← All Phrases

“unexplained investment”

Cash Credits & Unexplained ItemsSection 69Section 695,821 judgments

The decision most relied on for unexplained investment is Sumati Dayal v. CIT (214 ITR 801), cited in 1,967 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on unexplained investment

Sumati Dayal v. CIT
214 ITR 801 · 1995 · Supreme Court
1,967
citing judgments

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.

K.P. Varghese v. ITO
131 ITR 597 · 1981 · Supreme Court
989
citing judgments

An addition to income cannot be made merely on the basis of a difference in valuation of assets or a Valuation Officer's report without establishing actual understatement of consideration or the source of unexplained funds through proper enquiry. The Assessing Officer must conduct proper enquiry and satisfy the conditions for making such additions.

Chuharmal v. CIT
172 ITR 250 · 1988 · Supreme Court
340
citing judgments

The expression 'income' under Section 69A of the Income-tax Act, 1961, has a wide meaning, encompassing anything that comes in or results in gain. Therefore, an assessee's unexplained investments, such as purchasing articles or depositing cash, can legitimately be inferred and deemed as income under this section.

CIT v. Kamdhenu Steel & Alloys Ltd.
361 ITR 220 · 2014 · High Court
328
citing judgments

When making an addition under section 68, the creditworthiness or financial strength of an investor contributing share capital or share application money can be proved by producing their bank statements showing sufficient balance for the investment. The Supreme Court dismissed the SLP against this decision.

CIT v. Dwarkadhish Investment (P) Ltd.
330 ITR 298 · 2011 · High Court
218
citing judgments

An assessee cannot be asked to explain the source of the source for cash credits, particularly share capital or share application money, once they have discharged the initial onus regarding the identity, genuineness of the transaction, and creditworthiness of the immediate investor.

CIT v. Jansampark Advertising & Marketing (P.) Ltd.
56 Taxmann.com 286 · 2015 · High Court
196
citing judgments

The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) has an independent statutory obligation to conduct proper inquiries and verify facts, especially when the Assessing Officer has failed to do so. The CIT(A) must ensure effective inquiry is carried out before deleting additions or accepting additional evidence.

ITO v. Ch. Atchaiah
218 ITR 239 · 1996 · Supreme Court
149
citing judgments

Under the Income-tax Act, 1961, the Assessing Officer must tax any taxable income in the hands of the correct assessee to whom it truly belongs, having no option to assess it in any other person's hands.

CIT v. Stellar Investment Ltd.
192 ITR 287 · 1991 · High Court
146
citing judgments

Once the identity of the shareholders is established, no addition can be made in the hands of the assessee company under Section 68 for share capital or share application money, as it cannot be treated as undisclosed income.

Judgments citing unexplained investment

Ranjith Kumar Manikonda, Hyderabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-11(3), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 100/HYD/2020[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad28 Jun 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri K. Narasimha Chary & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

For Appellant: Shri P. Murali Mohan Rao, C.AFor Respondent: Ms. Sheetal Sarin, DR
Section 131Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148

r.w.s 147 of the Act assessing the total income at Rs. 86,68,136/ - by making the addition towards unexplained investment of Rs. 83,68,136/-. 3. Feeling aggrieved by the order passed by Ld. AO, the assessee filed an appeal before the Ld.CIT(A) who confirmed the addition made

Ganapathy Chandrasekaran, Erode vs. DCIT, Circle-1, Erode

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

ITA 776/CHNY/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Jun 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey, Hon’Ble & Shri S. R. Raghunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 776/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Deputy Commissioner Of Income Ganapathy Chandrasekaran, V. Tax, 93, Erode Main Road, Circle -1, Ganapathypalayam, Erode. Erode – 638 153. [Pan: Abrpc-3073-D] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri. S. Sridhar, Advocate (Erode) ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri. D. Hema Bhupal, Jcit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 20.06.2024 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 28.06.2024 आदेश /O R D E R Per S. R. Raghunatha:

For Appellant: Shri. S. Sridhar, Advocate (Erode)For Respondent: Shri. D. Hema Bhupal, JCIT
Section 69A

after it was banned for legal tender after 09th November, 2016 and further, the same can be added uls. 69 of the Act as unexplained investment and also can be taxed u/s. I 15BBE of the Act, it is necessary to examine the case in light of business model ... assessee, and evidence filed during the course of assessment proceedings. 9. The provisions of section 69 of the Act, deals with unexplained investment, where in the financial year immediately preceding the assessment year, the assessee has made investments which are not recorded in the books of accounts

