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 366,470 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

ACIT Central Circle 1(4) Mumbai, Mumbai vs. Kalyanee Fortune Constructions, Mumbai

In the result, all the above appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 5779/MUM/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Dec 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: Shri Neelkanth Khandelwal, ARFor Respondent: Ms. Kavitha Kaushik, (Sr. DR)
Section 131Section 132(1)Section 133ASection 143(3)

…ces and in law the Ld. CIT(A) erred in disregarding evidence of undisclosed cash receipts found on Party B’s premises, which directly impacts the profit-sharing rights of the assessee under a Joint Development Agreement, as held in Sumati Dayal vs. CIT (1995) 214 ITR 801 (SC), where the Supreme Court ruled that tax authorities are entitled to consider the surrounding circumstances and inherent probabilities when assessing the nature of unexplained income?” 2. “Whether on the facts and circumstances and in law the Ld. CIT(A) misapplied the law by placing the entire onus on the assessing officer to prove the direct…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle 1(4), Mumbai vs. Kalyanee Fortune Constructions, Mumbai

In the result, all the above appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 4448/MUM/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: Revenue byFor Respondent: Date of Hearing
Section 131Section 132(1)Section 133ASection 143(3)

…ces and in law the Ld. CIT(A) erred in disregarding evidence of undisclosed cash receipts found on Party B's premises, which directly impacts the profit-sharing rights of the assessee under a Joint Development Agreement, as held in Sumati Dayal vs. CIT (1995) 214 ITR 801 (SC), where the Supreme Court ruled that tax authorities are entitled to consider the surrounding circumstances and inherent probabilities when assessing the nature of unexplained income?” 2. “Whether on the facts and circumstances and in law the Ld. CIT(A) misapplied the law by placing the entire onus on the assessing officer to prove the direct…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Mumbai vs. Kalyanee Fortune Constructions, Mumbai

In the result, all the above appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 4445/MUM/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: Shri Neelkanth Khandelwal, ARFor Respondent: Ms. Kavitha Kaushik, (Sr. DR)
Section 131Section 132(1)Section 133ASection 143(3)

…ces and in law the Ld. CIT(A) erred in disregarding evidence of undisclosed cash receipts found on Party B’s premises, which directly impacts the profit-sharing rights of the assessee under a Joint Development Agreement, as held in Sumati Dayal vs. CIT (1995) 214 ITR 801 (SC), where the Supreme Court ruled that tax authorities are entitled to consider the surrounding circumstances and inherent probabilities when assessing the nature of unexplained income?” 2. “Whether on the facts and circumstances and in law the Ld. CIT(A) misapplied the law by placing the entire onus on the assessing officer to prove the direct…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle 1 4 Mumbai, Mumbai vs. Ms. Kalyanee Fortune Constructions, Mumbai

In the result, all the above appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 4444/MUM/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Dec 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: Shri Neelkanth Khandelwal, ARFor Respondent: Ms. Kavitha Kaushik, (Sr. DR)
Section 131Section 132(1)Section 133ASection 143(3)

…ces and in law the Ld. CIT(A) erred in disregarding evidence of undisclosed cash receipts found on Party B's premises, which directly impacts the profit-sharing rights of the assessee under a Joint Development Agreement, as held in Sumati Dayal vs. CIT (1995) 214 ITR 801 (SC), where the Supreme Court ruled that tax authorities are entitled to consider the surrounding circumstances and inherent probabilities when assessing the nature of unexplained income?” 2. “Whether on the facts and circumstances and in law the Ld. CIT(A) misapplied the law by placing the entire onus on the assessing officer to prove the direct…

ACIT, Lucknow vs. Mallics Jewels, Lucknow

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

ITA 312/LKW/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow22 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

Section 143(3)Section 68

…1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW ‘A’ BENCH LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI KUL BHARAT, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI ANADEE NATH MISSHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No.312/Lkw/2023 Assessment year:2017-18 ACIT, Vs. Mallics Jewels, Room No.202, Pratyaksha Kar 4/292, Vivek Khand, Gomti Nagar, Bhawan, 57, Ram Teerath Marg, Lucknow- 226010 Lucknow - 226001 PAN: ABDFM 6563A (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Shri G.S. Walia,CA Respondent by Shri Amit Kumar, D.R. O R D E R PER: ANADEE NATH MISSHRA, A.M. This appeal vide I.T.A. No. 312/Lkw/2023 has been filed by the Revenue for Assessment Year 2017-18 against impu…

