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

Income-Tax Officer, Ward-4(1)(1), Ahmedabad vs. Shree Vishvamurte Trad Invest Private Limited, Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 432/AHD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad27 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member), Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar (Accountant Member)

Section 115BSection 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 68Section 69C

…ough accommodation entries. (c) The Ld.CIT(A) has incorrectly granted relief on the grounds that no direct evidence links the assessee to price manipulation, without appreciating the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Sumati Dayal Vs CIT (1995) 214 ITR 801 (SC) wherein it has been held that human probabilities and surrounding circumstances must be considered. (d) The Ld.CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in deleting the addition of Rs. 24,53,10,000/- made by AO on account of Bogus Loan received from Mahavir Gems Pvt Ltd & Jeevan Jyoti Vanijya Ltd, without appreciating that the assessee has not ef…

Shree Vishvamurte Tradinvest Private Limited, Ahmedabad vs. ITO Ward 4 (1) (1), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 103/AHD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad27 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member), Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar (Accountant Member)

Section 115BSection 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 68Section 69C

…ough accommodation entries. (c) The Ld.CIT(A) has incorrectly granted relief on the grounds that no direct evidence links the assessee to price manipulation, without appreciating the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Sumati Dayal Vs CIT (1995) 214 ITR 801 (SC) wherein it has been held that human probabilities and surrounding circumstances must be considered. (d) The Ld.CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in deleting the addition of Rs. 24,53,10,000/- made by AO on account of Bogus Loan received from Mahavir Gems Pvt Ltd & Jeevan Jyoti Vanijya Ltd, without appreciating that the assessee has not ef…

Mr. Bhausaheb B Pansare, Kalyan vs. ITO Ward-3(1), Kalyan

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed for statistical

ITA 5931/MUM/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Nov 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan () Assessment Year: 2023-24

For Respondent: Shri Madhur Agarwal
Section 69C

…appellant does not pass the test of human probability as cited by Hon'ble Apex Court in case of SumatiDayal Vs probability as cited by Hon'ble Apex Court in case of SumatiDayal Vs probability as cited by Hon'ble Apex Court in case of SumatiDayal Vs CIT [1995] 80 Taxmann 89 (SC) as no prudent person would give CIT [1995] 80 Taxmann 89 (SC) as no prudent person would give CIT [1995] 80 Taxmann 89 (SC) as no prudent person would give credit card or bank accounts to a third party for his business credit card or bank accounts to a third party for his business credit card or bank accounts to a third party for his busin…

A. T. Invofin Private Limited, Delhi vs. DCIT Central Circle 26, Delhi

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1883/DEL/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Nov 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal, Accountnat Member [Assessment Year: 2013-14]

Section 10(38)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH, ‘G’: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTNAT MEMBER [Assessment Year: 2013-14] A.T. Invofin India Private DCIT, Central Cirlce-26, Limited, A-60 Naraina Income Tax Office, Jhandewalan Industrial Area-1, Vs Extn., Delhi-110055 New Delhi-110028 PAN-AAACA8248B Appellant Respondent Assessee by Shri Salil Kapoor, Adv. Shri Sumit Lachandani, Adv. and Ms. Ananya Kapoor, Adv. Revenue by Shri Manish Gupta, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 18.09.2025 Date of Pronouncement 26.11.2025 ORDER PER ANUBHAV SHARMA, JM, This appeal has…

Shri Swatantra Kumar Shukla, Kanpur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax-3, Kanpur

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

ITA 575/LKW/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow24 Nov 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Nikhil Choudharya.Y. 2015-16 Swatantra Kumar Shukla, Vs. Dy. Cit-3, Kanpur 61/139, Sita Ram Mohal, Kanpur- 208001 (U.P.) Pan: Acaps5484N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Sh. P.K. Kapoor, C.A. Revenue By: Sh. R.R.N. Shukla, Addl Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 03.09.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 24.11.2025 O R D E R Per Nikhil Choudhary, A.M.: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Orders Of The Ld. Cit(A)- 1, Kanpur, Passed On 29.07.2019 Wherein The Appeal Of The Assessee Against The Orders Passed By The Assessing Officer Under Section 143(3) Of The Act For The A.Y. 2015-16 On 29.12.2017 Has Been Dismissed. The Grounds Of Appeal Are As Under: - “1. That The Ld Cit(A) Was Wrong In Confirming The Addition Of Rs. 1,39,81,850- Made By The Ao Without Any Valid Reason. 2. That The Revenue Was Wrong In Disallowing The Claim Of Long Term Capital Gains U/S 10(38) Of The Act & The Same Is Against Facts & Law. 3. That The Various Case Law Cited By The Revenue In Rejecting The Claim Is Wrong In As Much As The Facts Of The Appellant'S Case Are Distinguishable From The Cited Case Law. 4. That The Revenue Was Wrong In Invoking Section 68 Of The Act & The Same Is Not Justified & Unwarranted. 5. That It Was Wrong On The Part Of Revenue To Invoke Section 68 Of The Act In As Much As Initial Onus On The Assessee To Establish Identity, Credit Capacity Of The Creditor & Genuineness Of The Transaction Was Discharged. 6. That The Finding Of The Ld Ao That 'Long Term Capital Gains Of Rs.1 39,81,850/ Claimed By The Assessee Is Held To Have Been Arranged By The Assessee Through

