← 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

Arvind Kumar Aggarwal, Ambala City vs. DCIT, Central Circle-2, Chandigarh, DCIT Central Circle Chandigarh

ITA 346/CHANDI/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh09 Mar 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Laliet Kumar, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.343/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13) & 2. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.344/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & 3. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.345/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & 4. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.445/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 5. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.346/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18) Shri Arvind Kumar Aggarwal Dcit (Central-2) बनाम/ C/O Sh. Rajiv Goel & Associates Cr Building, Sector 17 179, Bank Road Chandigarh – 160017 Vs. Ambala Cantt. (Haryana) -133001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Abfpa-8832-Q (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Sh. Rajiv Goel & Sh. Dhruv Goel (Ca) – Ld. Ars ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Smt. Meenkashi Vohra (Cit) - Ld. Dr (Virtual) सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 10-12-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 09-03-2026

For Appellant: Sh. Rajiv Goel & Sh. Dhruv Goel (CA) – Ld. ARsFor Respondent: Smt. Meenkashi Vohra (CIT) - Ld. DR (Virtual)
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153A(1)(b)Section 153DSection 69

That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and facts in confirming the addition of Rs.72,00,000/- u/s 69 on account of unexplained investment in land plotting project near MDSD college on the basis of presumptions. 6.That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and facts ... confirming the addition of Rs.1,56,51,832/- u/s 69 on account of unexplained investment in land plotting project near Ghail Road, Ambala City on the basis of presumptions. 7.That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law in confirming the order passed u/s 153A

Arvind Kumar Aggarwal, Arvind Kumar Aggarwal Ambala City vs. DCIT, Central Circle-2, Chandigarh, Central Circle

ITA 345/CHANDI/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh09 Mar 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Laliet Kumar, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.343/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13) & 2. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.344/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & 3. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.345/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & 4. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.445/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 5. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.346/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18) Shri Arvind Kumar Aggarwal Dcit (Central-2) बनाम/ C/O Sh. Rajiv Goel & Associates Cr Building, Sector 17 179, Bank Road Chandigarh – 160017 Vs. Ambala Cantt. (Haryana) -133001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Abfpa-8832-Q (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Sh. Rajiv Goel & Sh. Dhruv Goel (Ca) – Ld. Ars ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Smt. Meenkashi Vohra (Cit) - Ld. Dr (Virtual) सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 10-12-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 09-03-2026

For Appellant: Sh. Rajiv Goel & Sh. Dhruv Goel (CA) – Ld. ARsFor Respondent: Smt. Meenkashi Vohra (CIT) - Ld. DR (Virtual)
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153A(1)(b)Section 153DSection 69

That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and facts in confirming the addition of Rs.72,00,000/- u/s 69 on account of unexplained investment in land plotting project near MDSD college on the basis of presumptions. 6.That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and facts ... confirming the addition of Rs.1,56,51,832/- u/s 69 on account of unexplained investment in land plotting project near Ghail Road, Ambala City on the basis of presumptions. 7.That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law in confirming the order passed u/s 153A

Arvind Kumar Aggarwal, Ambala City vs. DCIT, Central Circle-2, Chandigarh, Central Circle Chandigarh

ITA 344/CHANDI/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh09 Mar 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Laliet Kumar, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.343/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13) & 2. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.344/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & 3. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.345/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & 4. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.445/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 5. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.346/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18) Shri Arvind Kumar Aggarwal Dcit (Central-2) बनाम/ C/O Sh. Rajiv Goel & Associates Cr Building, Sector 17 179, Bank Road Chandigarh – 160017 Vs. Ambala Cantt. (Haryana) -133001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Abfpa-8832-Q (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Sh. Rajiv Goel & Sh. Dhruv Goel (Ca) – Ld. Ars ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Smt. Meenkashi Vohra (Cit) - Ld. Dr (Virtual) सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 10-12-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 09-03-2026

For Appellant: Sh. Rajiv Goel & Sh. Dhruv Goel (CA) – Ld. ARsFor Respondent: Smt. Meenkashi Vohra (CIT) - Ld. DR (Virtual)
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153A(1)(b)Section 153DSection 69

