accounts of the partnership as those of the individua…

Mr. Bhaskar Joseph, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward- 6(2)(2), Bangalore

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

ITA 1737/BANG/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore07 Jun 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojariassessment Year: 2015-16

For Appellant: Sri Rajeev Nulvi, A.RFor Respondent: Sri Ganesh R. Ghale, A.R., Standing counsel for Revenue
Section 131Section 68

…f accounts (this is also said in the assessment order against which I am appealing). Hence the additions made are not correct in view of the law. 5. Books of accounts must be of assessee himself and not of any other assessee (In Smt Shanta Devi v. CIT [1998] 171 ITR 532 (P&H)) and Bank Pass book is not books of account for the purpose of Section 68 (In CIT, Poona v. Bhaichand H. Gandhi 141 ITR 67 (Born.) but the additions of Rs.41,35,000-00 were made based on cash credit entries in my bank account and not my books of accounts. And hence the additions made are not correct in view of the law. And the Assessing Off…

Shri. Tarsem Goyal, Sirsa vs. Pr.CIT, Rohtak

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 157/CHANDI/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh19 Jan 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Vikram Singh Yadavआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.149/Chd/2021 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year :2016-17 Sh. Rajeev Goyal Pr. Commissioner Of Income बनाम M/S R.K. Associates, Tax, Rohtak B.G. Complex Near Ganesh Dharam Kanta, Sirsa -125055, Haryana "थायीलेखासं./Pan No: Aibpg7289A अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 143(3)Section 263

…of the assessee, as has been held in following cases: i) 113 TTJ 178 (Del) Mayawati vs. DCIT Affirmed by Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in the case of CIT vs. Mayawati reported in 338 ITR 563 ITA Nos. 149 to 152, 154 & 157-c-2021 Rajeev Goyal & others 30 ii) 171 ITR 532 (P&H) Shanta Devi vs. CIT iii) 291 ITR 232 (Mad) CIT vs. Taj Borewells iv) 298 ITR 1 (SC) K.C.C. Software Ltd. vs. DIT (Inv.) v) 141 ITR 67 (Bom) CIT vs. Bhaichand H. Gandhi 5.4 It was also submitted that where two views are possible and the AO has taken a view with which the Ld. Pr. CIT does not agree, the said order cannot be treated as an…

Sh. Parshotam Goyal, Sirsa vs. Pr.CIT, Rohtak

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 154/CHANDI/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh19 Jan 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Vikram Singh Yadavआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.149/Chd/2021 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year :2016-17 Sh. Rajeev Goyal Pr. Commissioner Of Income बनाम M/S R.K. Associates, Tax, Rohtak B.G. Complex Near Ganesh Dharam Kanta, Sirsa -125055, Haryana "थायीलेखासं./Pan No: Aibpg7289A अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 143(3)Section 263

…of the assessee, as has been held in following cases: i) 113 TTJ 178 (Del) Mayawati vs. DCIT Affirmed by Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in the case of CIT vs. Mayawati reported in 338 ITR 563 ITA Nos. 149 to 152, 154 & 157-c-2021 Rajeev Goyal & others 30 ii) 171 ITR 532 (P&H) Shanta Devi vs. CIT iii) 291 ITR 232 (Mad) CIT vs. Taj Borewells iv) 298 ITR 1 (SC) K.C.C. Software Ltd. vs. DIT (Inv.) v) 141 ITR 67 (Bom) CIT vs. Bhaichand H. Gandhi 5.4 It was also submitted that where two views are possible and the AO has taken a view with which the Ld. Pr. CIT does not agree, the said order cannot be treated as an…

Smt. Shanta Devi v. CIT (171 ITR 532) — Cited in 51 Judgments | BharatTax