How many judgments cite Sumati Dayal v. CIT?

1,967 judgments on BharatTax cite Sumati Dayal v. CIT (214 ITR 801), spanning 2010 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Sumati Dayal v. CIT come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 68, Section 143(3), Section 147, Section 148, Section 142(1), Section 115BBE.

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 367,154 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 68 Section 143(3)Section 147 Section 148 Section 142(1)Section 115BBE Section 69C Section 69A

Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

price rigging colourable device preponderance of probability bogus ltcg penny stock section 10(38)entry operator addition under section 68 addition u/s 68 genuineness of the transaction accommodation entry share application money

Judgments citing Sumati Dayal v. CIT

Jayantika Singh, DCIT Central Circle 7 4 Mumbai, Mumbai vs. Indo Count Industries Ltd, Delhi

Appeal stands dismissed

ITA 3822/MUM/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Oct 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Omkareshwar Chidara

Section 1Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 250

…ratio is admitted to be 50:50 in F.Y.2015-16 and this practice of assessee is continued in future years as well. The Ld. DR also relied on Hon. Apex Court in the cases of CIT v. Durga Prasad More [1971) 82 ITR 540 and Sumati Dayal v. CIT [1995] 80 Taxman 89/214 ITR 801 (SC). 11. On the contrary Ld. AR while relying upon the order of Ld. CIT(A) submitted that the alleged excel sheet cannot be considered as incriminating as 8 Indo Count Industrial Ltd, Mumbai. the same was retrieved from the pen drive of Sh. Hadkar however the revenue had made the addition by contending that the contents of excel sheet was con…

Jayantika Singh DCIT Central Circle 7 4 Mumbai, Mumbai vs. Indo Count Industries Ltd, Delhi

Appeal stands dismissed

ITA 3820/MUM/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Oct 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Omkareshwar Chidara

Section 1Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 250

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Jalgaon vs. Taradevi Ratanlal Bafna, Jalgaon

ITA 498/PUN/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Oct 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

For Appellant: S/Shri Suchek Anchaliya and Tushar NagoriFor Respondent: Shri Amit Bobde, CIT

Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 153A

…ed by Shri Naresh Jain to manipulate the share prices by front running of stocks and providing exempt long term capital gain through exit providers. 19. Referring to the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Sumati Dayal vs. CIT reported in (1995) 80 Taxmann 89 (SC) and the decision of the Delhi Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Suman Poddar vs. ITO reported in (2019) taxmann.com 329 (Delhi) and various other decisions, he submitted that the order of the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC should be reversed and that of the Assessing Officer be restored. 20. So far as the observation of the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC that t…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Jalgaon vs. Taradevi Ratanlal Bafna, Jalgaon

In the result, all the above 6 appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and

ITA 497/PUN/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Oct 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

For Appellant: S/Shri Suchek Anchaliya andFor Respondent: Shri Amit Bobde, CIT

Section 10(38)Section 132Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 153A

…ed by Shri Naresh Jain to manipulate the share prices by front running of stocks and providing exempt long term capital gain through exit providers. 19. Referring to the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sumati Dayal vs. CIT reported in (1995) 80 Taxmann 89 (SC) and the decision of the Delhi Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Suman Poddar vs. ITO reported in (2019) taxmann.com 329 (Delhi) and various other decisions, he submitted that the order of the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC should be reversed and that of the Assessing Officer be restored. 20. So far as the observation of the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC that t…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Jalgaon vs. Sidharth Ratanlal Bafna, Jalgaon

In the result, all the above 6 appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and

ITA 1565/PUN/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Oct 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

For Appellant: S/Shri Suchek Anchaliya andFor Respondent: Shri Amit Bobde, CIT

Section 10(38)Section 132Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 153A

…ed by Shri Naresh Jain to manipulate the share prices by front running of stocks and providing exempt long term capital gain through exit providers. 19. Referring to the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sumati Dayal vs. CIT reported in (1995) 80 Taxmann 89 (SC) and the decision of the Delhi Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Suman Poddar vs. ITO reported in (2019) taxmann.com 329 (Delhi) and various other decisions, he submitted that the order of the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC should be reversed and that of the Assessing Officer be restored. 20. So far as the observation of the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC that t…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Jalgaon vs. Sidharth Ratanlal Bafna, Jalgaon

