Sumati Dayal v. CIT

214 ITR 801Supreme Court of India1995#12 most cited

What is Sumati Dayal v. CIT authority for?

The Revenue is entitled to look behind the apparent form of a transaction to discover its true nature, applying the test of human probabilities and surrounding circumstances. If transactions defy logic or are unnatural, they can be treated as bogus, even if supported by some documentation, especially in cases of cash credits or unexplained investments.

1,967

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,368 Indian tax judgments — from 2010 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Sumati Dayal v CIT · Section 68 · human probabilities · genuineness of transaction · true nature of transaction · accommodation entry · bogus capital gains · penny stock · look behind apparent form · preponderance of probability · colourable device · unexplained loans

Also reported as

80 Taxmann 89125 CTR 124

Sections most often in play

Section 68Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 142(1)Section 115BBESection 69CSection 69A
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

price riggingcolourable devicepreponderance of probabilitybogus ltcgpenny stocksection 10(38)entry operatoraddition under section 68addition u/s 68genuineness of the transactionaccommodation entryshare application money

Judgments citing Sumati Dayal v. CIT

Mohan Thankurdas Gurnani, Navi Mumbai vs. Dy CIT -CC-5(2), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for assessment year 2014 – 15 also

ITA 713/MUM/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Nov 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Pradip Kapasi CAFor Respondent: Shri Mahesh Akhade CIT DR
Section 10Section 132Section 139Section 143Section 153A

…ow we come to Para no 78 of that decision where the decision of Honourable supreme court in ITA No. 2089, 709 to 713 & 718 Mum/2023 A.Y. 2010-11, 14-15, 11-12, 12-13, 13-14, 15-16, 16-17 Mohan Thakurdas Guranani case of Sumati Dayal v. CIT [1995] 80 Taxman 89/214 ITR 801 (SC) was considered. Honourable court held that :- “78. In Sumati Dayal, the appeals were filed by the assessee against the order passed by the Income Tax Settlement Commission. On the aspect of burden of proof, it was pointed out that in all cases in which a receipt is sought to be taxed as income, the burden lies on the department to prove tha…

Mohan Thakurdas Gurnani, Navi Mumbai vs. Dy CIT -CC-5(2), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for assessment year 2014 – 15 also

ITA 712/MUM/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Nov 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Pradip Kapasi CAFor Respondent: Shri Mahesh Akhade CIT DR
Section 10Section 132Section 139Section 143Section 153A

…ow we come to Para no 78 of that decision where the decision of Honourable supreme court in ITA No. 2089, 709 to 713 & 718 Mum/2023 A.Y. 2010-11, 14-15, 11-12, 12-13, 13-14, 15-16, 16-17 Mohan Thakurdas Guranani case of Sumati Dayal v. CIT [1995] 80 Taxman 89/214 ITR 801 (SC) was considered. Honourable court held that :- “78. In Sumati Dayal, the appeals were filed by the assessee against the order passed by the Income Tax Settlement Commission. On the aspect of burden of proof, it was pointed out that in all cases in which a receipt is sought to be taxed as income, the burden lies on the department to prove tha…

Mohan Thakurdas Gurnani, Navi Mumbai vs. Dy CIT -CC-5(2), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for assessment year 2014 – 15 also

ITA 711/MUM/2021[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Nov 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Pradip Kapasi CAFor Respondent: Shri Mahesh Akhade CIT DR
Section 10Section 132Section 139Section 143Section 153A

…ow we come to Para no 78 of that decision where the decision of Honourable supreme court in ITA No. 2089, 709 to 713 & 718 Mum/2023 A.Y. 2010-11, 14-15, 11-12, 12-13, 13-14, 15-16, 16-17 Mohan Thakurdas Guranani case of Sumati Dayal v. CIT [1995] 80 Taxman 89/214 ITR 801 (SC) was considered. Honourable court held that :- “78. In Sumati Dayal, the appeals were filed by the assessee against the order passed by the Income Tax Settlement Commission. On the aspect of burden of proof, it was pointed out that in all cases in which a receipt is sought to be taxed as income, the burden lies on the department to prove tha…