For Appellant: Sh. P.K. Kapoor, C.AFor Respondent: Sh. R.R.N. Shukla, Addl CIT DR
Section 10(38)Section 143(3)Section 68

…dation entries in the form of long term capital gains. The assessee had failed to appear before the AO and justified his share transactions. Therefore, the ld. AO placed reliance on the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Sumati Dayal vs. CIT 214 ITR 801, CIT vs. Durga Prasad More (1971) 82 ITR 540 (SC), McDowell & Co. Ltd. vs. CTO 154 ITR 148 (SC) and various judgment of the ITAT to reject the claim of long term capital gains, holding them to be bogus. While doing so, he also discussed the movement of the script of M/s Jackson Investments Ltd., and raised question marks on the votality displayed…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Allahabad vs. Jyoti Mediservices Ltd., Allahabad

ITA 129/ALLD/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad21 Nov 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 153DSection 271(1)(c)Section 68

…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. (…

Jyoti Mediservices Private Limited, Allahabad vs. DCIT, Central Circle, Allahabad

ITA 115/ALLD/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad21 Nov 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 153DSection 271(1)(c)Section 68

…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. (…

Jyoti Mediservices Private Limited, Allahabad vs. DCIT, Central Circle, Allahabad

ITA 114/ALLD/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad21 Nov 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 153DSection 271(1)(c)Section 68

…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. (…

Jyoti Mediservices Private Limited, Allahabad vs. DCIT, Central Circle, Allahabad

ITA 113/ALLD/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad21 Nov 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 153DSection 271(1)(c)Section 68

…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. (…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Guntur vs. Shyam Sunder Tobacco Company, Guntur

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 490/VIZ/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam21 Nov 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Balakrishnan S.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.490/Viz/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2016-17) Assistant Commissioner Of Vs. Shyam Sunder Tobacco Income Tax, Company, Central Circle-1, Guntur. Cr Buildings, K V Thota, Pan: Aaifs2024E Guntur-522004. (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri Mv Prasad, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: Shri Badicala Yadagiri, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of 18/11/2025 Hearing: घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of 21/11/2025 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Ravish Sood, Jm: The Present Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, Dated 25/06/2025 Which In Turn Arises From The Order Passed By The Assessing Officer Under Section 143(3) R.W.S 153C Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (For Short, “The Act”), Dated

For Appellant: Shri MV Prasad, CAFor Respondent: Shri Badicala Yadagiri, CIT-DR
Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 651

…SLP filed by the assessee thus wholly relying on 132(4) statement as strong piece of evidence. 13. The Ld. CIT(A) is not justified in allowing relief to the assessee without applying the decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Sumati Dayal v CIT (1995) 214 ITR 801 (SC), wherein it was held that Surrounding circumstances and test of applying human probabilities "Though an apparent must be considered real until it was shown that there were reasons to believe that the apparent was not real in the case where a party relied on self-serving recitals in document, it was for that party to establish the truth of th…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, New Delhi vs. Global Agro Corp, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 4544/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2017-18] Dcit Vs Global Agro Corp, Room No.1704, Plot No.07,1St Floor, E-2 Block, Central Market West Civic Centre, Avenue Road, New Delhi-110002. West Punjabi Bagh, New Delhi-110026. Pan-Aakfg2650A Appellant Respondent Revenue By Shri Dheeraj Kumar Jaiswal, Sr.Dr Assessee By Shri Nitin Gulati, Ca Date Of Hearing 17.09.2025 Date Of 21.11.2025 Pronouncement Order Per Manish Agarwal, Am : The Present Appeal Is Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Dated 19.07.2024 Passed By Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (A), [“Ld.Cit(A)”], National Faceless Appeal Centre (“Nfac”), Delhi In Appeal No. Cit(A), Delhi-15/10990/2019-20 U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act,1961 [“The Act”] Arising Out Of The Assessment Order Dated 31.12.2019 Passed U/S 143(3) Of The Act Pertaining To Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That Assessee Is A Partnership Firm, Engaged In Export Of Rice & E-Filed Its Return Of Income On 28.09.2017 Declaring Income At Inr 66,28,650/-. The Case Was Selected Through Cass & After Considering The Submissions Made By The Assessee From Time To Time, Assessment Was Completed U/S 143(3) Vide Assessment Order Dated 31.12.2019 Wherein Following Additions Were Made:

