← All Phrases

“hundi transaction”

Cash Credits & Unexplained ItemsSection 69DSection 69D65 judgments

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, PATNA vs. PATNA IRON PVT. LTD., PATNA

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed and appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 373/PAT/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Patna26 Feb 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vp & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am Asst. Commissioner Of Income Patna Iron Pvt. Ltd. Tax, Central Circle-2 Ground Floor, Suprabhat 6Th Floor, Annexe, Central Building, Ceat Compound, Vs. Building, Beer Chand Patel Path, Phulwari, Patna-800001, Bihar Patna, Bihar-800001, (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aafcp2484B Asst. Commissioner Of Income Patna Iron Pvt. Ltd. Tax, Central Circle-2 Ground Floor, Suprabhat 6Th Floor, Annexe, Central Building, Ceat Compound, Vs. Building, Beer Chand Patel Path, Phulwari, Patna-800001, Bihar Patna, Bihar-800001, (Respondent) (Appellant) Sushil Kumar Kanodia N-601, Profesor Colony, Acit, Central Circle-2 Chitragupta Nagar, Kanakrbagh, Vs. Patna, Bihar Patna-800020, Bihar (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Agypk0702D Assessee By : Shri Manish Rastogi, Ar Revenue By : Md. A.H. Chowdhary, Dr Date Of Hearing: 27.11.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 26.02.2025

For Appellant: Shri Manish Rastogi, ARFor Respondent: Md. A.H. Chowdhary, DR
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153C

department relied upon the notings of hundi in the diary seized from the premises of third party. The said notings allegedly contained entries of hundi transactions on behalf of parties including assessee whose names. were written in abbreviated/code words. The Hon'ble Delhi High Court relying on its earlier decision

SUSHIL KUMAR KANODIA,PATNA vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, PATNA

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed and appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 237/PAT/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Patna26 Feb 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vp & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am Asst. Commissioner Of Income Patna Iron Pvt. Ltd. Tax, Central Circle-2 Ground Floor, Suprabhat 6Th Floor, Annexe, Central Building, Ceat Compound, Vs. Building, Beer Chand Patel Path, Phulwari, Patna-800001, Bihar Patna, Bihar-800001, (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aafcp2484B Asst. Commissioner Of Income Patna Iron Pvt. Ltd. Tax, Central Circle-2 Ground Floor, Suprabhat 6Th Floor, Annexe, Central Building, Ceat Compound, Vs. Building, Beer Chand Patel Path, Phulwari, Patna-800001, Bihar Patna, Bihar-800001, (Respondent) (Appellant) Sushil Kumar Kanodia N-601, Profesor Colony, Acit, Central Circle-2 Chitragupta Nagar, Kanakrbagh, Vs. Patna, Bihar Patna-800020, Bihar (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Agypk0702D Assessee By : Shri Manish Rastogi, Ar Revenue By : Md. A.H. Chowdhary, Dr Date Of Hearing: 27.11.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 26.02.2025

For Appellant: Shri Manish Rastogi, ARFor Respondent: Md. A.H. Chowdhary, DR
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153C

department relied upon the notings of hundi in the diary seized from the premises of third party. The said notings allegedly contained entries of hundi transactions on behalf of parties including assessee whose names. were written in abbreviated/code words. The Hon'ble Delhi High Court relying on its earlier decision

MEGHJI MANSUKHLAL DODHIA,BHIWANDI vs. DCIT-CC-3, THANE, THANE

ITA 2224/MUM/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Feb 2026AY 2013-14
Section 132Section 153ASection 68Section 69D

genuineness of the lender.\n7. Before Assessing Officer, the assessee contended that the\nseized documents were merely promissory notes and did not\nconstitute hundi transactions. It was also contended that the\ndocuments did not bear the name of the assessee and the alleged\nborrowings were proposed transactions which ... present case, the\nassessee contends that the documents name only two parties and\nreflect proposed borrowings and do not contain endorsement\nfeatures typical of hundi transactions. We find that the\ncharacterization must depend on substance and surrounding\nevidence. In Vasupujya Filaments (para 25), the Co-ordinate\nBench examined similar alleged

MUKESH JAIN,INDORE vs. THE ACIT (CENTRAL)-2, INDORE, INDORE

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for both the assessment years are allowed

ITA 928/IND/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore21 Jan 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

For Appellant: CA Sh. S.N. AgrawalFor Respondent: Sh. Anup Singh, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 153CSection 69

assessee was not mentioned in full and no signature or PAN appeared on the seized papers, and that the essential characteristics of a hundi transaction were not satisfied. It was also argued that the assessee was not confronted with the statement of Shri Dilip Kumar Jain and no opportunity ... Officer in “Nayi Duniya” and there is nothing on record to demonstrate that he was engaged in the business of advancing cash loans or hundi transactions. No independent enquiry has been conducted by the Assessing Officer to establish the financial capacity of the assessee to advance such alleged loans