Govindappa Balappa Dandagi, Dharward vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(2), Hubli

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

ITA 629/BANG/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Jun 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Smt Beena Pillai & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri Siddesh .N. Gaddi, CAFor Respondent: Shri Subramanian .S, JCIT-DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 234BSection 250Section 69

Ld.AO however did not agree with the submissions of the assessee, and made disallowance of the investment made of Rs. 2 crores as unexplained investment. 2.4 The Ld.AO noted that assessee claimed indirect expenses as under: 1. Interest – Karnataka bank Over draft – Rs.11,54,920/- 2. Interest on KSFC loan

Hemant Jivan, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer, International Taxation, Ward-1(2), Bangalore

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

ITA 196/BANG/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Jun 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri Deepesh Wagle, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, CIT-DR
Section 1Section 144C(1)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 69

Assessment Order U/s 147 r.w.s 144 of the I. Tax Act,1961 – Page 4 of 6 IT(IT)A No. 196/Bang/2024 Particulars Amount (INR) Unexplained Investment U/s 1,30,28,861/- 69 Interest Income 82,743/- Unexplained Investment 20,73,298/- U/s 69 Assessed Income

Kiran Pal Singh, Faridabad vs. DCIT, Central Circle, Faridabad

In the result, the Appeal of the Assessee in ITA No

ITA 2970/DEL/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Jun 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shamim Yahya & Sh. Yogesh Kumar U.S.Ita No. 1861/Del/2023 (A.Y. 2013-14) Ita No. 1863/Del/2023 (A.Y. 2015-16) Ita No. 1865/Del/2023 (A.Y. 2017-18) Ita No. 2589/Del/2023 (A.Y. 2019-20) Kiran Pal Singh Vs. Dcit House No. 453, Sector- Central Circle 9, Faridabad, C. R. Building, Faridabad, Haryana Haryana-121001 Pan: Akmpp5108N Appellant Respondent

Section 131Section 132Section 139Section 142(1)Section 144Section 153ASection 153A(1)Section 69Section 9

income of Rs. 1,49,85,980/- by making addition of Rs. 1,37,40,000/- u/s 69 of the Act on account of unexplained investment of the assessee. Various additions have also been made against the Assessee for Assessment Year 2013-14 to 2018-19 u/s 153A ... Assessee. 40. The Ground No. 2 in the Assessee’s Appeal is regarding the addition of Rs. 22,00,000/- on account of unexplained investment made u/s 69 of the Act by treating the same as unexplained investment of the Assessee and Rs. 2,25,000/- on account of interest

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-1, Faridabad vs. Kiran Pal Singh, Faridabad

In the result, the Appeal of the Assessee in ITA No

ITA 2815/DEL/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Jun 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shamim Yahya & Sh. Yogesh Kumar U.S.Ita No. 1861/Del/2023 (A.Y. 2013-14) Ita No. 1863/Del/2023 (A.Y. 2015-16) Ita No. 1865/Del/2023 (A.Y. 2017-18) Ita No. 2589/Del/2023 (A.Y. 2019-20) Kiran Pal Singh Vs. Dcit House No. 453, Sector- Central Circle 9, Faridabad, C. R. Building, Faridabad, Haryana Haryana-121001 Pan: Akmpp5108N Appellant Respondent

Section 131Section 132Section 139Section 142(1)Section 144Section 153ASection 153A(1)Section 69Section 9

income of Rs. 1,49,85,980/- by making addition of Rs. 1,37,40,000/- u/s 69 of the Act on account of unexplained investment of the assessee. Various additions have also been made against the Assessee for Assessment Year 2013-14 to 2018-19 u/s 153A ... Assessee. 40. The Ground No. 2 in the Assessee’s Appeal is regarding the addition of Rs. 22,00,000/- on account of unexplained investment made u/s 69 of the Act by treating the same as unexplained investment of the Assessee and Rs. 2,25,000/- on account of interest

Kiran Pal Singh, Faridabad vs. DCIT Central Circle, Faridabad

In the result, the Appeal of the Assessee in ITA No

ITA 2589/DEL/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Jun 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shamim Yahya & Sh. Yogesh Kumar U.S.Ita No. 1861/Del/2023 (A.Y. 2013-14) Ita No. 1863/Del/2023 (A.Y. 2015-16) Ita No. 1865/Del/2023 (A.Y. 2017-18) Ita No. 2589/Del/2023 (A.Y. 2019-20) Kiran Pal Singh Vs. Dcit House No. 453, Sector- Central Circle 9, Faridabad, C. R. Building, Faridabad, Haryana Haryana-121001 Pan: Akmpp5108N Appellant Respondent