Section 115BSection 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 250Section 40A(2)(b)Section 68

…has erred in disregarding circumstantial evidence, which is a crucial factor in taxation matters. The AO's findings were based on:  The modus operandi of the assessee  The pattern of cash movement & deposit The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Sumati Dayal vs. CIT (214 ITR 801) has held that taxation authorities are not bound by direct evidence alone and can rely on circumstantial evidence and preponderance of probabilities. The AO has rightly followed this principle, but the Ld CIT(A) has ignored it while deleting the addition. In the case of CIT v Durga Prasad More(1971) 82 ITR 540, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has made…

Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, Ajmer vs. Vijeta Lodha, Jaipur

58. As a result, the impugned order by Learned CIT(A) deleting the

ITA 390/JPR/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur19 Nov 2025AY 2015-16
For Appellant: Shri Rajeev Sogani, C.A. (through V.C.)For Respondent: None
Section 10(38)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 68Section 69C

…d the transactions were also unknown to the assessee. All these facts give credence to the unreliability of the entire transaction of shares giving rise to such capital gains. The ratio lay down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sumati Dayal v. CIT, 214 ITR 801 is squarely applicable to the case. Though the assessee has received the amounts by way of account payee cheques, the transactions cannot be treated as genuine in the presence of the overwhelming evidences put forward by the Revenue. The fact that in spite of earning such steep profits, the assessee never ventured to involve himself in any other…

DCIT, Central Circle-1, Guwahati vs. Satish Jalan, Shillong

Appeal of the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 62/GTY/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati17 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon'Ble Itat. 3. There Are Currently More Than 300 Time Barred Assessment & 200 Penalty Cases Are Pending In This Office. Due To Shortage Of Manpower It Was Delayed In The Filing Of Appeal Before Hon'Ble Itat.

Section 131Section 250Section 68

…s under Section 276CC for non-filing of ITRS, indicating dubious financial dealings. The transaction is a colorable device to introduce unaccounted money. In this regard, reliance is placed on – Sumati I.T.A. No. 62/GTY/2025 Satish Jalan Dayal v. CIT (1995) 214 ITR 801 (SC), where unexplained credits were treated as income. During assessment, the AD provided multiple opportunities to prove genuineness, but the assessee failed. The Ld. CIT(A) ignored the AO's findings based on material evidence, including non-verification of lender's bank statements, lack of financial details. In this regard, humble submission t…

Arun Kumar Gupta, DCIT, Circle-1(3), Surat, Adajan vs. Chunibhai Haribhai Gajera, Adarsh Nagar Society

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 779/SRT/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Surat17 Nov 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.778 & 779/Srt/2023 Assessment Years: (2013-14 & 2014-15) (Physical Hearing) Dcit, Vs. Chunibhai Haribhai Gajera, Circle - 1(3), 67, Adarsh Nagar Society, Athwalines, Surat Surat - 395 001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aawpg3525A (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent) Appellant By Shri Mukesh Jain, Cit-Dr Respondent By Shri Rasesh Shah, Ca Date Of Hearing 03/09/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 17/11/2025

Section 143(3)Section 250

…assessee was in a company having no financial worth and such investment does not conform to normal behaviour of an investor. He relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in cases of CIT vs. Durga Prasad More, 82 ITR 542 (SC) and Sumati Dayal vs. CIT, 214 ITR 801 (SC) and submitted that the assessee had been a party to a pre- designed mode of transaction and invested in the shares of M/s Kyra Landscapes Ltd to convert unaccounted cash under the guise of LTCG amounting to Rs.9,44,74,3917/- and therefore, the said amount has to be considered as income from undisclosed sources and the claim of exemption as L…