That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and facts in confirming the addition of Rs.72,00,000/- u/s 69 on account of unexplained investment in land plotting project near MDSD college on the basis of presumptions. 6.That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and facts ... confirming the addition of Rs.1,56,51,832/- u/s 69 on account of unexplained investment in land plotting project near Ghail Road, Ambala City on the basis of presumptions. 7.That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law in confirming the order passed u/s 153A

Arvind Kumar Aggarwal, Ambala City vs. DCIT, Central Circle-2 Chandigarh, DCIT Central Circle Chandigarh

ITA 343/CHANDI/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh09 Mar 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Laliet Kumar, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.343/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13) & 2. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.344/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & 3. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.345/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & 4. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.445/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 5. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.346/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18) Shri Arvind Kumar Aggarwal Dcit (Central-2) बनाम/ C/O Sh. Rajiv Goel & Associates Cr Building, Sector 17 179, Bank Road Chandigarh – 160017 Vs. Ambala Cantt. (Haryana) -133001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Abfpa-8832-Q (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Sh. Rajiv Goel & Sh. Dhruv Goel (Ca) – Ld. Ars ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Smt. Meenkashi Vohra (Cit) - Ld. Dr (Virtual) सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 10-12-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 09-03-2026

For Appellant: Sh. Rajiv Goel & Sh. Dhruv Goel (CA) – Ld. ARsFor Respondent: Smt. Meenkashi Vohra (CIT) - Ld. DR (Virtual)
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153A(1)(b)Section 153DSection 69

That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and facts in confirming the addition of Rs.72,00,000/- u/s 69 on account of unexplained investment in land plotting project near MDSD college on the basis of presumptions. 6.That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and facts ... confirming the addition of Rs.1,56,51,832/- u/s 69 on account of unexplained investment in land plotting project near Ghail Road, Ambala City on the basis of presumptions. 7.That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law in confirming the order passed u/s 153A

Sangeeta Aggarwal, Sangeeta Aggarwal Ambala City vs. DCIT, Central Circle-2 Chandigarh, Central Circle, Chandigarh

The appeals stand allowed on merits accordingly

ITA 335/CHANDI/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh09 Mar 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Laliet Kumar, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.329/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & 2. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.330/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & 3. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.333/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & 4. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.334/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 5. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.335/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18) Smt. Sangeeta Aggarwal Dcit (Central-2) बनाम/ C/O Sh. Rajiv Goel & Associates Cr Building, Sector 17 179, Bank Road Chandigarh – 160017 Vs. Ambala Cantt. (Haryana) -133001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Abfpa-8835-K (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Sh. Rajiv Goel & Sh. Dhruv Goel (Ca) – Ld. Ars ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Smt. Meenkashi Vohra (Cit) - Ld. Dr (Virtual) सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 10-12-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 09-03-2026

For Appellant: Sh. Rajiv Goel & Sh. Dhruv Goel (CA) – Ld. ARsFor Respondent: Smt. Meenkashi Vohra (CIT) - Ld. DR (Virtual)
Section 132(4)Section 153A(1)(b)Section 292C

zeros has been rejected by us in the case of Shri Arvind Kumar Aggarwal (supra) as under: - 6. The first addition of unexplained investment and consequential interest income is based on entries found noted in a Neelgagan Diary which was found from the residence of the assessee. This diary ... assumption of facts by Ld. AO. 9. Finally, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, we would hold that the impugned addition of unexplained investment and consequential estimation of interest income could not be sustained in law. Considering the contents of the diary, sufficient surrender has already been made

Sangeeta Aggarwal, Sangeeta Aggarwal Ambala City vs. DCIT, Central Circle-2 Chandigarh, Central Circle Chandigarh