Mohan Thakurdas Gurnani, Navi Mumbai vs. Dy CIT -CC-5(2), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for assessment year 2014 – 15 also

ITA 710/MUM/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Nov 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Pradip Kapasi CAFor Respondent: Shri Mahesh Akhade CIT DR
Section 10Section 132Section 139Section 143Section 153A

…ow we come to Para no 78 of that decision where the decision of Honourable supreme court in ITA No. 2089, 709 to 713 & 718 Mum/2023 A.Y. 2010-11, 14-15, 11-12, 12-13, 13-14, 15-16, 16-17 Mohan Thakurdas Guranani case of Sumati Dayal v. CIT [1995] 80 Taxman 89/214 ITR 801 (SC) was considered. Honourable court held that :- “78. In Sumati Dayal, the appeals were filed by the assessee against the order passed by the Income Tax Settlement Commission. On the aspect of burden of proof, it was pointed out that in all cases in which a receipt is sought to be taxed as income, the burden lies on the department to prove tha…

Mohan Thakurdas Gurnani, Navi Mumbai vs. Dy CIT -CC-5(2), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for assessment year 2014 – 15 also

ITA 709/MUM/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Nov 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Pradip Kapasi CAFor Respondent: Shri Mahesh Akhade CIT DR
Section 10Section 132Section 139Section 143Section 153A

…ow we come to Para no 78 of that decision where the decision of Honourable supreme court in ITA No. 2089, 709 to 713 & 718 Mum/2023 A.Y. 2010-11, 14-15, 11-12, 12-13, 13-14, 15-16, 16-17 Mohan Thakurdas Guranani case of Sumati Dayal v. CIT [1995] 80 Taxman 89/214 ITR 801 (SC) was considered. Honourable court held that :- “78. In Sumati Dayal, the appeals were filed by the assessee against the order passed by the Income Tax Settlement Commission. On the aspect of burden of proof, it was pointed out that in all cases in which a receipt is sought to be taxed as income, the burden lies on the department to prove tha…

Mohan Gurnani, Navi Mumbai vs. DCIT Central Cirle - 5(2), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for assessment year 2014 – 15 also

ITA 2089/MUM/2021[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Nov 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Pradip Kapasi CAFor Respondent: Shri Mahesh Akhade CIT DR
Section 10Section 132Section 139Section 143Section 153A

…ow we come to Para no 78 of that decision where the decision of Honourable supreme court in ITA No. 2089, 709 to 713 & 718 Mum/2023 A.Y. 2010-11, 14-15, 11-12, 12-13, 13-14, 15-16, 16-17 Mohan Thakurdas Guranani case of Sumati Dayal v. CIT [1995] 80 Taxman 89/214 ITR 801 (SC) was considered. Honourable court held that :- “78. In Sumati Dayal, the appeals were filed by the assessee against the order passed by the Income Tax Settlement Commission. On the aspect of burden of proof, it was pointed out that in all cases in which a receipt is sought to be taxed as income, the burden lies on the department to prove tha…

The Hamlet, Bangalore vs. The Income-Tax Officer-Ward-6(2)(4), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed

ITA 70/BANG/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 Nov 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year : 2012-13 M/S. The Hamlet, No. 11, Kemwell House, The Income Tax Tumkur Road, Officer, Yeshwanthpur, Ward – 6(2)(4), Bangalore – 560 022. Bangalore. Vs. Pan: Aaaft6690D Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri H.N. Kincha, Ca : Shri D.K. Mishra, Cit - Revenue By Dr Date Of Hearing : 24-08-2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 16-11-2023 Order Per Beena Pillaipresent Appeal Arises Out Of The Order Dated 27.12.2022 Passed By The Nfac, Delhi For A.Y. 2012-13 On Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Has Erred In Passing The Appellate Order In The Manner Passed. The Appellate Order As Passed Is Bad In Law & Is Liable To Be Quashed. 2. In Any Case, The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Has Erred In Confirming The Assessment Order Passed By The Learned Assessing Officer. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Should Have Quashed, The Order Passed By Assessing Officer Or Atleast Should Have Deleted The Additions Made By The Assessing Officer.