Arun Kumar Gupta, DCIT, Circle-1(3), Surat, Adajan vs. Chunibhai Haribhai Gajera, Adarsh Nagar Society

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 778/SRT/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Surat17 Nov 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.778 & 779/Srt/2023 Assessment Years: (2013-14 & 2014-15) (Physical Hearing) Dcit, Vs. Chunibhai Haribhai Gajera, Circle - 1(3), 67, Adarsh Nagar Society, Athwalines, Surat Surat - 395 001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aawpg3525A (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent) Appellant By Shri Mukesh Jain, Cit-Dr Respondent By Shri Rasesh Shah, Ca Date Of Hearing 03/09/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 17/11/2025

Section 143(3)Section 250

…assessee was in a company having no financial worth and such investment does not conform to normal behaviour of an investor. He relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in cases of CIT vs. Durga Prasad More, 82 ITR 542 (SC) and Sumati Dayal vs. CIT, 214 ITR 801 (SC) and submitted that the assessee had been a party to a pre- designed mode of transaction and invested in the shares of M/s Kyra Landscapes Ltd to convert unaccounted cash under the guise of LTCG amounting to Rs.9,44,74,3917/- and therefore, the said amount has to be considered as income from undisclosed sources and the claim of exemption as L…

Tarun Sharda Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (in Situ) Circle-I, Ludhiana vs. Sharmanji Yarns Private Limited, Ludhiana

Appeal stands dismissed

ITA 340/CHANDI/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh17 Nov 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Rajpal Yadav & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.340/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2020-21) Jcit (In Situ) M/S Sharmanji Yarns Pvt. Ltd. Circle-1 बनाम/ Village Lakhowal Road Aaykar Bhawan, Rishi Nagar Kohara, Jandiali Vs. Ludhiana – 141001 Ludhiana - 141112 "ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aahcs-6629-R (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) & 2. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.331/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2020-21) M/S Sharmanji Yarns Pvt. Ltd. Dcit-Circle-1 बनाम/ Village Lakhowal Road Aaykar Bhawan, Rishi Nagar Kohara, Jandiali Ludhiana – 141001 Vs. Ludhiana - 141112 "ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aahcs-6629-R (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Tej Mohan Singh (Advocate) – Ld. Ar Revenue By : Smt. Kusum Bansal (Cit)(Virtual) – Ld. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 08-10-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 17/11/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1.1 Aforesaid Cross-Appeals For Assessment Year (Ay) 2020-21 Arises Out Of An Order Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)

For Appellant: Shri Tej Mohan Singh (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal (CIT)(Virtual) – Ld. DR
Section 143(3)

…1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, CHANDIGARH PHYSICAL HEARING BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, VICE PRESIDENT AND HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM 1. आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.340/CHANDI/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2020-21) JCIT (In situ) M/s Sharmanji Yarns Pvt. Ltd. Circle-1 बनाम/ Village Lakhowal Road Aaykar Bhawan, Rishi Nagar Kohara, Jandiali Vs. Ludhiana – 141001 Ludhiana - 141112 "ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No. AAHCS-6629-R (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) & 2. आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.331/CHANDI/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2020-21) M/s Sharmanji Yarns Pvt. L…

Sharmanji Yarns Private Limited, Ludhiana vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle -1, Ludhiana

Appeal stands dismissed

ITA 331/CHANDI/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh17 Nov 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Rajpal Yadav & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.340/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2020-21) Jcit (In Situ) M/S Sharmanji Yarns Pvt. Ltd. Circle-1 बनाम/ Village Lakhowal Road Aaykar Bhawan, Rishi Nagar Kohara, Jandiali Vs. Ludhiana – 141001 Ludhiana - 141112 "ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aahcs-6629-R (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) & 2. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.331/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2020-21) M/S Sharmanji Yarns Pvt. Ltd. Dcit-Circle-1 बनाम/ Village Lakhowal Road Aaykar Bhawan, Rishi Nagar Kohara, Jandiali Ludhiana – 141001 Vs. Ludhiana - 141112 "ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aahcs-6629-R (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Tej Mohan Singh (Advocate) – Ld. Ar Revenue By : Smt. Kusum Bansal (Cit)(Virtual) – Ld. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 08-10-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 17/11/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1.1 Aforesaid Cross-Appeals For Assessment Year (Ay) 2020-21 Arises Out Of An Order Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)