Section 131Section 132Section 139Section 142(1)Section 144Section 153ASection 153A(1)Section 69Section 9

income of Rs. 1,49,85,980/- by making addition of Rs. 1,37,40,000/- u/s 69 of the Act on account of unexplained investment of the assessee. Various additions have also been made against the Assessee for Assessment Year 2013-14 to 2018-19 u/s 153A ... Assessee. 40. The Ground No. 2 in the Assessee’s Appeal is regarding the addition of Rs. 22,00,000/- on account of unexplained investment made u/s 69 of the Act by treating the same as unexplained investment of the Assessee and Rs. 2,25,000/- on account of interest

Kiran Pal Singh, Faridabad vs. DCIT Central Circle, Faridabad

In the result, the Appeal of the Assessee in ITA No

ITA 2588/DEL/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Jun 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shamim Yahya & Sh. Yogesh Kumar U.S.Ita No. 1861/Del/2023 (A.Y. 2013-14) Ita No. 1863/Del/2023 (A.Y. 2015-16) Ita No. 1865/Del/2023 (A.Y. 2017-18) Ita No. 2589/Del/2023 (A.Y. 2019-20) Kiran Pal Singh Vs. Dcit House No. 453, Sector- Central Circle 9, Faridabad, C. R. Building, Faridabad, Haryana Haryana-121001 Pan: Akmpp5108N Appellant Respondent

Section 131Section 132Section 139Section 142(1)Section 144Section 153ASection 153A(1)Section 69Section 9

income of Rs. 1,49,85,980/- by making addition of Rs. 1,37,40,000/- u/s 69 of the Act on account of unexplained investment of the assessee. Various additions have also been made against the Assessee for Assessment Year 2013-14 to 2018-19 u/s 153A ... Assessee. 40. The Ground No. 2 in the Assessee’s Appeal is regarding the addition of Rs. 22,00,000/- on account of unexplained investment made u/s 69 of the Act by treating the same as unexplained investment of the Assessee and Rs. 2,25,000/- on account of interest

DCIT, Central Circle-1, Faridabad vs. Kiran Pal Singh, Faridabad

In the result, the Appeal of the Assessee in ITA No

ITA 2040/DEL/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Jun 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shamim Yahya & Sh. Yogesh Kumar U.S.Ita No. 1861/Del/2023 (A.Y. 2013-14) Ita No. 1863/Del/2023 (A.Y. 2015-16) Ita No. 1865/Del/2023 (A.Y. 2017-18) Ita No. 2589/Del/2023 (A.Y. 2019-20) Kiran Pal Singh Vs. Dcit House No. 453, Sector- Central Circle 9, Faridabad, C. R. Building, Faridabad, Haryana Haryana-121001 Pan: Akmpp5108N Appellant Respondent

Section 131Section 132Section 139Section 142(1)Section 144Section 153ASection 153A(1)Section 69Section 9

income of Rs. 1,49,85,980/- by making addition of Rs. 1,37,40,000/- u/s 69 of the Act on account of unexplained investment of the assessee. Various additions have also been made against the Assessee for Assessment Year 2013-14 to 2018-19 u/s 153A ... Assessee. 40. The Ground No. 2 in the Assessee’s Appeal is regarding the addition of Rs. 22,00,000/- on account of unexplained investment made u/s 69 of the Act by treating the same as unexplained investment of the Assessee and Rs. 2,25,000/- on account of interest

DCIT, Central Circle-1, Faridabad vs. Kiran Pal Singh, Faridabad

In the result, the Appeal of the Assessee in ITA No

ITA 2039/DEL/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Jun 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shamim Yahya & Sh. Yogesh Kumar U.S.Ita No. 1861/Del/2023 (A.Y. 2013-14) Ita No. 1863/Del/2023 (A.Y. 2015-16) Ita No. 1865/Del/2023 (A.Y. 2017-18) Ita No. 2589/Del/2023 (A.Y. 2019-20) Kiran Pal Singh Vs. Dcit House No. 453, Sector- Central Circle 9, Faridabad, C. R. Building, Faridabad, Haryana Haryana-121001 Pan: Akmpp5108N Appellant Respondent