For Appellant: Shri H.N. Kincha, CA
Section 133(6)Section 148Section 234BSection 68

…merits of the case, the Ld.CIT(A) relied on the decisions of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in case of NDR Promoters Ltd. reported in 410 ITR 379 and by applying the test of human probability as laid down by Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Sumati Dayal reported in 214 ITR 801 and Durga Prasad reported in 82 ITR 540 upheld the action of the Ld.AO by observing as under: “7.12 I find that the entire amount of the so called receipt on sale of shares has been treated correctly as unexplained credit u/s 68 of the Act, as it has all the ingredients of attracting the rigours of the said section. Section 68 of the Act provides…

Sanjay Madanraj Shah, Mumbai vs. ACIT 32(3), Mumbai

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

ITA 1502/MUM/2023[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Nov 2023AY 2015-2016

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Ms Padmavathy Ssanjay Madanrajshah, Acit – 32(3) 316, New Link Way Kautilya Bhavan, बनाम/ Estate, Near Chincholi Bkc Complex, Vs. Fire Brigade, Bandra (E), Malad (W), Mumbai-400051. Mumbai-400064. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Ajcps1858H (""थ" / Respondent) (अपीलाथ" /Appellant)

For Appellant: Shri. Prakash Jhunjhunwala.ARFor Respondent: Shri. Manoj kumar Sinha.DR
Section 68Section 69C

…ITA.No.1502/Mum/2023. Sanjay Madanraj Shah.Mumbai IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “G” BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER & MS PADMAVATHY S, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Sanjay MadanrajShah, ACIT – 32(3) 316, New Link Way Kautilya Bhavan, बनाम/ Estate, Near Chincholi BKC Complex, Vs. Fire Brigade, Bandra (E), Malad (W), Mumbai-400051. Mumbai-400064. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. : AJCPS1858H (""थ" / Respondent) (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) Assessee by : Shri. Prakash Jhunjhunwala.AR Revenue by : Shri. Manoj kumar Sinha.DR सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of Hearing 08/09/2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of…

Harishbhai G. Chovatiya, Sarthana, Surat vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 3(3)(1), Surat

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 486/SRT/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Surat13 Nov 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Pawan Singhआ.अ.सं./Ita No.486/Srt/2023 (Ay 2016-17) (Hearing In Physical Court) Harishbhai G Chovatiya Income Tax Officer, 18, Bapa Sitaram Row House, Ward-3(3)(1), Surat, Vs Kamrej Road, Aayakar Bhavan, Sarthana, Majura Gate, Surat- 394101 Surat-395001 Pan No: Agdpc 6539 M अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""थ" /Respondent

Section 143(3)Section 254(1)Section 68Section 69A

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, सुरत "ायपीठ, सुरत IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, “SMC” BENCH, SURAT BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER आ.अ.सं./ITA No.486/SRT/2023 (AY 2016-17) (Hearing in Physical Court) Harishbhai G Chovatiya Income Tax Officer, 18, Bapa Sitaram Row House, Ward-3(3)(1), Surat, Vs Kamrej Road, Aayakar Bhavan, Sarthana, Majura Gate, Surat- 394101 Surat-395001 PAN No: AGDPC 6539 M अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""थ" /Respondent िनधा"रती की ओर से /Assessee by Shri Mehul Shah, CA राज" की ओर से /Revenue by Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr-DR अपील पंजीकरण/Appeal instituted on 17.07.2023 सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of hearing 07.…

DCIT, Central Circle Ajmer, Ajmer vs. Puja Synthetics Private Limited, Bhilwara

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 87/JPR/2023[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur09 Nov 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Mukesh Soni (Adv.)For Respondent: Shri A.S. Nehra (Addl.CIT)
Section 115JSection 153ASection 263

