“unexplained cash credit”

BHAWNA KAPOOR,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CIRCLE-62(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri S Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumarsmt. Bhawna Kapoor Vs. Acit Prop M/S Manish Circle 62(1) Handicraft 1196, Main Delhi Bazar, Paharganj, New Delhi 110055 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Adxpk 3853 F Appellant .. Respondent

erred on facts and in law in treating the long-term capital gain of INR 33,97,009/- as unexplained cash credit u/s 68 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ['the Act'} despite the fact that the said long-term capital gains is on account of sale of long term

ITO WARD - 52(5), NEW DELHI vs. INDERPAL SINGH L/H OF LATE SHRI RAGHBIR SINGH, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the Department of Revenue is allowed

circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs.1,97,83,000/- made on account of unexplained cash credit u/s 68 of the I.T. Act, without appreciating the findings of the AO. 2. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleing the addition ... Departmental Representative submitted that Ld. CIT(A) erred in deleting additions of Rs.1,97,831/- made on account of unexplained cash credit u/s 68 of the Act, despite of the fact that assessee had introduced cash in his capital account which was proved bogus. 6. At the time of hearing

NEERAJ ,FARIDABAD vs. PR, CIT , FARIDABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Amitabh Shukla, Accountnat Member

income of the assessee under section 69A (though there were specific directions of the Pr. CIT was to consider the case as unexplained cash credit within the meaning of under section 68 of the Act) of the Act at Rs.32,76,780/- against the returned income of Rs.3 ... explain the deposits of Rs.29,67,900/- Therefore, the Assessing Officer is directed to charge the tax on the same considering as unexplained cash credit within the meaning of uls 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961...” Page 4 of 12 ITA Nos.928 and 929/Del/2025 6. The ld. Counsel

NEERAJ,FARIDABAD vs. ITO,WARD-2(1), FARIDABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Amitabh Shukla, Accountnat Member

income of the assessee under section 69A (though there were specific directions of the Pr. CIT was to consider the case as unexplained cash credit within the meaning of under section 68 of the Act) of the Act at Rs.32,76,780/- against the returned income of Rs.3 ... explain the deposits of Rs.29,67,900/- Therefore, the Assessing Officer is directed to charge the tax on the same considering as unexplained cash credit within the meaning of uls 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961...” Page 4 of 12 ITA Nos.928 and 929/Del/2025 6. The ld. Counsel

DCIT, CIRCLE- 19(1), DELHI vs. PASHUPATI ROAD CARRIER PVT. LTD., DELHI

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

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sudhir Kumardcit, Circle 19(1), Vs. Pashupati Road Carrier Delhi Pvt. Ltd., Room No. 221, 2Nd Floor, Plot No. 70A/47, Ground C.R. Building, Floor, Moti Nagar, I.P. Estate, New Delhi – 110 002 Rama Road Indl. Area, New Delhi – 110 045 (Pan: Aadcp8319H) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Sh. Baldev Raj, Ca & Sh. Manish Upneja, Ca Revenue By : Sh. Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, Sr. Dr. Date Of Hearing : 24.02.2026 Date Of Order : 20.03.2026 O R D E R Per Sudhir Kumar, Jm :

Accordingly, the assessment was completed by making an addition of Rs. 1,08,97,000/- u/s. 68 of the Act on account of unexplained cash credits. Aggrieved by the additions, the appellant has filed the appeal. 7.1 Now, countering the arguments of the AO, the appellant has made a detailed ... section 40A(3) of the Act. 7.2 Since the core issues involved is of addition made u/s. 68 on account 3 of unexplained cash credits in nature of cash deposit in the bank account, it is imperative to look upon the ratios laid down by the various Hon'ble Courts

INCOME TAX OFFICER, DELHI vs. GOVERDHAN TRANSPORT COMPANY PVT. LTD., DELHI

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

Revenue appealed against the CIT(A)'s order, which partly allowed the assessee's appeal. The original addition of Rs.6.66 crores was for unexplained cash credits under Section 68, related to share capital issued. The CIT(A) sustained an addition of Rs.30.42 lacs.", "held": "The Tribunal found that the shares

ALAINA BULLIONS PRIVATE LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE, GHAZIABAD

In the result, appeals of the Revenue in ITA No

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Amitabh Shukla, Accountnat Member [Assessment Year: 2017-18] M/S Alaina Buillions Private Assistant Commissioner Of Limited, Income Tax, Central Circle, 1St Floor, Panna Bhawan, Nel Ghaziabad, Room No.229, 2Nd Vs Gali, Sarafa Bazar, Meerut, Floor, Cgo-1, Hapur Chungi, Uttar Pradesh-250002 Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh-201002 Pan-Aanca8659D Appellant Respondent

trade tax returns were enclosed. Thus he submits that the sales credited in profit & loss account under no circumstances can be termed as unexplained cash credit, as the same have already been credited as revenue and confirmations of all the parties have been submitted. As regards, the statement

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, GHAZIABAD vs. ALAINA BULLIONS PRIVATE LIMITED, MEERUT

In the result, appeals of the Revenue in ITA No

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Amitabh Shukla, Accountnat Member [Assessment Year: 2017-18] M/S Alaina Buillions Private Assistant Commissioner Of Limited, Income Tax, Central Circle, 1St Floor, Panna Bhawan, Nel Ghaziabad, Room No.229, 2Nd Vs Gali, Sarafa Bazar, Meerut, Floor, Cgo-1, Hapur Chungi, Uttar Pradesh-250002 Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh-201002 Pan-Aanca8659D Appellant Respondent

trade tax returns were enclosed. Thus he submits that the sales credited in profit & loss account under no circumstances can be termed as unexplained cash credit, as the same have already been credited as revenue and confirmations of all the parties have been submitted. As regards, the statement

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, GHAZIABAD vs. ALAINA BULLIONS PRIVATE LIMITED, MEERUT

In the result, appeals of the Revenue in ITA No

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Amitabh Shukla, Accountnat Member [Assessment Year: 2017-18] M/S Alaina Buillions Private Assistant Commissioner Of Limited, Income Tax, Central Circle, 1St Floor, Panna Bhawan, Nel Ghaziabad, Room No.229, 2Nd Vs Gali, Sarafa Bazar, Meerut, Floor, Cgo-1, Hapur Chungi, Uttar Pradesh-250002 Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh-201002 Pan-Aanca8659D Appellant Respondent

trade tax returns were enclosed. Thus he submits that the sales credited in profit & loss account under no circumstances can be termed as unexplained cash credit, as the same have already been credited as revenue and confirmations of all the parties have been submitted. As regards, the statement

NARENDRA BANSAL,DELHI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRLCE -12(2), NEW DELHI

In the result, the Assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanasstt. Year : 2016-17 Narendra Bansal, Vs. Acit, Circle 12(2), A-61, Okhla Industrial Area, Delhi Phase-Ii, New Delhi – 110 020 C.R. Building, I.P. Estate, New Delhi – 2 [Pan: Ahdpb0964E) (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Sh. Ankit Kumar, Adv. Respondent By : Sh. Manish Gupta, Sr. Dr.

initio. 3. That the Ld. CIT(A) erred in upholding the addition of Rs. 1,00,00,000/- made by the AO as unexplained cash credit u/s. 68 of the Act in respect of loan received from M/s Ambarnuj Finance and Investments Pvt. Ltd., an RBI registered NBFC, even though ... interest payment made by the assessee. AO treated the sum of Rs. 1.00 crore received from Ambarnuj finance and Investments Pvt. Ltd. as unexplained cash credit and adding to the total income of the assessee, moreover AO also held that interest paid net of TDS amounting