Comet Enterprise, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward - 16(2)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 5090/MUM/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Dec 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Anikesh Banerjee () Assessment Year: 2022-23

For Respondent: Ms. Ridhisha Jain (Virtually appear)
Section 271ASection 272A(1)(d)Section 69

…investments not recorded in the books of account and fails to explain the source, the amount can be treated as t explain the source, the amount can be treated as the assessee's he assessee's Comet Enterprise income. In the case of Sumati Dayal vs. CIT [1995] 214 ITR 801 income. In the case of Sumati Dayal vs. CIT [1995] 214 ITR 801 income. In the case of Sumati Dayal vs. CIT [1995] 214 ITR 801 (SC), the Hon'ble Supreme Court emphasized that tax authorities are (SC), the Hon'ble Supreme Court emphasized that tax authorities are (SC), the Hon'ble Supreme Court emphasized that tax authorities are entitled to consid…

Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax Central Kanpur vs. Rajan Rajesh Kumar

The Appeal stands dismissed without being admitted

ITA/12/2024HC Uttarakhand17 Dec 2025

Bench: This Court Being Aggrieved By The Judgment & Order Dated 08.02.2024, Whereby The Appellate Tribunal Was Pleased To Allow The Appeal Of The Respondent. 3.

For Appellant: Mr. Hari Mohan Bhatia, learned counsel
Section 133ASection 151

…apers if the situation so warranted. Secondly, it is contended that attributing income on the basis of circumstantial evidence and human probabilities were also accepted by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, in the case of Sumati Dayal vs. CIT reported in (1995) 214 ITR 801 and CIT vs. Durga Prasad More reported in (1971) 82 ITR 540 (SC). That the AO after exploring the nexus or proximal working connection of the assessee with Shri Amit Sharma and such examination being indicative of a strong connection with Shri Sharma, hence, the payment as written in Pages LP 186 & 187 were attributed to the assessee, but…

Neelam Sanjay Mehta, Mumbai vs. NFAC, Delhi

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

ITA 5859/MUM/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Dec 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry (Jm) A N D Shri Prabhash Shankar (Am) Smt. Neelam Sanjay Mehta Ito, Ward 19(2)(4), 2/78-80, Gora Gandhi Building, C.P. Mumbai/ Nfac, Delhi Tank Road Vs. Mumbai-400 004. Pan : Ayzpm8574E Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Vimal Punmiya, Ld. Ca Revenue By : Shri Leyaqat Ali Aafaqui, Ld. Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 01/10/2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 17/12/2025 O R D E R Per Narender Kumar Choudhry (Jm) :- This Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 20.9.2024 Impugned Herein Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax/Nfac, Delhi (In Short Ld. Commissioner) Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short ‘Act’) For A.Y. 2015-16. 2. In The Instant Case, The Assessee Being An Individual Deriving Income From Salary, House Property, Capital Gain & Other Sources Had Declared Her Total Income At Rs. 4,63,750/- By Filing Her Return Of Income On Dated 1.9.2015 For The Assessment Year Under Consideration. Subsequently, Case Of The Assessee Was Reopened Under Section 147 Of The Act, With The Reason That The Assessee Is One Of The Beneficiaries, Who Has Made Sale Of Shares, Wherein Trading Quantity Is Higher Than ‘Buy Trades Quantity’ Of The Scrip M/S. Toyam Industries Ltd. To The Tune Of Rs. 1,99,12,777/- & Accordingly, Statutory Notices Were Issued To The Assessee. In Response To Which, The Assessee Filed Relevant Details & The Documents, Such As Purchase Documents, Sale Contract Note, Bank Statement Etc. Qua Purchase & Sale Of Shares Of Scrip Namely M/S. Toyam Industries Ltd. .

For Appellant: Shri Vimal Punmiya, Ld. CAFor Respondent: Shri Leyaqat Ali Aafaqui, Ld. Sr
Section 10(38)Section 147Section 155BSection 250Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Mumbai “B” Bench, Mumbai. Before Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry (JM) A N D Shri Prabhash Shankar (AM) Smt. Neelam Sanjay Mehta ITO, Ward 19(2)(4), 2/78-80, Gora Gandhi Building, C.P. Mumbai/ NFAC, Delhi Tank Road Vs. Mumbai-400 004. PAN : AYZPM8574E Appellant Respondent Assessee by : Shri Vimal Punmiya, Ld. CA Revenue by : Shri Leyaqat Ali Aafaqui, Ld. Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 01/10/2025 Date of pronouncement : 17/12/2025 O R D E R Per Narender Kumar Choudhry (JM) :- This appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order dated 20.9.2024 impugned herein passed by the…