…upport the wrongdoing and in this process, the Hon'ble ITAT and the Commissioner Appeal who has followed the ITAT ignored the Principle of Preponderance of Human Probability as elucidated by Honorable Supreme Court in the cases of Sumati Dayal versus CIT 1995 214 ITR 801 SC, and CIT versus 1971 82 ITR 540 SC. 4. The learned CIT Appeal has erred in law and on facts in relying upon order of Honorable ITAT wherein the Honorable ITAT has, by erring in law and on facts and in the circumstances of that case, deleted the addition of Rupees 2.35 crores made by the assessing officer as unexplained share premium amount, a…

ITO, Ward-8(2), Kol, Kolkata vs. M/S. Indus Realty Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 666/KOL/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata08 Nov 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumar

Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 154Section 68

…olders and assessing them to tax in accordance with law. It does not entitle the Revenue to add the same to the assessee's income as unexplained cash credit. 9.The Ld. AO has placed reliance on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Sumati Dayal v. CIT (214 ITR 801) which is a landmark judgment for decision in cases wherein the surrounding circumstances are heavily evident and hence the true nature of a transaction has to be ascertained in the light of these surrounding circumstances. Any other conclusion would be a travesty of justice. In this instant case however, the reliance is misplaced as the AO’s sel…

Arrs Megamall P. Ltd., Salem vs. DCIT Central Circle, Salem

ITA 311/CHNY/2023[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai01 Nov 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Ble & Shri Manomohan Das, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 311/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2008-09 Arrs Megamall P. Ltd., Deputy Commissioner Of 102, Yercaud Road, V. Income Tax, Reddiyur, Alagapuram, Central Circle, Salem – 636 001. Salem. [Pan: Aagca-7199-F] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri. S. Sridhar, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri. D. Hema Bhupal, Jcit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 28.08.2023 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 01.11.2023 आदेश /O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri. S. Sridhar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. D. Hema Bhupal, JCIT
Section 147Section 69B

…ed investment for purchase of property. The Assessing Officer, had discussed the issue at length in light of certain judicial precedents including the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs Durga Prasad More 82 ITR 540 and Sumati Dayal vs CIT 214 ITR 801, in light of theory of preponderance of human probabilities and observed that no prudent person would sell his property and receive part consideration after period of four years. The Assessing Officer, further observed that the evidence gathered during the course of search and post-search investigation coupled with statements recorded from Shri.…

Kanishk Gupta, Hyderabad vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-3(1), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 34/HYD/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 Oct 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarआ.अपी.सं / Ita No.34/Hyd/2022 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2012-13)

For Appellant: Shri Narahari BiswalFor Respondent: Ms. TH Vijaya Lakshmi
Section 10(38)Section 132Section 143(3)Section 148Section 153ASection 68

…lkata and held that the shares are not genuine and preplanned with the help of entry operators. Ld.CIT(A) confirmed the action of Assessing Officer in this regard relying upon various decisions like CIT Vs. Durga Prasad More, Sumati Dayal Vs. CIT reported in 214 ITR 801 (SC) etc. 6. On the other hand, ld. DR submitted that the learned DR submitted that the statement recorded by the Investigation Team are binding and is an incriminating material as held by the learned CIT (A). Ld. DR further submitted that the order passed by the Assessing Officer as well as the Ld.CIT(A) are in accordance with law and no interf…

Shri Khandelwal Diamonds Private Limited, Jaipur vs. ACIT, Circle 1, Jaipur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 375/JPR/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur30 Oct 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Him On The Reason Of Issuing Notice U/S 148 On Borrowed Satisfaction Of Another Wing Of The Department.