ITA 1561/PUN/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Oct 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

For Appellant: S/Shri Suchek Anchaliya and Tushar NagoriFor Respondent: Shri Amit Bobde, CIT

Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 153A

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Jalgaon vs. Sidharth Ratanlal Bafna, Jalgaon

ITA 1560/PUN/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Oct 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

For Appellant: S/Shri Suchek Anchaliya and Tushar NagoriFor Respondent: Shri Amit Bobde, CIT

Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 153A

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Jalgaon vs. Sidharth Ratanlal Bafna, Jalgaon

In the result, all the above 6 appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and

ITA 1555/PUN/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Oct 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

For Respondent: S/Shri Suchek Anchaliya and

Section 10(38)Section 132Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 153A

…ed by Shri Naresh Jain to manipulate the share prices by front running of stocks and providing exempt long term capital gain through exit providers. 19. Referring to the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sumati Dayal vs. CIT reported in (1995) 80 Taxmann 89 (SC) and the decision of the Delhi Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Suman Poddar vs. ITO reported in (2019) taxmann.com 329 (Delhi) and various other decisions, he submitted that the order of the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC should be reversed and that of the Assessing Officer be restored. 20. So far as the observation of the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC that t…

Sehgal Path Lab, Andheri West vs. ITO, Circle 17(1), Kautilya Bhavan

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 4830/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Smt.Renu Jauhrisehgal Path Lab Vs. Ito, Circle 17(1) 103, Yashodhan It Sehgal Circle 17(1), Path Lab, Azad Nagar, S.O, Kautilya Bhavan, Mumbai-400053. Bandra Kurla Complex, Mumbai-400051. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No:Abxfs0461M Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Piyush Chhajed –CA &For Respondent: Shri Swapnil Choudhary- Sr. AR

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 68

…in SBNs defies economic logic, especially when healthcare services being largely elective and non-emergency for diagnostic labs would likely see lower footfall during cash shortages. As observed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sumati Dayal v. CIT (214 ITR 801), the doctrine of human probabilities must be applied. It is improbable that the appellant's cash collections surged precisely during the period when the public had limited access to valid currency The onus lies squarely on the appellant to provide a plausible explanation supported by facts. The appellant's explanation that the cash on hand befor…

DCIT CC-8(2), Mumbai vs. Niru Dhiren Shah, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 4294/MUM/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Oct 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Prabhash Shankardeputy Commissioner Of Income V/S. Niru Dhiren Shah Tax, Central Circle – 8(2) बनाम 3Rd Floor, Flat No. 35, Jolly Room No. 658, 6Th Floor, Maker Apartment, No. 3 Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, 119, Cuffe Parade, Colaba, Churchgate, Mumbai –400020, Mumbai – 400 005, Maharashtra Maharashtra स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aanps7632R Appellant/अपीलार्थी .. Respondent/प्रतिवादी

For Appellant: Dr. K. Shivaram, Sr. Adv. & Ms. Neelam JadhavFor Respondent: Shri Leyaqat Ali Aafaqui, (Sr.AR)

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 69Section 69A

…IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL“B” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI PRABHASH SHANKAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Deputy Commissioner of Income v/s. Niru Dhiren Shah Tax, Central Circle – 8(2) बनाम 3rd Floor, Flat No. 35, Jolly Room No. 658, 6th Floor, Maker Apartment, No. 3 Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, 119, Cuffe Parade, Colaba, Churchgate, Mumbai –400020, Mumbai – 400 005, Maharashtra Maharashtra स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No: AANPS7632R Appellant/अपीलार्थी .. Respondent/प्रतिवादी Assessee by : Dr. K. Shivaram, Sr. Adv. & Ms. Neelam Jadhav Revenue by: Shri Leyaqat A…

Subhash Chand Choraria, Guwahati vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle - 2, Guwahati

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

ITA 63/GTY/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati16 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Manomohan Das & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 115BSection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 69A