Section 131Section 132Section 139Section 142(1)Section 144Section 153ASection 153A(1)Section 69Section 9

income of Rs. 1,49,85,980/- by making addition of Rs. 1,37,40,000/- u/s 69 of the Act on account of unexplained investment of the assessee. Various additions have also been made against the Assessee for Assessment Year 2013-14 to 2018-19 u/s 153A ... Assessee. 40. The Ground No. 2 in the Assessee’s Appeal is regarding the addition of Rs. 22,00,000/- on account of unexplained investment made u/s 69 of the Act by treating the same as unexplained investment of the Assessee and Rs. 2,25,000/- on account of interest

DCIT, Central Circle-1, Faridabad vs. Kiran Pal Singh, Faridabad

In the result, the Appeal of the Assessee in ITA No

ITA 2038/DEL/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Jun 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shamim Yahya & Sh. Yogesh Kumar U.S.Ita No. 1861/Del/2023 (A.Y. 2013-14) Ita No. 1863/Del/2023 (A.Y. 2015-16) Ita No. 1865/Del/2023 (A.Y. 2017-18) Ita No. 2589/Del/2023 (A.Y. 2019-20) Kiran Pal Singh Vs. Dcit House No. 453, Sector- Central Circle 9, Faridabad, C. R. Building, Faridabad, Haryana Haryana-121001 Pan: Akmpp5108N Appellant Respondent

Section 131Section 132Section 139Section 142(1)Section 144Section 153ASection 153A(1)Section 69Section 9

income of Rs. 1,49,85,980/- by making addition of Rs. 1,37,40,000/- u/s 69 of the Act on account of unexplained investment of the assessee. Various additions have also been made against the Assessee for Assessment Year 2013-14 to 2018-19 u/s 153A ... Assessee. 40. The Ground No. 2 in the Assessee’s Appeal is regarding the addition of Rs. 22,00,000/- on account of unexplained investment made u/s 69 of the Act by treating the same as unexplained investment of the Assessee and Rs. 2,25,000/- on account of interest

Kiran Pal Singh, Faridabad vs. DCIT Central Circle, Faridabad

In the result, the Appeal of the Assessee in ITA No

ITA 1865/DEL/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Jun 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shamim Yahya & Sh. Yogesh Kumar U.S.Ita No. 1861/Del/2023 (A.Y. 2013-14) Ita No. 1863/Del/2023 (A.Y. 2015-16) Ita No. 1865/Del/2023 (A.Y. 2017-18) Ita No. 2589/Del/2023 (A.Y. 2019-20) Kiran Pal Singh Vs. Dcit House No. 453, Sector- Central Circle 9, Faridabad, C. R. Building, Faridabad, Haryana Haryana-121001 Pan: Akmpp5108N Appellant Respondent

Section 131Section 132Section 139Section 142(1)Section 144Section 153ASection 153A(1)Section 69Section 9

income of Rs. 1,49,85,980/- by making addition of Rs. 1,37,40,000/- u/s 69 of the Act on account of unexplained investment of the assessee. Various additions have also been made against the Assessee for Assessment Year 2013-14 to 2018-19 u/s 153A ... Assessee. 40. The Ground No. 2 in the Assessee’s Appeal is regarding the addition of Rs. 22,00,000/- on account of unexplained investment made u/s 69 of the Act by treating the same as unexplained investment of the Assessee and Rs. 2,25,000/- on account of interest

Kiran Pal Singh, Faridabad vs. DCIT Central Circle, Faridabad

In the result, the Appeal of the Assessee in ITA No

ITA 1864/DEL/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Jun 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shamim Yahya & Sh. Yogesh Kumar U.S.Ita No. 1861/Del/2023 (A.Y. 2013-14) Ita No. 1863/Del/2023 (A.Y. 2015-16) Ita No. 1865/Del/2023 (A.Y. 2017-18) Ita No. 2589/Del/2023 (A.Y. 2019-20) Kiran Pal Singh Vs. Dcit House No. 453, Sector- Central Circle 9, Faridabad, C. R. Building, Faridabad, Haryana Haryana-121001 Pan: Akmpp5108N Appellant Respondent

