← All Phrases

“Section 132(44)”

Section References (mined)Section 132Section 132(44)7 judgments

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1), CHENNAI, CHENNAI vs. M/S RADAAN MEDIA WORKS INDIA LIMITED, TEYNAMPET

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2136/CHNY/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai10 Feb 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2136/Chny/2025 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2015-16 V. Acit, M/S Radaan Media Works Central Circle 2(1), India Limited, Chennai-600034 14 Jayammal Road, Chennai -600018 [Pan: Aabcr3815L] (अपीलाथ"/Assessee) (""यथ"/Respondent)

Section 131Section 132Section 132(44)Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 153CSection 69C

आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, ‘सी’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘C’ BENCH: CHENNAI "ी मनु कुमार

ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(4) MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. KALYANEE FORTUNE CONSTRUCTIONS, MUMBAI

In the result, all the above appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 5779/MUM/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Dec 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: Shri Neelkanth Khandelwal, ARFor Respondent: Ms. Kavitha Kaushik, (Sr. DR)
Section 131Section 132(1)Section 133ASection 143(3)

third party search but not belonging to the appellant, this presumption will not be applicable unless corroborated by other evidence. Presumption available under section 132(44) can be drawn against the person in whose case search is authorized and from whose possession or control books of account, diary or documents

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , MUMBAI vs. KALYANEE FORTUNE CONSTRUCTIONS, MUMBAI

In the result, all the above appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 4445/MUM/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: Shri Neelkanth Khandelwal, ARFor Respondent: Ms. Kavitha Kaushik, (Sr. DR)
Section 131Section 132(1)Section 133ASection 143(3)

third party search but not belonging to the appellant, this presumption will not be applicable unless corroborated by other evidence. Presumption available under section 132(44) can be drawn against the person in whose case search is authorized and from whose possession or control books of account, diary or documents

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, HUBBALLI vs. SHRI KRISHNA MOHAN KALBURGI, HUBBALLI

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are partly allowed for both the\nPronounced in the open court on the date mentioned on the caption page

ITA 1136/BANG/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore13 Aug 2025AY 2018-19
Section 10Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 153C

{ "clean_text": "IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL\n\"A\" BENCH : BANGALORE\nBEFORE SHRI LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER\nAND

PRIYANSI CORPORATION,DIST RAJKOT vs. DCIT, CC-1, RAJKOT, RAJKOT

ITA 408/RJT/2023[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot30 May 2025AY 2021-22
Section 143(3)Section 250

contained certain jottings. The Tribunal held that the jottings in diary neither\nrepresented books of account nor any document and, therefore, presumption under section 132(44) was\nnot available and the addition made on the basis of the said jottings was deleted.\n•\nIn the Case Of MV Mathew ... contained certain jottings. The Tribunal held that the jottings in diary neither\nrepresented books of account nor any document and, therefore, presumption under section 132(44) was\nnot available and the addition made on the basis of the said jottings was deleted.\n•\nIn the Case Of MV Mathew

CHAMPALAL COMPANY,GANDHIDHAM vs. DCIT, CC-1, RAJKOT, RAJKOT

In the result, all these appeals filed by the different assessees, are allowed for\nstatistical purposes

ITA 405/RJT/2023[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot30 May 2025AY 2021-22
Section 143(3)Section 250

contained certain jottings. The Tribunal held that the jottings in diary neither\nrepresented books of account nor any document and, therefore, presumption under section 132(44) was\nnot available and the addition made on the basis of the said jottings was deleted.\n•\nIn the Case Of MV Mathew

OSWAL PETROCHEM,GANDHIDHAM vs. DCIT, CC-1, RAJKOT, RAJKOT

In the result, all these appeals filed by the different assessees, are allowed for\nstatistical purposes

ITA 402/RJT/2023[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot30 May 2025AY 2021-22
Section 143(3)Section 250

contained certain jottings. The Tribunal held that the jottings in diary neither\nrepresented books of account nor any document and, therefore, presumption under section 132(44) was\nnot available and the addition made on the basis of the said jottings was deleted.\n•\nIn the Case Of MV Mathew