…o as to substantiate the claim that the withdrawals were kept at home and were not utilised for incurring some expenses for or on behalf of the family. It has been held in the case of 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] where the facts were that during the AY 1971-72, the assessee claimed to have won in horse races a total amount ₹3,11,831/- on 13 occasions out of which 10 winnings were from jackpots and 3 were from treble events. In the AY 1972-73, she claimed to have won two jackpots worth ₹93,500/-, both of which were…

Alka Khandaka, Jaipur vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 1(2), Jaipur

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

ITA 1014/JPR/2025[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur16 Oct 2025AY 2017-2018

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Sauravh Harsh, AdvFor Respondent: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT

Section 131Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 44ASection 68

…t, and there is compelling evidence that the transactions are structured to give a colour of legitimacy to unexplained income. It is also relevant to mention here that the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Income-Tax vs. Durga Prasad More (214 ITR 801) held that human probability and circumstantial evidence has to be kept in mind to decide the genuineness of the transactions. The Hon'ble court observed that "Science has not yet invented any instrument to test the reliability of the evidence placed before a Court or Tribunal, Therefore the Courts and Tribunals have to judge the evidence before…

Ranjeet Singh, Lucknow vs. D/ACIT-4, Lucknow

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

ITA 331/LKW/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow16 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Sh. Kul Bharat & Sh. Nikhil Choudharya.Y. 2017-18 Ranjeet Singh, Vs. The Dcit / Acit-4, 459, Ameer Nagar, Aishbagh, Lucknow-226001 Lucknow-226004 Pan: Afsps0877G (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Sh. Rakesh Garg, Advocate Revenue By: Sh. Amit Kumar, Dr Date Of Hearing: 23.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 16.10.2025 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), Nfac Dated 22.03.2024, Wherein The Ld. Cit(A) Has Dismissed The Appeals Of The Assessee Against The Orders Of The Ld. Assessing Officer Passed On 21.12.2019. The Grounds Of Appeal Are As Under: - “01. Because The Cit(A) Has Erred On Facts & In Law In Upholding An Addition Of Rs.31,90,000/- Being Cash Deposited In Bank During Demonetization Period As Unexplained, The Same Is Contrary To Facts, Bad In Law, Be Deleted. 02. Because The Entire Cash Deposited In Bank Is Part Of The Sale Proceeds & Realization Of Debts, The Addition Made Is Purely On Suspicions & Surmises, Such Addition Is Contrary To Facts, Bad In Law, Be Deleted. 03. Because There Being No Change In The Method Of Accounting Regularly Followed By The Assessee & The Same Having Being Consistently Accepted, The Books Of Account Having Not Been Rejected, The Stock Tally Not Disputed, The Accounts Being Tax Audited, There Was No Reason For The Ao To Disbelieve The Cash Deposited In The Bank Treating The Same As Unexplained, The Addition Of Rs.31,90,000/- Upheld By The Cit(A) Be Deleted. 04. Because The Amount Of Rs.31,90,000/- Being Cash Deposited In Bank Being Part Of Sale Proceeds & Cash Receipts Already Charged To Revenue For The Purposes Of Computation Of Income, Separate Addition Of The Same Has Resulted Into Double Taxation, Not Permitted By Law, The Addition Made Be Deleted.

For Appellant: Sh. Rakesh Garg, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Amit Kumar, DR

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 272A(1)(d)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW ‘B’ BENCH, LUCKNOW BEFORE SH. KUL BHARAT, VICE PRESIDENT AND SH. NIKHIL CHOUDHARY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER A.Y. 2017-18 Ranjeet Singh, vs. The DCIT / ACIT-4, 459, Ameer Nagar, Aishbagh, Lucknow-226001 Lucknow-226004 PAN: AFSPS0877G (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by: Sh. Rakesh Garg, Advocate Revenue by: Sh. Amit Kumar, DR Date of hearing: 23.07.2025 Date of pronouncement: 16.10.2025 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), NFAC dated 22.03.2024, wherein the ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeals…