Harshvardhan T.Soni, Dahod vs. The ACIT, Panchamahal Circle, Godhra Present Jurisdiction the ACIT., Anand Circle, Anand

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 171/AHD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad15 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri M K Patel, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ravindra, Sr. DR
Section 250Section 271ASection 68

…ed the cash deposited during the demonetization period. The onus is upon the assessee to prove that the amount credited didn't represent his income in terms of sec. 68 of the Act as ruled out by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sumati Dayal Vs. CIT [1995] 214 ITR 801. Since, the assessee fails to prove to the satisfaction of the assessing officers, the source and nature of the amount of cash credits, AO is entitled to draw an inference that the entire credit-entry represents income taxable in the hands of the assessee. It is not the duty of AO to locate exact source of the cash credits. Therefore, to plug the…

ACIT, Central Circle-II, Lucknow vs. Rakesh Kumar Pandey, Gonda U.P

In the result, the outcome of the appeals and Cross Objections are as under:

ITA 460/LKW/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow11 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

Section 132Section 253(3)

…with the Assessing Officer; and the JCIT did not even refer to the assessment records before granting approval u/s 153D of the IT Act. The doctrine of human probabilities in orders of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Durga Prasad More 82 ITR 540 (SC) and Sumati Dayal 214 ITR 801 (SC) operates against Revenue, in the facts and circumstances of the present case. (L.2) It is not in dispute that aforesaid common approval letter dated 31/07/2017 was issued by JCIT to give approval u/s 153D of the IT Act for 63 different assessments pertaining to 11 different assessees of Jeevan Jyoti Group, for different assessment years. (…

Rakesh Kumar Pandey, Gonda vs. DCIT/ACIT (Central)-2, Lucknow

In the result, the outcome of the appeals and Cross Objections are as under:

ITA 351/LKW/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow11 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

Section 132Section 253(3)

…with the Assessing Officer; and the JCIT did not even refer to the assessment records before granting approval u/s 153D of the IT Act. The doctrine of human probabilities in orders of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Durga Prasad More 82 ITR 540 (SC) and Sumati Dayal 214 ITR 801 (SC) operates against Revenue, in the facts and circumstances of the present case. (L.2) It is not in dispute that aforesaid common approval letter dated 31/07/2017 was issued by JCIT to give approval u/s 153D of the IT Act for 63 different assessments pertaining to 11 different assessees of Jeevan Jyoti Group, for different assessment years. (…

Rakesh Kumar Pandey, Gonda vs. DCIT/ACIT (Central)-2, Lucknow

In the result, the outcome of the appeals and Cross Objections are as under:

ITA 349/LKW/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow11 Dec 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

Section 132Section 253(3)

…with the Assessing Officer; and the JCIT did not even refer to the assessment records before granting approval u/s 153D of the IT Act. The doctrine of human probabilities in orders of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Durga Prasad More 82 ITR 540 (SC) and Sumati Dayal 214 ITR 801 (SC) operates against Revenue, in the facts and circumstances of the present case. (L.2) It is not in dispute that aforesaid common approval letter dated 31/07/2017 was issued by JCIT to give approval u/s 153D of the IT Act for 63 different assessments pertaining to 11 different assessees of Jeevan Jyoti Group, for different assessment years. (…

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-3, Ludhiana vs. Raman Seth, Ludhiana

ITA 966/CHANDI/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh09 Dec 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Tejmohan Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Rajat Kumar Kureel, CIT, DR
Section 148Section 69A

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण,च"ीगढ़ "ायपीठ “बी” , च"ीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH BENCH “B”, CHANDIGARH HEARING THROUGH: PHYSICAL MODE "ी लिलत कुमार, "ाियक सद" एवं "ी मनोज कुमार अ"वाल, लेखा सद" BEFORE: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR, JM & SHRI. MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No. 966/Chd/ 2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2020-21 Dy. CIT बनाम Raman Seth 3rd Floor, Opp. BVM School, Kitchlu Central Circle-3, Ludhiana Nagar, Ludhiana-141001, Punjab "ायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: ACSPS8765L अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""थ"/Respondent CROSS OBJECTION NO. 37/Chd/2025 In (आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No. 966/Chd/ 2025) िनधा"रण वष" /…

