← All Phrases

“real income theory”

Judicial DoctrinesCIT vs Shoorji VallabhdasCIT vs Shoorji Vallabhdas205 judgments

DE vs. THAN TRUST,VADODARAVS.THE ITO, WARD- EXEMPTION, VADODARA

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1729/AHD/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad09 Apr 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Shri Parin S Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Umesh Kumar Agarwal, Sr. D.R
Section 11Section 119(2)(b)Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 154Section 234A

Without prejudice to the above and in alternative, Ld. NFAC ought to have give direction to compute income on commercial principle and real income theory. 6. Charging of Interest u/s 234A, 234B, 234C are unjustified.” Devsthan Trust vs. ITO Asst.Year–2016-17 3. The assessee is a trust and registered

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 1, RAJKOT, RAJKOT vs. SHRI DEEPAK MOHANLAL PURSWANI, RAJKOT

ITA 665/RJT/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot13 Mar 2026AY 2022-23
For Appellant: Shri Mehul Ranpura, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. SR. DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 250

nhad allowed 'loss on embezzlement', though not an expenditure, as a deduction on the\nprinciple of real income theory. This theory is propounded more particularfy when there\nPage 16 of 35\nITA Nos.630 & 631 and 665/Rjt/2024\nDeepak Mohanlal Puruswani\nis no assistance in the form of law, so that

THE BOMBAY HINDU BURNING AND BURIAL GROUNDS COMMITTEE,MUMBAI vs. ITO EXE WARD 2(4), MUMBAI

In the result, the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 9324/MUM/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Mar 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI PAWAN SINGH (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

Section 10Section 11Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 154Section 254(1)

said disallowance of expenses which are exclusively and necessarily incurred for the object of the trust is against the real income theory. Relief Claimed The appellant trust, requests your good honor to quash the adjustment not permitted u/s 143(1)(a). III. Ground No 3 Without Prejudice to Ground

RAVI BANSILAL DARIRA,MUMBAI vs. CIRCLE 15(3)(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

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

ITA 5900/MUM/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jan 2026AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadav & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopalassessment Year : 2023-24 Ravi Bansilal Darira, Deputy Commissioner Of 10Th Floor, Income Tax, Supreme Serenity, Vs. Circle-15(3)(1), 16Th Road, Aayakar Bhavan, Khar Delivery S.O. Mumbai-400020. Mumbai-400052. Pan : Aahpd2499M (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Shri Vijay Jadhav For Revenue : Shri Annavaran Kosuri Date Of Hearing : 22-01-2026 Date Of Pronouncement : 28-01-2026 O R D E R Per Vikram Singh Yadav, A.M :

For Appellant: Shri Vijay JadhavFor Respondent: Shri Annavaran Kosuri
Section 143(3)

assessee-company. It was submitted that Form-26AS is only an information statement and cannot determine the taxability by itself and real income theory mandates taxation in the hands of the person, who actually earned and retained the income, in the present case, the company. It was submitted that

KAKINADA INFRASTRUCTURE HOLDINGS PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CIRCLE-2(1), HYDERABAD

ITA 1053/HYD/2025[2021-2022]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad21 Jan 2026AY 2021-2022
For Appellant: \nShri Naresh Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: MS Reema Yadav, Sr. AR
Section 270A

case and in law, the\ntransaction relating to sale of shares of Kakinada Seaports Limited\nshould not be chargeable to tax as per real income theory.\n5. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the\nincome arising out of the aforesaid voidable transaction, which\nsubsequently

SKYLINE DEVELOPERS,PUNE vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD4(50, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 709/PUN/2023[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Pune20 Jan 2026AY 2006-07

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.709/Pun/2023 Assessment Year : 2006-07

For Appellant: Shri Pramod S. ShingteFor Respondent: Shri Amit Bobde
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 80I

made in the books of account and further the deduction has been claimed u/s.80IB(10) of the Act. The Real Income principle or Real income theory is a foundational concept in income tax law that indicates that tax should be levied only on the income that has actually accrued

INTEGRATED SERVICE POINT LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CC-2(4), CHENNAI

Accordingly, the assessee's appeals in ITA Nos.1881, 1882,\nand 1883/Chny/2025 for A.Ys.2016-17, 2019-20, and 2022-23 are\nallowed