Section 131Section 132Section 139Section 142(1)Section 144Section 153ASection 153A(1)Section 69Section 9

income of Rs. 1,49,85,980/- by making addition of Rs. 1,37,40,000/- u/s 69 of the Act on account of unexplained investment of the assessee. Various additions have also been made against the Assessee for Assessment Year 2013-14 to 2018-19 u/s 153A ... Assessee. 40. The Ground No. 2 in the Assessee’s Appeal is regarding the addition of Rs. 22,00,000/- on account of unexplained investment made u/s 69 of the Act by treating the same as unexplained investment of the Assessee and Rs. 2,25,000/- on account of interest

Kiran Pal Singh, Faridabad vs. DCIT Central Circle, Faridabad

In the result, the Appeal of the Assessee in ITA No

ITA 1863/DEL/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Jun 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shamim Yahya & Sh. Yogesh Kumar U.S.Ita No. 1861/Del/2023 (A.Y. 2013-14) Ita No. 1863/Del/2023 (A.Y. 2015-16) Ita No. 1865/Del/2023 (A.Y. 2017-18) Ita No. 2589/Del/2023 (A.Y. 2019-20) Kiran Pal Singh Vs. Dcit House No. 453, Sector- Central Circle 9, Faridabad, C. R. Building, Faridabad, Haryana Haryana-121001 Pan: Akmpp5108N Appellant Respondent

Section 131Section 132Section 139Section 142(1)Section 144Section 153ASection 153A(1)Section 69Section 9

income of Rs. 1,49,85,980/- by making addition of Rs. 1,37,40,000/- u/s 69 of the Act on account of unexplained investment of the assessee. Various additions have also been made against the Assessee for Assessment Year 2013-14 to 2018-19 u/s 153A ... Assessee. 40. The Ground No. 2 in the Assessee’s Appeal is regarding the addition of Rs. 22,00,000/- on account of unexplained investment made u/s 69 of the Act by treating the same as unexplained investment of the Assessee and Rs. 2,25,000/- on account of interest

Kiran Pal Singh, Faridabad vs. DCIT Central Circle, Faridabad

In the result, the Appeal of the Assessee in ITA No

ITA 1862/DEL/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Jun 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shamim Yahya & Sh. Yogesh Kumar U.S.Ita No. 1861/Del/2023 (A.Y. 2013-14) Ita No. 1863/Del/2023 (A.Y. 2015-16) Ita No. 1865/Del/2023 (A.Y. 2017-18) Ita No. 2589/Del/2023 (A.Y. 2019-20) Kiran Pal Singh Vs. Dcit House No. 453, Sector- Central Circle 9, Faridabad, C. R. Building, Faridabad, Haryana Haryana-121001 Pan: Akmpp5108N Appellant Respondent

Section 131Section 132Section 139Section 142(1)Section 144Section 153ASection 153A(1)Section 69Section 9

income of Rs. 1,49,85,980/- by making addition of Rs. 1,37,40,000/- u/s 69 of the Act on account of unexplained investment of the assessee. Various additions have also been made against the Assessee for Assessment Year 2013-14 to 2018-19 u/s 153A ... Assessee. 40. The Ground No. 2 in the Assessee’s Appeal is regarding the addition of Rs. 22,00,000/- on account of unexplained investment made u/s 69 of the Act by treating the same as unexplained investment of the Assessee and Rs. 2,25,000/- on account of interest

Kiran Pal Singh, Faridabad vs. DCIT Central Circle, Faridabad

In the result, the Appeal of the Assessee in ITA No

ITA 1861/DEL/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Jun 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shamim Yahya & Sh. Yogesh Kumar U.S.Ita No. 1861/Del/2023 (A.Y. 2013-14) Ita No. 1863/Del/2023 (A.Y. 2015-16) Ita No. 1865/Del/2023 (A.Y. 2017-18) Ita No. 2589/Del/2023 (A.Y. 2019-20) Kiran Pal Singh Vs. Dcit House No. 453, Sector- Central Circle 9, Faridabad, C. R. Building, Faridabad, Haryana Haryana-121001 Pan: Akmpp5108N Appellant Respondent

Section 131Section 132Section 139Section 142(1)Section 144Section 153ASection 153A(1)Section 69Section 9

income of Rs. 1,49,85,980/- by making addition of Rs. 1,37,40,000/- u/s 69 of the Act on account of unexplained investment of the assessee. Various additions have also been made against the Assessee for Assessment Year 2013-14 to 2018-19 u/s 153A ... Assessee. 40. The Ground No. 2 in the Assessee’s Appeal is regarding the addition of Rs. 22,00,000/- on account of unexplained investment made u/s 69 of the Act by treating the same as unexplained investment of the Assessee and Rs. 2,25,000/- on account of interest