MUKESH JAIN,INDORE vs. THE ACIT (CENTRAL)-2, INDORE, INDORE

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for both the

ITA 927/IND/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Indore21 Jan 2026AY 2015-16
Section 153CSection 69

purely\non the basis of presumptions and surmises.\n7.5. We also observe that the seized documents do not satisfy the essential\ncharacteristics of a hundi transaction, as there is no evidence of a tripartite\narrangement involving drawer, drawee and payee, nor is there any\nunconditional order signed by the assessee ... violation of natural justice as the assessee was not confronted with the statement of Shri Dilip Kumar Jain. The essential characteristics of a hundi transaction were also not met.", "result": "Allowed", "sections": ["153C", "69", "115BBE", "271(1)(c)", "132"], "issues": "Whether additions made under Section 69 on the basis

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CHENNAI vs. MUTHULAKSHMI VELLAISAMY, TIRUPUR

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

ITA 610/CHNY/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai20 Jan 2026AY 2020-21
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 139(4)

wherein it was held therein that where a diary was\nseized in search of the premises of a third party allegedly containing entries\nof hundi transactions on behalf of various parties including the assessee, no\naddition could be made based on the said entries since the diary was neither\nfound

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CHENNAI vs. GNANAGURU LAVANYA, TIRUPUR

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue in ITA Nos

ITA 605/CHNY/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai20 Jan 2026AY 2020-21
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 139(4)

wherein it was held therein that where a diary was\nseized in search of the premises of a third party allegedly containing entries\nof hundi transactions on behalf of various parties including the assessee, no\naddition could be made based on the said entries since the diary was neither\nfound

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, TRICHY, INCOME TAX OFFICE, TRICHY vs. LIFE LINE AUTO FINANCE, KARUR

ITA 1630/CHNY/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai20 Jan 2026AY 2013-14
Section 101Section 132Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 153ASection 292C(1)Section 34Section 69A

wherein it was held therein that where a diary\nwas seized in search of the premises of a third party allegedly containing\nentries of hundi transactions on behalf of various parties including the\nassessee, no addition could be made based on the said entries since the\ndiary was neither found

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CHENNAI vs. SHRI JAYA PRADEEP, CHENNAI

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

ITA 960/CHNY/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Dec 2025AY 2020-21
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153C

wherein it was held therein that where a diary was\nseized in search of the premises of a third party allegedly containing entries\nof hundi transactions on behalf of various parties including the assessee, no\naddition could be made based on the said entries since the diary was neither\nfound

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA, KOTA vs. MADAN MOHAN GUPTA, KOTA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 882/JPR/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur10 Nov 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI GAGAN GOYAL (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Aditya Kumar Garg, Ld. AdvFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Ojha, Ld. CIT
Section 132(4)Section 250Section 69A

transaction on right side of the cash book ignoring the fact that 3 Madan Mohan Gupta, Kota. the assessee failed to prove that the hundi transaction giving cash loan of Rs. 5,00,000/- is duly accounted for; and the CIT (A) did not examine the assessee’s unusual business

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(2), CHENNAI, CHENNAI vs. CHITRAVEL VETRIMARAN, CHENNAI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 905/CHNY/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Oct 2025AY 2019-20
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 153CSection 250Section 271D

wherein it was held\ntherein that where a diary was seized in search of the premises of a third party\nallegedly containing entries of hundi transactions on behalf of various parties\nincluding the assessee, no addition could be made based on the said entries since the\ndiary was neither found

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(2), CHENNAI, CHENNAI vs. CHITRAVEL VETRIMARAN, CHENNAI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 904/CHNY/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Oct 2025AY 2017-18
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 153CSection 250Section 271D

wherein it was held\ntherein that where a diary was seized in search of the premises of a third party\nallegedly containing entries of hundi transactions on behalf of various parties\nincluding the assessee, no addition could be made based on the said entries since the\ndiary was neither found

DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE 3(1),, HYDERABAD vs. UNITED DEVELOPER, HYDERABAD

In the result, the cross-objections file d by the assessee firm in A

ITA 453/HYD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad24 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Us As A Cross-Objector. Since Common Issues Are Involved In The Captioned Appeals & Cross-Objections, Therefore, The Same Have Been Taken Up & Disposed Of By A Consolidated Order. We Shall First Take Up The Appeal Filed By The Revenue & The Cross- Objection Of The Assessee Firm For A.Y.2016-17 & The Order Therein Passed Shall Apply Mutatis Mutandis For The Purpose Of Disposing Of The Other Appeal & Cross-Objection.

Section 132Section 153C

upon the notings of hundi in the diary seized from the premises of a third party. The said noting's allegedly contained entries of hundi transactions on behalf of parties, including CO No.14 & 15/Hyd/2025 United Developer the assessee, whose names were written in abbreviated/code words. The Hon'ble High Court

DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(1), HYDERABAD vs. UNITED DEVELOPER, HYDERABAD

In the result, the cross-objections file d by the assessee firm in A

ITA 452/HYD/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad24 Sept 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Us As A Cross-Objector. Since Common Issues Are Involved In The Captioned Appeals & Cross-Objections, Therefore, The Same Have Been Taken Up & Disposed Of By A Consolidated Order. We Shall First Take Up The Appeal Filed By The Revenue & The Cross- Objection Of The Assessee Firm For A.Y.2016-17 & The Order Therein Passed Shall Apply Mutatis Mutandis For The Purpose Of Disposing Of The Other Appeal & Cross-Objection.