ITA 1883/CHNY/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Dec 2025AY 2022-23
For Appellant: Mr. Y. Sridhar, FCAFor Respondent: Mr. Bipin C.N, CIT
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 250

complete understanding of the seized material, preventing\narbitrary additions to the assessee's income. In particular, search\nassessments must adhere to the real income theory, and ignoring a\nholistic approach to seized records is arbitrary and legally\nimpermissible.\n114. The Gujarat High Court in the case Navjivan Oil Mills

INTEGRATED SERVICE POINT LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), CHENNAI

Accordingly, the assessee’s appeals in ITA Nos. 1881, 1882, and 1883/Chny/2025 for A.Ys. 2016-17, 2019-20, and 2022-23 are allowed

ITA 1882/CHNY/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Dec 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri Hon’Ble Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos.1881, 1882 & 1883/Chny/2025 िनधा;रण वष; /Assessment Years: 2016-17, 2019-20 & 2022-23

For Appellant: Mr. Y. Sridhar, FCAFor Respondent: Mr. Bipin C.N, CIT
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 134(4)Section 250

complete understanding of the seized material, preventing arbitrary additions to the assessee’s income. In particular, search assessments must adhere to the real income theory, and ignoring a holistic approach to seized records is arbitrary and legally impermissible. 114. The Gujarat High Court in the case Navjivan Oil Mills

INTEGRATED SERVICE POINT LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), CHENNAI

Accordingly, the assessee's appeals in ITA Nos.1881, 1882,\nand 1883/Chny/2025 for A.Ys.2016-17, 2019-20, and 2022-23 are\nallowed

ITA 1881/CHNY/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Dec 2025AY 2016-17
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 134(4)Section 250

complete understanding of the seized material, preventing\narbitrary additions to the assessee's income. In particular, search\nassessments must adhere to the real income theory, and ignoring a\nholistic approach to seized records is arbitrary and legally\nimpermissible.\n114. The Gujarat High Court in the case Navjivan Oil Mills

ACIT, CHENNAI vs. INTEGRATED SERVICE POINT LIMITED, ANNA NAGAR

Accordingly, the assessee’s appeals in ITA Nos. 1881, 1882, and 1883/Chny/2025 for A.Ys. 2016-17, 2019-20, and 2022-23 are allowed

ITA 1879/CHNY/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Dec 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri Hon’Ble Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos.1881, 1882 & 1883/Chny/2025 िनधा;रण वष; /Assessment Years: 2016-17, 2019-20 & 2022-23

For Appellant: Mr. Y. Sridhar, FCAFor Respondent: Mr. Bipin C.N, CIT
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 134(4)Section 250

complete understanding of the seized material, preventing arbitrary additions to the assessee’s income. In particular, search assessments must adhere to the real income theory, and ignoring a holistic approach to seized records is arbitrary and legally impermissible. 114. The Gujarat High Court in the case Navjivan Oil Mills

ACIT, NUNGAMBAKKAM vs. INTEGRATED SERVICE POINT LIMITED, ANNA NAGAR

Accordingly, the assessee's appeals in ITA Nos.1881, 1882,\nand 1883/Chny/2025 for A.Ys.2016-17, 2019-20, and 2022-23 are\nallowed

ITA 1876/CHNY/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Dec 2025AY 2019-20
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 250

complete understanding of the seized material, preventing\narbitrary additions to the assessee's income. In particular, search\nassessments must adhere to the real income theory, and ignoring a\nholistic approach to seized records is arbitrary and legally\nimpermissible.\n114. The Gujarat High Court in the case Navjivan Oil Mills

ACIT, NUNAGAMBAKKAM vs. INTEGRATED SERVICE POINT LIMITED, ANNA NAGAR

ITA 1874/CHNY/2025[2016]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Dec 2025
For Appellant: \nMr. Y. Sridhar, FCA
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 250

complete understanding of the seized material, preventing\narbitrary additions to the assessee's income. In particular, search\nassessments must adhere to the real income theory, and ignoring a\nholistic approach to seized records is arbitrary and legally\nimpermissible.\n114. The Gujarat High Court in the case Navjivan Oil Mills

ACIT, DELHI vs. PAWAN KUMAR BANSAL, DELHI

In the result, Appeal of the Revenue in ITA

ITA 4801/DEL/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Dec 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Amitabh Shukla

Section 153CSection 153DSection 69A

whereas no enquiry or investigation was made by the A.O. to prove the actual receipt of money and by applying the principal of real income theory deleted the addition. Thus, in the absence of any contrary material on record, brought by the revenue, we find no reason to interfere with