The appeals stand allowed on merits accordingly

ITA 334/CHANDI/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh09 Mar 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Laliet Kumar, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.329/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & 2. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.330/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & 3. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.333/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & 4. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.334/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 5. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.335/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18) Smt. Sangeeta Aggarwal Dcit (Central-2) बनाम/ C/O Sh. Rajiv Goel & Associates Cr Building, Sector 17 179, Bank Road Chandigarh – 160017 Vs. Ambala Cantt. (Haryana) -133001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Abfpa-8835-K (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Sh. Rajiv Goel & Sh. Dhruv Goel (Ca) – Ld. Ars ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Smt. Meenkashi Vohra (Cit) - Ld. Dr (Virtual) सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 10-12-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 09-03-2026

For Appellant: Sh. Rajiv Goel & Sh. Dhruv Goel (CA) – Ld. ARsFor Respondent: Smt. Meenkashi Vohra (CIT) - Ld. DR (Virtual)
Section 132(4)Section 153A(1)(b)Section 292C

zeros has been rejected by us in the case of Shri Arvind Kumar Aggarwal (supra) as under: - 6. The first addition of unexplained investment and consequential interest income is based on entries found noted in a Neelgagan Diary which was found from the residence of the assessee. This diary ... assumption of facts by Ld. AO. 9. Finally, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, we would hold that the impugned addition of unexplained investment and consequential estimation of interest income could not be sustained in law. Considering the contents of the diary, sufficient surrender has already been made

Sangeeta Aggarwal, Sangeeta Aggarwal Ambala City vs. DCIT, Central Circle-2 Chandigarh, DCIT Central Circle Chandigarh

The appeals stand allowed on merits accordingly

ITA 333/CHANDI/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh09 Mar 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Laliet Kumar, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.329/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & 2. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.330/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & 3. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.333/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & 4. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.334/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 5. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.335/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18) Smt. Sangeeta Aggarwal Dcit (Central-2) बनाम/ C/O Sh. Rajiv Goel & Associates Cr Building, Sector 17 179, Bank Road Chandigarh – 160017 Vs. Ambala Cantt. (Haryana) -133001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Abfpa-8835-K (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Sh. Rajiv Goel & Sh. Dhruv Goel (Ca) – Ld. Ars ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Smt. Meenkashi Vohra (Cit) - Ld. Dr (Virtual) सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 10-12-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 09-03-2026

For Appellant: Sh. Rajiv Goel & Sh. Dhruv Goel (CA) – Ld. ARsFor Respondent: Smt. Meenkashi Vohra (CIT) - Ld. DR (Virtual)
Section 132(4)Section 153A(1)(b)Section 292C

zeros has been rejected by us in the case of Shri Arvind Kumar Aggarwal (supra) as under: - 6. The first addition of unexplained investment and consequential interest income is based on entries found noted in a Neelgagan Diary which was found from the residence of the assessee. This diary ... assumption of facts by Ld. AO. 9. Finally, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, we would hold that the impugned addition of unexplained investment and consequential estimation of interest income could not be sustained in law. Considering the contents of the diary, sufficient surrender has already been made

Sangeeta Aggarwal, Ambala City vs. DCIT, Central Circle-2 Chandigarh, Central Circle, Chandigarh

The appeals stand allowed on merits accordingly

ITA 330/CHANDI/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh09 Mar 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Laliet Kumar, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.329/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & 2. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.330/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & 3. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.333/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & 4. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.334/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 5. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.335/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18) Smt. Sangeeta Aggarwal Dcit (Central-2) बनाम/ C/O Sh. Rajiv Goel & Associates Cr Building, Sector 17 179, Bank Road Chandigarh – 160017 Vs. Ambala Cantt. (Haryana) -133001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Abfpa-8835-K (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Sh. Rajiv Goel & Sh. Dhruv Goel (Ca) – Ld. Ars ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Smt. Meenkashi Vohra (Cit) - Ld. Dr (Virtual) सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 10-12-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 09-03-2026