Section 132Section 153C

upon the notings of hundi in the diary seized from the premises of a third party. The said noting's allegedly contained entries of hundi transactions on behalf of parties, including CO No.14 & 15/Hyd/2025 United Developer the assessee, whose names were written in abbreviated/code words. The Hon'ble High Court

VASUPUJYA FILAMENTS,MUMBAI vs. DCIT-CC-3, THANE, THANE

In the result, all appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 883/MUM/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Aug 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: Ms. Simran Chavan &For Respondent: Shri Vivek Perampurna, CIT-DR
Section 131(1)(d)Section 132Section 143(3)Section 147Section 68Section 69CSection 69D

which negate its treatment as a Hundi: a) The transaction is strictly bilateral in nature and not tripartite, which is the essence of a Hundi transaction. b) The document is in the English language and not in any oriental or vernacular script, which is the traditional and customary form ... under: “We feel that one of the reasons for bringing s, 69D of the Act on the statute book is to cover the Hundi transaction in view of the wording of s. I of the Negotiable Instruments Act. Now considering the present transactions as pointed out already. we find that

VASUPUJYA FILAMENTS,MUMBAI vs. DCIT-CC-3, THANE, THANE

In the result, all appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 876/MUM/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Aug 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: Ms. Simran Chavan &For Respondent: Shri Vivek Perampurna, CIT-DR
Section 131(1)(d)Section 132Section 143(3)Section 147Section 68Section 69CSection 69D

which negate its treatment as a Hundi: a) The transaction is strictly bilateral in nature and not tripartite, which is the essence of a Hundi transaction. b) The document is in the English language and not in any oriental or vernacular script, which is the traditional and customary form ... under: “We feel that one of the reasons for bringing s, 69D of the Act on the statute book is to cover the Hundi transaction in view of the wording of s. I of the Negotiable Instruments Act. Now considering the present transactions as pointed out already. we find that

BANNARIAMMAN EDUCATIONAL TRUST,COIMBATORE vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 3(2), CHENNAI

ITA 3314/CHNY/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai14 Aug 2025AY 2021-22
For Appellant: Mr.Vikram VijayaraghavanFor Respondent: Mr.Shiva Srinivasan, CIT/DR
Section 12ASection 132Section 133ASection 143(2)Section 153CSection 250

{ "clean_text": "आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘बी’ यायपीठ, चेई।\nIN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL \n‘B’ BENCH: CHENNAI \n\n

BANNARIAMMAN EDUCATIONAL TRUST,COIMBATORE vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 3(2), CHENNAI

ITA 3311/CHNY/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai14 Aug 2025AY 2018-19
For Appellant: Mr.Vikram VijayaraghavanFor Respondent: Mr.Shiva Srinivasan, CIT/DR
Section 12ASection 132Section 133ASection 143(2)Section 153CSection 250

{ "clean_text": "आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, ‘बी’ यायपीठ, चेई।\nIN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL\n‘B’ BENCH: CHENNAI\nश्री एबी

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, TRICHY, TRICHY vs. NO 1 AUTO FINANCE, KARUR

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue in ITA Nos

ITA 658/CHNY/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai06 Aug 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.:656 To 658/Chny/2025 धनिाजरण वर्ज / Assessment Years: 2012-13, 2015-16 & 2018-19 Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, No.1 Auto Finance, Central Circle – 2, Vs. No.1, Tam Complex, Nrmp Street, Trichy Covai Road, Karur – 639 002. [Pan:Aahfn 3793 J] (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.:622 & 633/Chny/2025 धनिाजरण वर्ज / Assessment Years: 2012-13 & 2018-19 Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Help Line Motor Finance, Central Circle – 2, Vs. No.1, Tam Complex, Nrmp Street, Trichy Covai Road, Karur – 639 002. [Pan:Aaffh 3971 E] (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/Respondent) अपीलाथी की ओर से/Appellant By : Ms.E.Pavuna Sundari, Cit प्रत्यथी की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri.R.Venkata Raman, Ca & Shri.R.S.Lakshmi Narayana, Advocate सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 18.06.2025 घोर्णा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 06.08.2025

For Appellant: Ms.E.Pavuna Sundari, CITFor Respondent: Shri.R.Venkata Raman, CA &
Section 132Section 143(3)

wherein it was held that where a diary was seized in search of the premises of a third party allegedly containing entries of hundi transactions on behalf of various parties including the assessee, no addition could be made based on the said entries since the diary was neither found from

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, TRICHY, TRICHY vs. NO 1 AUTO FINANCE, KARUR

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue in ITA Nos

ITA 657/CHNY/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai06 Aug 2025AY 2015-16
Section 132Section 143(3)

wherein it was held that where a diary was seized in search of the\npremises of a third party allegedly containing entries of hundi transactions\non behalf of various parties including the assessee, no addition could be\nmade based on the said entries since the diary was neither found from

Showing 1–20 of 65 · Page 1 of 4