DCIT, CC-2(3), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan Poorva vs. Maxcab Industries Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2590/KOL/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 Oct 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm Dcit, Central Circle-2(3), Maxcab Industries Pvt. Ltd. 4Th Floor, 110 Shantipally, 67/C, Balaram Dey Street, E.M. Bypass, Vs. West Bengal-700006 West Bengal-700107 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aancm1997Q Assessee By : Shri Soumitra Choudhury & Ms. Nandini Surekh, Shri Pranabesh Sarkar, Ars Revenue By : Praveen Kishore, Dr Date Of Hearing: 04.09.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 16.10.2025

For Appellant: Shri Soumitra Choudhury &For Respondent: Praveen Kishore, DR

Section 131Section 132(1)Section 133(6)Section 133ASection 143(1)Section 68

…ar as unexplained cash credit u/s 68 of the Act and made an addition of ₹11,50,00,000/- to the income of the assessee by relying o the decision of Hon'ble Apex court in the case of CIT v Durga Prasad More (1971) 82 ITR 540(SC) and Sumati Dayal Vs. CIT ((1995) 214 ITR 801 (SC). The ld. AO also disallowed the interest paid by the assessee on unsecured loans including loans which were borrowed in the earlier years as well as during the year amounting to ₹₹1,10,18,307/-, besides making disallowance of ₹5,75,000/- on account of commission paid towards arranging the unsecured loan by applying a rate of 0.5%. Maxcab Ind…

Jasmer Singh, Naraingarh, Ambala vs. ITO, Ward-2, Ambala

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

ITA 967/CHANDI/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh15 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Ankit Dhiman, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardhan, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR

Section 115BSection 142(1)Section 144Section 249(4)(b)Section 69A

…n nor paid tax equivalent to advance tax; hence, appeal was rightly dismissed as non-maintainable. On merits, the AO’s finding that the explanation of 10-month-old withdrawal  was implausible is justified and supported by the decision in Sumati Dayal v. CIT (214 ITR 801, SC) which emphasizes on human probabilities. 8. We have carefully considered the rival submissions and perused the material on record including the orders of the lower authorities. It is an undisputed fact that the assessee did not file return of income and that no amount equal to advance tax was deposited before filing the appeal. Section 249(4…

Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(1), Chandigarh vs. Hari Krishan Gupta, Chandigarh

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 837/CHANDI/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh15 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Or At The Time Of Hearing Of Appeal.

For Appellant: Shri Harry Rikhy, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardhan, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR

Section 115BSection 147Section 250Section 68

…ed to furnish satisfactory explanation along with supporting evidence. The explanation offered—that the cash represented festival season sales duly recorded in the books—was rejected by applying the theory of human probability. Relying on Sumati Dayal v. CIT (214 ITR 801) and Durga Prasad More (82 ITR 540), the AO held that no prudent person would hold invalid currency for long and deposit it in parts. The AO thus treated the entire deposit of Rs.1,11,67,000/- as unexplained cash credit u/s 68, taxable u/s 115BBE, and completed assessment at an income of Rs.1,37,21,355/-. 4. Against the order of the Assessing Off…

Income Tax Officer, Ward-9(1), Kolkata vs. S G S Fashion Private Limited, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 729/KOL/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Oct 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shripradip Kumar Choubey, Jm Income Tax Officer, Ward 9(1), Sgs Fashion Private Limited 5Th Floor, Room No.5/12/2B, 49/1/1, Cotton Street, Barabazar, Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, H.O. Kolkata-700007, Vs. Chowringhee Square, West Bengal Kolkata-700069, West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aancs2236G Assessee By : Shri Manish Tiwari, Ar Revenue By : Shri Manas Mondal, Dr Date Of Hearing: 18.09.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 15.10.2025

For Appellant: Shri Manish Tiwari, ARFor Respondent: Shri Manas Mondal, DR

Section 131Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM AND SHRIPRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY, JM Income Tax Officer, Ward 9(1), SGS Fashion Private Limited 5th Floor, Room No.5/12/2B, 49/1/1, Cotton Street, Barabazar, Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, H.O. Kolkata-700007, Vs. Chowringhee Square, West Bengal Kolkata-700069, West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN No. AANCS2236G Assessee by : Shri Manish Tiwari, AR Revenue by : Shri Manas Mondal, DR Date of hearing: 18.09.2025 Date of pronouncement: 15.10.2025 O R D E R Per Rajesh Kumar, AM: This is an appeal preferred by the Revenue against the order o…