For Appellant: Sh. Rajiv Goel & Sh. Dhruv Goel (CA) – Ld. ARsFor Respondent: Smt. Meenkashi Vohra (CIT) - Ld. DR (Virtual)
Section 132(4)Section 153A(1)(b)Section 292C

zeros has been rejected by us in the case of Shri Arvind Kumar Aggarwal (supra) as under: - 6. The first addition of unexplained investment and consequential interest income is based on entries found noted in a Neelgagan Diary which was found from the residence of the assessee. This diary ... assumption of facts by Ld. AO. 9. Finally, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, we would hold that the impugned addition of unexplained investment and consequential estimation of interest income could not be sustained in law. Considering the contents of the diary, sufficient surrender has already been made

Sangeeta Aggarwal, Ambala City vs. DCIT, Central Circle-2 Chandigarh, Central Circle Chandigarh

The appeals stand allowed on merits accordingly

ITA 329/CHANDI/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh09 Mar 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Laliet Kumar, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.329/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & 2. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.330/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & 3. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.333/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & 4. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.334/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 5. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.335/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18) Smt. Sangeeta Aggarwal Dcit (Central-2) बनाम/ C/O Sh. Rajiv Goel & Associates Cr Building, Sector 17 179, Bank Road Chandigarh – 160017 Vs. Ambala Cantt. (Haryana) -133001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Abfpa-8835-K (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Sh. Rajiv Goel & Sh. Dhruv Goel (Ca) – Ld. Ars ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Smt. Meenkashi Vohra (Cit) - Ld. Dr (Virtual) सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 10-12-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 09-03-2026

For Appellant: Sh. Rajiv Goel & Sh. Dhruv Goel (CA) – Ld. ARsFor Respondent: Smt. Meenkashi Vohra (CIT) - Ld. DR (Virtual)
Section 132(4)Section 153A(1)(b)Section 292C

zeros has been rejected by us in the case of Shri Arvind Kumar Aggarwal (supra) as under: - 6. The first addition of unexplained investment and consequential interest income is based on entries found noted in a Neelgagan Diary which was found from the residence of the assessee. This diary ... assumption of facts by Ld. AO. 9. Finally, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, we would hold that the impugned addition of unexplained investment and consequential estimation of interest income could not be sustained in law. Considering the contents of the diary, sufficient surrender has already been made

Thanushkodi Narayanan, Chennai vs. DCIT, Central Circle-3(2), Chennai

ITA 2570/CHNY/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Mar 2026AY 2011-12

Bench: This Tribunal. 2. Since, The Facts Are The Identical Across All The Appeals / For All The Assessment Years, Except For The Nature Of The Additions / Disallowances Varying In Few Of The Assessment Year(S) Before This Tribunal In The Present Batch Of 6 Appeals, The Appeal Arising From The A.Y. 2012-13 Is Being Taken Up As The Lead Case With The Consent Of The Both The Ld. Ar As Well As The Departmental Representatives. 3. The Brief Fact Of The Present Case Is That The Assessee, Shri Thanushkodi Narayanan, Is The Managing Director Of M/S.Annai Builders Real Estates Pvt Ltd. The Assessee Filed His Original Return Of Income For The A.Y. 2012-13 On 27.09.2012 In Declaring A Total Income Of Rs.24,87,430/-. 4. A Search & Seizure Operation Was Carried Out In Terms Of Section 132 Of The Act On 04.10.2017 In The Residential Premises Of The Assessee & Also In The Premises Of M/S.Annai Builders Real Estates Pvt. Ltd. In Which The Assessee Is The Managing Director. 5. Thereafter, A Notice U/S.153A Of The Act For The A.Y.2012-13 Was Issued On 25.09.2018 To The Assessee By The Assessing Officer (In Short “Ao”) & In Response To The Same, The Assessee Had Filed E-Return Of Income For The A.Y. 2012-13 On 17.08.2019 In Declaring Total Income Of Rs.14,53,440/-. :-3-:

Section 132Section 142Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153A

Foreign Travel Expenses Unexplained investment u/s 69 Unexplained money 2,81,25,000 (16.1-16.5) 3,00,000 (12.1 - 12.5) 158-169 63. We find that the additions made in the search assessment order for the Assessment Year 2012-13 to 2016-17 are extract replicate of the annexures forming