Venkata Narasimham Thota, Kirlampudi Mandal vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Kakinada

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 207/VIZ/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam05 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Balakrishnan S.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.207/Viz/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2017-18) Venkata Narasimham Thota, Vs. Income Tax Officer, Veeravaram, Kirlampudi. Ward-2, Pan: Achpt2895H Kakinada. (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri Boda Anand Kumar, Ca (Hybrid) राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. Ar सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of 27/11/2025 Hearing: घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of 05/12/2025 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Ravish Sood, Jm:

For Appellant: Shri Boda Anand Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. AR
Section 115BSection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 250Section 69A

…1 Venkata Narasimham Thota vs. ITO आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, िवशाखापटणम पीठ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Visakhapatnam Bench, Visakhapatnam Before Shri Ravish Sood, Judicial Member and Shri Balakrishnan S., Accountant Member आ.अपी.सं /ITA No.207/Viz/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2017-18) Venkata Narasimham Thota, Vs. Income Tax Officer, Veeravaram, Kirlampudi. Ward-2, PAN: ACHPT2895H Kakinada. (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती "ारा/Assessee by: Shri Boda Anand Kumar, CA (Hybrid) राज" व "ारा/Revenue by: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. AR सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of 27/11/2025 Hearing: घोषणा की तारीख/Date of 05/12/2…

DCIT - 19(1), Mumbai, Piramal Chambers vs. Dishant Deepak Shah, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 4281/MUM/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Dec 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan () Assessment Year: 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri Satyaprakash Singh
Section 10(38)Section 68Section 69C

…cision in Durga mstantial evidences in view of the decision in Durga Prasad More (1971) 82 ITR 540 (SC) and Sumati Dalal Prasad More (1971) 82 ITR 540 (SC) and Sumati Dalal Prasad More (1971) 82 ITR 540 (SC) and Sumati Dalal 4 Mr. Dishant Deepak Shah (1995) 80 Taxmann 89(SC)/1995) 2014 ITR 801(SC) (1995) 80 Taxmann 89(SC)/1995) 2014 ITR 801(SC) (1995) 80 Taxmann 89(SC)/1995) 2014 ITR 801(SC) (1995), rendered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, wherein it (1995), rendered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, wherein it (1995), rendered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, wherein it was held that the court and tribunal have to was…

Principal Commissioner of Income Tax 2 Kolkata vs. M/S Royal Touch Fablon Private Limited

The appeal is dismissed

ITAT/132/2025HC Calcutta03 Dec 2025

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE RAJARSHI BHARADWAJ,HON'BLE JUSTICE UDAY KUMAR

Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 68

…ORDER OD-18 ITAT/132/2025 IA NO:GA/2/2025 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA SPECIAL JURISDICTION (INCOME TAX) ORIGINAL SIDE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-2, KOLKATA VS. M/S. ROYAL TOUCH FABLON PRIVATE LIMITED BEFORE: THE HON’BLE JUSTICE RAJARSHI BHARADWAJ AND THE HON’BLE JUSTICE UDAY KUMAR Date : 3rd December, 2025. Appearance: Mr. Prithu Dudhoria, Adv. …for Appellant Mr. S. M. Surana Adv. Mrs. Swapna Das, Adv. Mr. Siddharth Das, Adv. …for Respondent The Court: Learned counsel appearing for the appellant/revenue suggests the following questions arise for c…

Vasanthi Bijjala, Hyderabad vs. ACIT, Central Circle-2(1), Hyderabad

In the result, we find no merit in the appeal filed by the assessee, which, being devoid and bereft of any substance, is dismissed

ITA 1568/HYD/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad03 Dec 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri Ravish Soodआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1568/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2020-21) Vasanthi Bijjala, Vs. Acit, Hyderabad. Central Circle-2(1), Pan: Afipb2336M Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri Y.V. Bhanu Narayan Rao, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr. Ar सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 19/11/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of 03/12/2025 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Ravish Sood, J.M: The Present Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Cit(Appeals)-12, Hyderabad, Dated 15.07.2025, Which In Turn Arises From The Order Passed By The Assessing Officer (For Short, “Ao”) Under Section 153C R.W.S. 144 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (For Short, “Act”), Dated 25.02.2025, For The Assessment Year 2020-21. The Assessee Has Assailed The Impugned Order Of The Cit(Appeals) On The Following Grounds Of Appeal Before Us:

For Appellant: Shri Y.V. Bhanu NarayanFor Respondent: Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr. AR
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 144Section 153CSection 234ASection 250Section 69A