Kiran Pal Singh, Faridabad vs. DCIT Central Circle, Faridabad

In the result, the Appeal of the Assessee in ITA No

ITA 1860/DEL/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Jun 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shamim Yahya & Sh. Yogesh Kumar U.S.Ita No. 1861/Del/2023 (A.Y. 2013-14) Ita No. 1863/Del/2023 (A.Y. 2015-16) Ita No. 1865/Del/2023 (A.Y. 2017-18) Ita No. 2589/Del/2023 (A.Y. 2019-20) Kiran Pal Singh Vs. Dcit House No. 453, Sector- Central Circle 9, Faridabad, C. R. Building, Faridabad, Haryana Haryana-121001 Pan: Akmpp5108N Appellant Respondent

Section 131Section 132Section 139Section 142(1)Section 144Section 153ASection 153A(1)Section 69Section 9

income of Rs. 1,49,85,980/- by making addition of Rs. 1,37,40,000/- u/s 69 of the Act on account of unexplained investment of the assessee. Various additions have also been made against the Assessee for Assessment Year 2013-14 to 2018-19 u/s 153A ... Assessee. 40. The Ground No. 2 in the Assessee’s Appeal is regarding the addition of Rs. 22,00,000/- on account of unexplained investment made u/s 69 of the Act by treating the same as unexplained investment of the Assessee and Rs. 2,25,000/- on account of interest

ITO Ward-20(1), New Delhi vs. Poltavsky- Tps Power Services Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 4884/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Jun 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY (Judicial Member), SHRI AVDHESH KUMAR MISHRA (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Vivek Vardhan, Sr.DRFor Respondent: Ms. Sangeeta Singh, CA
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 37Section 68

money received in FY 2008-09. 7. Apart from above, the AO had made addition of Rs. 1,10,00,000/- on account of unexplained investment. The assessee had furnished necessary details during First Appellate proceedings. The AO in remand report dated 23.09.2015 after examining transaction gave his comments

ACIT, Central Circle-26, New Delhi vs. Bharat Buildtech P.Ltd, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue stands dismissed

ITA 1460/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Jun 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Sudhir Pareekacit, Central Circle 26, Vs. M/S. Bharat Buildtech P. Ltd., New Delhi. 8-B, Rajendra Park, Pusa Road, New Delhi. (Pan : Aaccb4322K) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Ved Jain, Advocate Shri Aman Garg, Ca Revenue By : Shri Kanv Bali, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 26.06.2024 Date Of Order : 28.06.2024 Order Per Shamim Yahya: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit (Appeals)-29, New Delhi Dated 08.12.2017 For The Assessment Year 2013-14. 2. Grounds Of Appeal Taken By The Revenue Read As Under :- “1. That On The Facts & Under The Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Law In Allowing The Appeal Of Assessee On The Issue Of Initiating The Assessment Proceedings Against The Appellant U/S 153C Of The Act In The Absence Of Any Material Belonging To The Appellant Company Found During The Course Of Search, Ignoring That The Addition Was Made On The Basis Of Documents Found During Search Containing Entries Pertaining To The Assessee & Also Not Appreciating The Ratio Laid

For Appellant: Shri Ved Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Kanv Bali, Sr. DR
Section 131Section 153CSection 292CSection 69Section 69A

erred in law and on the facts in deleting the addition of RS.1.80 Crore made by the AO on account of unexplained investment signified by purchase of property u/s 69 of the I.T. Act, when none of the parties has challenged the document and signatories have verified it as signed

Paragkumar Dipakkumar Khamar, Gandhinagar vs. The ITO, Ward-4, Mehsana

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

ITA 232/AHD/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad27 Jun 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri N.J. Vyas, Sr. D.R
Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 144

assessee. The Assessing Officer proceeded to frame ex-parte assessment u/s. 144 by making addition of Rs. 13,13,329/- on account of unexplained investment. During the assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer called for information u/s. 133(6) from M/s. Rajvi Stock Broking Pvt. Ltd.. The said company provided ... investments in the share/securities . Since the assessee could not explain the aforesaid investment, the AO added the amount of Rs. 13,13,329/- as unexplained investment. 3. The assessee being aggrieved filed first appeal with CIT(A). The ld. CIT(A) issued notices to the assessee but there