For Appellant: Sh. Mukesh Khandelwal (CA)For Respondent: Sh. Anup Singh (Addl. CIT) a
Section 143(3)Section 148

…017] 84 taxmann.com 300 (SC) SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Paramount Communications Ltd. v. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax 6 43-48 [2019] 112 taxmann.com 330 (SC) SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Suman Poddar v. Income Tax Officer 7 49-54 [1995] 80 Taxman 89 (SC)/[1995] 214 ITR 801 (SC)/[1995] 125 ...[1995] 80 Taxman 89 (SC)SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Sumati Dayal v. Commissioner of ncome-tax 8 [1999] 236 ITR 34 (SC)/[1999] 152 CTR 418 (SC)[17-12-1997] 55-56 [1999] 236ITR34 (SC) SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Raymond Woollen Mills Ltd. v. Income-tax Officer 57-116 [2022] 139 taxmann.com 352 (Calcutta) HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA Principal 9…

Ashok Kumar Ghamandiram Arnaiya, Mumbai vs. ITO-Ward 19(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 483/MUM/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Oct 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri S Rifaur Rahman, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Shashank MehtaFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar Sinha
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 250

…2008-09 & 2011-12) Ashok Kumar G Arnaiya vs. ITO proving the genuineness of the said purchases. The ld. CIT(A) by relying on the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of CIT v. Durga Prasad More [1971] 82 ITR 540 (SC) and Sumati Dayal v. CIT (1995) 214 ITR 801 (SC) held that the assessee has failed to prove the nexus of the purchase made by him from the alleged accommodation entry providers and further relied on the decision of Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat in the case of CIT vs. Simit P. Sheth 356 ITR 451 (Guj) wherein it was held that when the sales are not disputed, then only the profit element e…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Cir - 1(3), Surat vs. Rajgreen Infralink LLP, Surat

In the result, the ground No

ITA 375/SRT/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Surat26 Oct 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr Arjun Lal Sainiआ.अ.सं./Ita No.257 & 375/Srt/2023 (Ay 2018-19) (Hearing In Physical Court) Rajgreen Infralink Llp Deputy Commissioner Of 29-30, Sai Baba Shraddha Nagar, Income Tax, Circle-1(3) Nr. Choksi Wadi, New Rander Road, Surat, Aaykar Bhavan, Adajan, Surat-395009 Majura Gate, Surat-395001 Pan No. Aavfr 8064 N Assistant Commissioner Of Income- Rajgreen Infralink Llp Vs Tax, Circle-1(3), Surat, Room No. 29-30, Sai Baba Shraddha 301, 3Rd Floor, Anavil Business Nagar, Nr. Choksi Wadi, Centre, Hazira Road, Adajan, New Rander Road, Adajan, Surat-395009 Surat-395009 Pan No. Aavfr 8064 N अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""थ" /Respondent

Section 143(3)Section 254(1)Section 68

…e NFAC/Ld.CIT(a) by referring the decision of Delhi Tribunal in the case of Harsh W Chadda Vs DDIT [201] 9 taxmann.com 1, (Delhi), Hon’ble Apex Court Court in the case of CIT vs. Durga Prasad More [1971] 82 ITR 540 (SC) and in the case of Sumathy Dayal Vs CIT 214 ITR 801 (SC) held that in such cases, principle was laid down that where entry of loan in a set of entities, mere furnishing certain details and payment made account payee cheque is not sacrosanct and held that loan are not explained, thereby upheld the addition. 10. However, on the addition of Rs.27.72 crores on account of advance given to Rameshwaram D…

Rajgreen Infralink LLP, Surat vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle - 1(3), Surat

In the result, the ground No

ITA 257/SRT/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Surat26 Oct 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr Arjun Lal Sainiआ.अ.सं./Ita No.257 & 375/Srt/2023 (Ay 2018-19) (Hearing In Physical Court) Rajgreen Infralink Llp Deputy Commissioner Of 29-30, Sai Baba Shraddha Nagar, Income Tax, Circle-1(3) Nr. Choksi Wadi, New Rander Road, Surat, Aaykar Bhavan, Adajan, Surat-395009 Majura Gate, Surat-395001 Pan No. Aavfr 8064 N Assistant Commissioner Of Income- Rajgreen Infralink Llp Vs Tax, Circle-1(3), Surat, Room No. 29-30, Sai Baba Shraddha 301, 3Rd Floor, Anavil Business Nagar, Nr. Choksi Wadi, Centre, Hazira Road, Adajan, New Rander Road, Adajan, Surat-395009 Surat-395009 Pan No. Aavfr 8064 N अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""थ" /Respondent