…dismissed as vague or meaningless on the sole ground that it lacks the signatures of the vendors. 12. Applying the principle of preponderance of human probability as has been emphasised by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Sumati Dayal Vs. CIT (1995) 214 ITR 801 (SC), we are of a firm conviction that as the seized document, i.e., development agreement, viz. Annexure A/SIEPL/OFF/22, Pages 130–138, records the detailed transactional particulars and bears the purchaser’s endorsement, the same, in our view, sufficiently proves the underlying commercial arrangement. Also, the subsequent registered sale deed d…

Viraj Software Pvt. Ltd., Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-26(4), Delhi

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 1084/DEL/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Dec 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwalassessment Year: 2012-13 M/S. Viraj Software Pvt. Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ltd., Ward-26(4), 28, Raja Garden, New Delhi New Delhi Pan: Aaccv5229M (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By None Department By Ms. Ankush Kalra, Sr. Dr

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 68Section 69C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI BENCH: ‘E’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/s. Viraj Software Pvt. Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ltd., Ward-26(4), 28, Raja Garden, New Delhi New Delhi PAN: AACCV5229M (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by None Department by Ms. Ankush Kalra, Sr. DR Date of hearing 03.12.2025 Date of pronouncement 03.12.2025 ORDER PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JM This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2012-13, arises against the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre…

Rajesh Kapoor, Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle- 47(1), Delhi

Appeal is partly allowed

ITA 1452/DEL/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Dec 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA (Judicial Member), SHRI MANISH AGARWAL (Accountant Member)

Section 131Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147

…reasons to believe that apparent is not real. In this case, enough material has been brought on record to show that the apparent is not real. 5.18 Further reliance is placed upon the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sumati Dayal vs. CIT (1995) 214 ITR 802 (SC). After going through the ratio of decisions as referred above, facts of the case, element of human probability and surrounding circumstances, it is noted that the appellant has failed to prove creditworthiness and genuineness of the transaction in respect of bogus purchases. The onus was upon the appellant to explain the source and nature of…

Anurodh Sahu, Jabalpur vs. ITO (It and Tp), Bhopal

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 11/JAB/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur28 Nov 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Sh. Kul Bharat & Sh. Nikhil Choudharya.Y. 2018-19 Anurodh Sahu, Vs. Ito (Ft & Tp), 3173, Tulsi Nagar Ranjhi, Jabalpur, Bhopal Madhya Pradesh Pan: Bktps9371L (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Sh. Anil Agrawal, C.A. Revenue By: Sh. Alok Bhura, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 17.09.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 28.11.2025 O R D E R Per Nikhil Choudhary, A.M.: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Orders Of The Income Tax Officer (It & Tp), Bhopal At Jabalpur Dated 16.01.2024 Under Section 147 R.W.S. 144C(13) Of The Income Tax Act For The A.Y. 2018-19. The Grounds Of Appeal Are As Under: - “1. That The Assessment Order Issued By The Learned Assessing Officer On The Basis Of Directions Of Drp Is Unjustified & Base Less On The Basis Of Information & Documents Submitted. 2. That The Learned Assessing Officer Has Never Countered Or Produced Before The Assessee The Source Of Information/ Documents On Basis Of Which The Said Addition Appealed Against Is Made During Whole Assessment Proceedings. 3. That The Learned Assessing Officer Never Questioned The Relevant Sources Of Income Produced & Submitted By The Assessee During The Assessment Proceedings & Brought Nothing On Record To Prove Or Justify The Assessee Having Some Other Source Or Hidden Source Of Income. 4. That The Learned Assessing Officer Has Made The Additions On The Basis Of Incomplete Information Having No Evidence & Based On Surmises On The Directions Given By Drp.

For Appellant: Sh. Anil Agrawal, C.AFor Respondent: Sh. Alok Bhura, Sr. DR
Section 147Section 148Section 271

…ce the onus of disproving the investment had not been satisfactorily carried out through confirmations from different stakeholders therefore, the explanations of the assessee was not acceptable. The ld. DRP cited the ratio of the cases of Sumati Dayal vs. CIT 214 ITR 801 and CIT vs. Durga Prasad More (1971) 82 ITR 540 (SC). The ld. DRP held that the assessee had failed to discharge the onus of explaining how the crypto currencies had been purchased from the explained sources and therefore, was of the view that the additions made by the AO deserve to be sustained. On the basis of these directions, the ld. AO passe…