Income Tax Officer, Delhi vs. Mohd Rizwan, Delhi

ITA 3535/DEL/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Oct 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.Income Tax Officer, Delhi. (Appellant)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Abhijeet Kumar, Sr. DR

Section 144Section 80C

…has relied on following case-laws : 1. India Woolen Carpet factory 178 ITR 420 (Raj.), 2. VISP (P) Ltd 186 CTR 717 (MP), 3. Precision Finance 208 ITR 465 (Cal), 4. Golcha Prop. Pvt Ltd 227 ITR 391 (Raj), 5. Chaturbhuj Pandey AIR 1969 (SC) 255, 6. Sumati Dayal 214 ITR 801 (SC), and 7. Sanjay Oil Cakes 316 ITR 274 (Gujarat), and 8. C VasantLal& Co. 45 ITR 206 (SC) In the case of India Woolen Carpet factory supra, the assesse failed to provide addresses of the suppliers as well as evidence to prove genuineness of the transactions. But in the present case, copies of invoices were provided and payments were made throu…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-13, New Delhi, Ara Centre, Jhandewalan vs. Urbainia Spaces Pvt. Ltd., Mandawali, Delhi

ITA 2012/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri S Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumarassessment Year: 2017-18 Deputy Commissioner Of Income Vs. Urbainia Spaces Pvt. Ltd., Tax, Central Circle 13, Flat No.19, Ground Floor, Prop. No. Delhi. 01, Pardhan Complex, Main Road, Mandawali, Delhi-1100 92 Pan :Aabcu6277D (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 250Section 68

…uestion was raised on the maintenance of books of account and its accuracy during entire assessment proceedings. The appellant assesee would like draw your attention on judgments of various Hon'ble Courts of law given hereunder:- i. Sumati Dayal V CIT (1995) 214 ITR 801 Taxman 89 (SC) ii. Hindustan Tea Trading Company Limited V CIT(2003) 263 ITR 289(Cal HC) ii. iii. Tola Ram Daga V CIT (1966) 59 ITR 632 (Assam) iv. Dhansi Ram Agarwala V CIT (1966) 217 ITR 4 (Gau) v. Khandelwal Constructions V CIT 227 ITR 900(Gau) 5.3.1 I have considered the facts of case and the submissions filed by the appellant. The assessing…

Sunil Kumar Agarwal, Jaipur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Jaipur

ITA 521/JPR/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur14 Oct 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, \nvk;dj vihy la-@ITA Nos.513 & 519 to 521/JP/2025\nfu/k Zkj.k o\"kZ@Assessment Years : 2016-17 & 2018-19 to 2020-21\n\nSunil Kumar Agarwal\n395, Narnoli Mansion, Outside\nSanganeri Gate, Jaipur\ncuke\nVs.\nACIT,\nCentral Circle-2,\nJaipur\nLFkk;h y s[kk l a-@thvkb Zvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: ABRPA9601M\nvihykFkhZ@Appellant i zR;Fkh Z@Respondent\n\nvk;dj vihy la-@ITSS No. 03/JP/2025\nfu/k Zkj.k o\"kZ@Assessment Year : 2015-16\

For Appellant: Shri S. L. Poddar, AdvFor Respondent: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT, Sr-DR

Section 132Section 139Section 153ASection 234B

…the assessee without any evidence or linkage to seized documents cannot be accepted. h) CIT v. Dhingra Metal Works (2011) 196 Taxman 488 (Del.) - In absence of books and bills, GP estimation by AO based on best judgment is valid. i) Sumati Dayal v. CIT (1995) 214 ITR 801 (SC) - Fiction cannot be accepted as fact in tax jurisprudence; surrounding circumstances and human probabilities must guide judgment. j) Thus, if the assessee truly had a GP rate of 5%, the onus was on him to substantiate it, not merely to state it. No one stopped the assessee from providing a working model or formula. The fact that no such expl…