Section 143(3)Section 254(1)Section 68

…e NFAC/Ld.CIT(a) by referring the decision of Delhi Tribunal in the case of Harsh W Chadda Vs DDIT [201] 9 taxmann.com 1, (Delhi), Hon’ble Apex Court Court in the case of CIT vs. Durga Prasad More [1971] 82 ITR 540 (SC) and in the case of Sumathy Dayal Vs CIT 214 ITR 801 (SC) held that in such cases, principle was laid down that where entry of loan in a set of entities, mere furnishing certain details and payment made account payee cheque is not sacrosanct and held that loan are not explained, thereby upheld the addition. 10. However, on the addition of Rs.27.72 crores on account of advance given to Rameshwaram D…

ACIT, Circle -1, Nagpur vs. Smt Desha Deven Malviya L/H of Late Shri Deven Malviya, Nagpur

ITA 402/NAG/2019[2010-11]Status: HeardITAT Nagpur24 Oct 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Dr. Dipak Ripote

For Appellant: Shri Kapil Hirani, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Kailash Kanojiya, Sr. DR
Section 68Section 69

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR [THROUGH VIRTUAL HEARING AT INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL : PUNE BENCHES : PUNE] BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND DR. DIPAK RIPOTE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Sl. CIT(A)’s Appellant / No. Respondent / order Proceedings Cross ITA.No. A.Y. appealed Respondent u/sec. against, Objector case no. & Dated The ACIT, Smt. Disha CIT(A)-1/ Circle-1, Deven Malviya, 1. 400/NAG./2019 2009-10 244/2016- Room L/H late Shri 17 , dated No.508, 5th Deven Malviya, 23.09.2019 Floor, MECL Plot No.K-6, CIT(A)-1/ Bldg., 303, Janardhan 262/2016- 2. 401/NAG./2019 200…

ACIT, Circle-1, Nagpur vs. Smt Disha Deven Malviya L/H of Late Shri Deven Malviya, Nagpur

ITA 401/NAG/2019[2009-10]Status: HeardITAT Nagpur24 Oct 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Dr. Dipak Ripote

For Appellant: Shri Kapil Hirani, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Kailash Kanojiya, Sr. DR
Section 68Section 69

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR [THROUGH VIRTUAL HEARING AT INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL : PUNE BENCHES : PUNE] BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND DR. DIPAK RIPOTE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Sl. CIT(A)’s Appellant / No. Respondent / order Proceedings Cross ITA.No. A.Y. appealed Respondent u/sec. against, Objector case no. & Dated The ACIT, Smt. Disha CIT(A)-1/ Circle-1, Deven Malviya, 1. 400/NAG./2019 2009-10 244/2016- Room L/H late Shri 17 , dated No.508, 5th Deven Malviya, 23.09.2019 Floor, MECL Plot No.K-6, CIT(A)-1/ Bldg., 303, Janardhan 262/2016- 2. 401/NAG./2019 200…

ACIT, Circle-1, Nagpur vs. Smt Disha Deven Malviya, Nagpur

ITA 400/NAG/2019[2009-10]Status: HeardITAT Nagpur24 Oct 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Dr. Dipak Ripote

For Appellant: Shri Kapil Hirani, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Kailash Kanojiya, Sr. DR
Section 68Section 69

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR [THROUGH VIRTUAL HEARING AT INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL : PUNE BENCHES : PUNE] BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND DR. DIPAK RIPOTE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Sl. CIT(A)’s Appellant / No. Respondent / order Proceedings Cross ITA.No. A.Y. appealed Respondent u/sec. against, Objector case no. & Dated The ACIT, Smt. Disha CIT(A)-1/ Circle-1, Deven Malviya, 1. 400/NAG./2019 2009-10 244/2016- Room L/H late Shri 17 , dated No.508, 5th Deven Malviya, 23.09.2019 Floor, MECL Plot No.K-6, CIT(A)-1/ Bldg., 303, Janardhan 262/2016- 2. 401/NAG./2019 200…