“Section 36(1)(via)”

Section References (mined)Section 36Section 36(1)(via)69 judgments

The decision most relied on for Section 36(1)(via) is ITO v. Diza (255 ITR 573), cited in 42 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on Section 36(1)(via)

ITO v. Diza

255 ITR 573 · 2002 · High Court

citing judgments

For an addition under Section 68, the assessee must satisfactorily explain the source of depositors and their creditworthiness; mere receipt of funds via banking channels or furnishing particulars is not conclusive proof of genuineness.

Judgments citing Section 36(1)(via)

Dy CIT-1(3)(2), Mumbai vs. Maharashtra State Co-Operative Bank Limited, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed partly assessee is allowed partly whereas the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3916/MUM/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Aug 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail () Assessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Mr. Sushil LakhaniFor Respondent: Mrs. Riddhi Mishra, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 3Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(vii)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “D” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) AND SHRI SANDEEP

M/S the Maharashtra State Co. Op Bank Ltd., Mumbai vs. ITO-1(3)(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed partly assessee is allowed partly whereas the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3878/MUM/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Aug 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail () Assessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Mr. Sushil LakhaniFor Respondent: Mrs. Riddhi Mishra, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 3Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(vii)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “D” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) AND SHRI SANDEEP

Au Small Finance Bank Limited, Jaipur vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Jaipur-1

In the result both the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 203/JPR/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur28 Jul 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay Jhanwar, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri James Kurian, CIT

Section 115JSection 263Section 35ASection 36(1)(viia)

year of creation of the said provision as the year under consideration was the first year in which the deduction under Section 36(1)(via) become applicable on the Appellant. 15. Therefore, the purpose of netting off is not attracted in the present case and if netting off is done

Yes Bank Limited, Mumbai vs. DCIT - 2(2)(2), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue and assessee he appeals of the Revenue and assessee are allowed partly for statistical purposes

ITA 3501/MUM/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jun 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 2014-15 Dcit-2(2)(2), M/S Yes Bank Ltd., Room No. 545, 5Th Floor, 9Th Floor, Nehru Centre, Discovery Of Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, India, Dr. Ab Road, Worli, M.K. Road, Churchgate, Mumbai-400018. Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aaacy 2068 D Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2014-15 M/S Yes Bank Ltd., Dcit-2(2)(2), 9Th Floor, Nehru Centre, Room No. 545, 5Th Floor, Aayakar Discovery Of India, Dr. Ab Vs. Bhavan, Road, Worli, M.K. Road, Churchgate, Mumbai-400018. Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aaacy 2068 D Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. Yogesh Thar/Ms. Ayushi ModaniFor Respondent: Dr. Kishor Dhule, DR

Section 14ASection 251

branches within the meaning of section Appellant had rural branches within the meaning of section Appellant had rural branches within the meaning of section 36(1) (via) when all the relevant details were available on 36(1) (via) when all the relevant details were available on 36(1) (via) when

DCIT-2(2)(2), Mumbai vs. Yes Bank Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue and assessee he appeals of the Revenue and assessee are allowed partly for statistical purposes

ITA 3239/MUM/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jun 2023AY 2014-15

For Appellant: Mr. Yogesh Thar/Ms. Ayushi ModaniFor Respondent: Dr. Kishor Dhule, DR

Section 14ASection 251

Abhyudaya Coop Bank Ltd., Mumbai vs. Pr. CIT-1, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 623/MUM/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Mar 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Amarjit Singh, Hon'Bleabhyudaya Co-Op Bank Limited V. Pr.Cit -1 Ground Floor, K.K. Tower 3Rd Floor, Room No. 330 Abhudaya Bank Lane Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Off. G.D. Ambedkar Marg Mumbai - 400020 Parel Village, Mumbai – 400012 Pan: Aaaaa0300L (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Keshav Bhujale Department By : Ms. Sailaja Rai

For Appellant: Shri Keshav BhujaleFor Respondent: Ms. Sailaja Rai

Section 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 263Section 36(1)(via)Section 36(1)(viia)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (VIRTUAL COURT) “A” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

M/S. Corporation Bank, Mangaluru vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 2(1), Mangaluru

ITA 1109/BANG/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore15 Mar 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri George George K & Ms. Padmavathy S & Ita No.1680/Bang/2018 Assessment Year : 2015-16 & 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Ananthan, C.A &For Respondent: Shri Pradeep Kumar, CIT(DR)

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘C’ BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND MS. PADMAVATHY S

M/S Corporation Bank, Mangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-2(1), Mangalore

In the result, both the appeal filed by the assessee as well as Revenue are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1678/BANG/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore11 Jan 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri B.R Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri S. Ananthan, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Kumar, D.R

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)Section 36(2)Section 40a

ITA No.1678/Bang/2018 & ITA No.234/PAN/2018 Union Bank of India, Mumbai IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI

M/S. Syndicate Bank, Manipal vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1, Udupi

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee and the appeal of the revenue are treated as partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1884/BANG/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore27 Dec 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri George George K. & Shri B.R. Baskaranassessment Year : 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri S. Ananthan, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Kumar, D.R

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)Section 40

ITA No.1884/Bang/2018 & M/s. Canara Bank, Bangalore IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C’’ BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K