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. PAWAN KUMAR BANSAL, DELHI

In the result, Appeal of the Revenue in ITA

ITA 4800/DEL/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Amitabh Shukla

Section 153CSection 153DSection 69A

whereas no enquiry or investigation was made by the A.O. to prove the actual receipt of money and by applying the principal of real income theory deleted the addition. Thus, in the absence of any contrary material on record, brought by the revenue, we find no reason to interfere with

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. PAWAN KUMAR BANSAL, DELHI

In the result, Appeal of the Revenue in ITA

ITA 4799/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Amitabh Shukla

Section 153CSection 153DSection 69A

whereas no enquiry or investigation was made by the A.O. to prove the actual receipt of money and by applying the principal of real income theory deleted the addition. Thus, in the absence of any contrary material on record, brought by the revenue, we find no reason to interfere with

TRIPURA BAMBU AND CANE DEVELOPMENT CENTRE,DELHI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, EXEMP WARD 2(3), DELHI, DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2380/DEL/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri C. N. Prasad & Shri M. Balaganeshtripura Bambu & Cane Vs. Income Tax Officer, Development Centre, Exemption, Ward-2(3), Tripura Bhawan, Delhi Chanakyapuri, New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aaatt7449L

For Appellant: Shri D. C. Garg, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Kumar Arora, Sr. DR
Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 25

confirming action of the Assessing Officer in treating gross receipts amounting to Rs 1.26.27,851/- as income in violation of the principles of real income theory. 4. That ld National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, has grossly erred in law as well as on facts in confirming action

M/S ROBUST TRANSPORTATION PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 15(3)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4803/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

income from surfacing in its accounts. 13. On the legal side, the learned CIT(A) dealt with the assessee’s reliance on the real income theory. Referring to decisions such as State Bank of Travancore v. CIT and Morvi Industries Ltd. v. CIT, he observed that where under the mercantile ... response of recipient entities to departmental notices under section 133(6) cast a serious shadow on the assessee’s version; (iii) the real income theory did not assist the assessee; and (iv) the Assessing Officer had rightly computed notional interest at 8% on the amount

DCIT, CIRCLE-1, MUZAFFARPUR vs. M/S ASHA REALTY DEVELOPERS PVT LTD, MUZAFFARPUR

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 10/PAT/2021[2015-16]Status: HeardITAT Patna09 Dec 2025AY 2015-16
For Appellant: Shri G.P. Tulsiyan, ARFor Respondent: Shri Md. AH Chowdhary, DR

percentage completion basis on accrual basis.\n\n4. The accounting entries at S.NO:03 & 04. shall uphold the MATCHING CONCEPT and\nalso the REAL INCOME theory.\n\n5. No part of the revenue shall escape over the whole period of the project, as the\nprogressive revenue recognitions over year aggregated together

ERIS LIFESCIENCES LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. NFAC, DELHI (PRESENT JURISDICTION- THE DY. CIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1)), AHMEDABAD

In the result, for assessment year 2022-23, the appeal of the Department is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 915/AHD/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad09 Dec 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Respondent by: Shri R P Rastogi, CIT-DR & Shri Abhijit, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Shri R P Rastogi, CIT-DR & Shri Abhijit, Sr. DR
Section 14ASection 36(1)(va)Section 37(1)Section 43BSection 80

there is no express bar in section 115JB excluding indexation (iv) denying indexation leads to taxation of unreal income, contrary to the real income theory recognised by the Supreme Court in CIT v. Shoorji Vallabhdas & Co. (1962) 46 ITR 144 (SC); and (v) specific provisions governing capital gains override

ERIS LIFESCIENCES LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. NFAC, DEHI (PRESENT JURISDICTION- THE DY. CIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

Appeal are dismissed

ITA 914/AHD/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad09 Dec 2025AY 2021-22
For Appellant: Shri Vartik Choksi, ARFor Respondent: Shri R P Rastogi, CIT-DR & Shri Abhijit, Sr. DR
Section 14ASection 36(1)(va)Section 37(1)Section 43BSection 80

nthere is no express bar in section 115JB excluding\nindexation\n(iv)\ndenying indexation leads to taxation of unreal income,\ncontrary to the real income theory recognised by the Supreme Court\nin CIT v. Shoorji Vallabhdas & Co. (1962) 46 ITR 144 (SC); and\n(v)\nspecific provisions governing capital gains

Showing 1–20 of 205 · Page 1 of 11

...