For Appellant: Shri Tej Mohan Singh (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal (CIT)(Virtual) – Ld. DR
Section 143(3)

…1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, CHANDIGARH PHYSICAL HEARING BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, VICE PRESIDENT AND HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM 1. आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.340/CHANDI/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2020-21) JCIT (In situ) M/s Sharmanji Yarns Pvt. Ltd. Circle-1 बनाम/ Village Lakhowal Road Aaykar Bhawan, Rishi Nagar Kohara, Jandiali Vs. Ludhiana – 141001 Ludhiana - 141112 "ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No. AAHCS-6629-R (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) & 2. आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.331/CHANDI/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2020-21) M/s Sharmanji Yarns Pvt. L…

DCIT, Kolkata vs. M/S New Charan Kanwal Finance Company Pvt., Kolkata

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 434/KOL/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata17 Nov 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 132Section 133(6)Section 153ASection 250Section 68

…td. was not sufficient to prove the genuineness of the transaction and relying upon the case of Commissioner of Income-tax vs. Durga Prasad More [1971] 82 ITR 540 (SC)[26-08-1971] and Sumati Dayal vs. Commissioner of Income-tax [1995] 80 Taxman 89 (SC)/[1995] 214 ITR 801 (SC)/[1995] 125 CTR 124 (SC)[28-03-1995] wherein it is held that “Tribunals have to judge the evidence before them by applying the test of human probability” and in the case of the assessee if the said test was applied, the assessee failed to prove the identity, creditworthiness and the genuineness of the transaction, therefore, the loan of ₹25 L…

Ankit Garg, Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-35(3), Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5507/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shris.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Anubhav Sharmaankit Garg, Vs. Ito, Ward 35 (3), L – 153, Shastri Nagar, New Delhi. Delhi – 110 052. (Pan : Amhpg1493N) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By :Shri V.K. Sabharwal, Advocate Shri Rajiv Kumar, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Ajay Kumar Arora, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 28.10.2025 Date Of Order : 14.11.2025 Order Per S. Rifaur Rahman: 1. The Assessee Has Filed Appeal Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [“Ld. Cit(A)”, For Short] Dated 03.10.2024For The Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are, The Assessee Is An Individual, Engaged In The Business Of Manufacturing, Trading, Sales Of Socks, Fabrics & Hosiery Etc. The Assessee Filed His Return Of Income On 25.01.2018 For A.Y. 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri V.K. Sabharwal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Kumar Arora, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 40Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES ‘A’: NEW DELHI. BEFORE SHRIS.RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER and SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER Ankit Garg, vs. ITO, Ward 35 (3), L – 153, Shastri Nagar, New Delhi. Delhi – 110 052. (PAN : AMHPG1493N) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY :Shri V.K. Sabharwal, Advocate Shri Rajiv Kumar, Advocate REVENUE BY : Shri Ajay Kumar Arora, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 28.10.2025 Date of Order : 14.11.2025 ORDER PER S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : 1. The assessee has filed appeal against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)/National Facele…

Adhira Vinicom Private Limited, Howrah vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward (10)1, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 998/KOL/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata11 Nov 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shripradip Kumar Choubey, Jm Adhira Vincom Private Limited Ito, Ward (10)1, Kolkata 52/1, 2Nd Floor, Santan Mistry Chowringhee Square, Lane, Near Oriya Para Mandir, Vs. Kolkata-700069, West Bengal Howrah-711011, West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aahca4935E Assessee By : Shri Devesh Poddar, Ar Revenue By : Shri Pankaj Pandey, Dr Date Of Hearing: 14.10.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 11.11.2025

For Appellant: Shri Devesh Poddar, ARFor Respondent: Shri Pankaj Pandey, DR
Section 131Section 132Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 68

…d u/s 131 of the Act. Thereafter, the ld. AO relied on the decision of Commissioner of Income-tax vs. Durga Prasad More [1971] 82 ITR 540 (SC)[26-08-1971] and Sumati Dayal Assessment Year; 2012-13 vs. Commissioner of Income-tax [1995] 80 Taxman 89 (SC)/[1995] 214 ITR 801 (SC)/[1995] 125 CTR 124 (SC)[28-03-1995] and observed that surrounding circumstances to be taken into account to determine the true nature of these transactions and finally, held that the assessee has introduced his own money in the grub of share subscription. Consequently , the amount of share capital/share premium was added to the income of the…