“addition u/s 68”

Cash Credits & Unexplained ItemsSection 68Section 682,598 judgments

The decision most relied on for addition u/s 68 is CIT v. Lovely Exports (P) Ltd. (216 CTR 195), cited in 854 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on addition u/s 68

CIT v. Lovely Exports (P) Ltd.

216 CTR 195 · 2008 · Supreme Court

854

citing judgments

If an assessee company receives share application money from alleged bogus shareholders and provides their details to the Assessing Officer, no addition can be made under Section 68 in the company's hands; the Department must proceed against the shareholders by reopening their individual assessments.

CIT v. Divine Leasing & Finance Ltd.

299 ITR 268 · 2008 · High Court

426

citing judgments

The Assessing Officer cannot add share capital or share premium amounts if the assessee provides the identity and creditworthiness of the subscriber and establishes the genuineness of the transaction. The court may admit additional evidence under Rule 46A, such as the PAN identity of the creditor.

CIT v. Devi Prasad Vishwanath Prasad

72 ITR 194 · 1969 · Supreme Court

272

citing judgments

If there is an unexplained cash credit, the Assessing Officer can treat it as the assessee's income, even when the income is finalized on an estimation basis, without proving its specific source. The onus then shifts to the assessee to prove that the income represented by the cash credit has already been taxed.

CIT v. Dwarkadhish Investment (P) Ltd.

330 ITR 298 · 2011 · High Court

218

citing judgments

An assessee cannot be asked to explain the source of the source for cash credits, particularly share capital or share application money, once they have discharged the initial onus regarding the identity, genuineness of the transaction, and creditworthiness of the immediate investor.

1) CIT v. Sahibganj Electric Cables Pvt. Ltd. (

151 ITR 150 · 1985 · High Court

citing judgments

The assessee's burden under Section 68 to prove cash credits is discharged by establishing the identity of the creditor and the genuineness of the transaction; the assessee is not required to prove the creditor's source of funds or creditworthiness, as the department can use Section 131 for further investigation.

Jatia Investment Co. v. CIT

206 ITR 718 · 1994 · High Court

citing judgments

An addition under Section 68 for unexplained cash credits cannot be made when there is no actual cash credit or flow of funds, such as in cases of share swaps or notional credits.

Hastimal v. CIT

49 ITR 273 · 1963 · High Court

citing judgments

An assessee's duty regarding the creditworthiness of a creditor is limited to the transactions between them, and they are not required to investigate the ultimate source of the creditor's funds. If the genuineness of the transaction and the creditworthiness are established, no addition under Section 68 is permissible.

CIT v. Prameshwar Bohra

301 ITR 404 · 2008 · High Court

citing judgments

An amount already credited in the books of account in an earlier assessment year cannot be added again as an unexplained cash credit under Section 68 of the Income-tax Act in a subsequent assessment year.

Judgments citing addition u/s 68

Sumitra Surendra Gadodia, Mumbai vs. ITO 31(3)(4), Bandra, Mumbai

ITA 4519/MUM/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Dec 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Ms. Padmathy S. ()

Section 10(26)Section 10(38)Section 143(2)Section 44ASection 68

submissions and passing the order without providing cross examination, nor confronting statement of Mr. Sanjay Vora, hereby, violating the principles of natural justice. Addition u/s 68 of Rs.40,031 : 4. The Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition u/s 68 of Rs.40,031 towards sale of shares

Dhaval Vinod Gada, Pune vs. DCIT Circle-5, Pune

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1817/PUN/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune03 Dec 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2013-14 Dhaval Vinod Gada Dcit, Circle – 5, Pune 101, New Timber Market, Vs. Bhawani Peth, Pune – 411042 Pan: Anjpg4733A (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Nikhil S Pathak Department By : Shri A D Kulkarni Date Of Hearing : 26-11-2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 03-12-2025 O R D E R Per R.K. Panda, Vp:

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil S PathakFor Respondent: Shri A D Kulkarni

Section 131Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 271(1)(c)Section 40A(2)(b)Section 68

brother has been made by the Assessing Officer nor any action u/s 147 or 263 has been taken. He submitted that the addition u/s 68 of the Act in the instant case cannot be made since the assessee has not only explained the source but even the source ... source of the source of funds other than share capital money, share capital, share premium or any amount of such nature, therefore, no addition u/s 68 can be made. 12. We find some force in the above arguments of the Ld. Counsel for the assessee. It is an undisputed fact

Yashwant Raj Lalchand Bamboli, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer, WD-27(3)(5), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4373/MUM/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Dec 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail & Shri Prabhash Shankaryashwant Raj Lalchand V/S. Income Tax Officer, Ward – Bamboli बनाम 27(3)(5), 4Th Floor, Tower 7, Trimurti Building, 105-A, No. 6, Vashi Station N.G. Acharaya Marg, Complex, Mumbai –400703, Chembur, Mumbai - 400 071, Maharashtra Maharashtra स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aijpb5149A Appellant/अपीलार्थी .. Respondent/प्रतिवादी

For Appellant: Shri Prakash Jhunjhunwala,ARFor Respondent: Shri Swapnil Choudhary, (Sr.DR)

Section 10(38)Section 143(3)Section 68Section 69C

appeal are as under:- 1. On facts and circumstances of the case and in law, Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition u/s 68 of Rs.57,56,750/- of entire sale consideration of STT paid listed shares of M/s Surabhi Chemicals & Investments Ltd, on rejecting the appellant’s claim ... where the above addition is confirmed by them. Thus, orders of lower authorities are reversed. The ld. AO is directed to delete the addition u/s 68 of the act and allow assessee exemption u/s 10 (38) of the Act. Thus, ground no 2 & 3 of the appeals are allowed

Golden Realty, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer 19(1)(3), Matru Mandir Mumbai

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

ITA 1770/MUM/2024[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Dec 2025AY 2017-2018

Bench: Justice (Retd.) C. V. Bhadang & Shri Prabhash Shankargolden Realty V/S. Income Tax Officer– 19(1)(3), 617, 6Th Floor, Tardeo Air बनाम 220, 2Nd Floor, Matru Condition Market, Tardeo Mandir, Tardeo Road, Road, Mumbai – 400 034, Mumbai – 400 007, Maharashtra Maharashtra स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aaifg8857D Appellant/अपीलार्थी .. Respondent/प्रतिवादी

For Appellant: Shri Bhupendra Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Swapnil Choudhary, (Sr. DR)

Section 143(3)Section 68

Golden Realty, Mumbai 2. The grounds of appeal are as under: 1. Disallowance of Outstanding liability Rs. 1,37,10,000/-. 2. Addition u/s 68, Rs. 97,83,949/- for cash deposit Rs., 1,20,17,850 being unsecured loan. 3. Briefly stated facts of the case are that

ACIT, Chennai vs. Sri Balaji Educational Amd Trust Charitable Public Trust, Chenna

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee and that of the Department are dismissed

ITA 1471/CHNY/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai01 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri S. R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 1249/Chny/2025 िनधा$रण वष$ / Assessment Year: 2017-18 M/S. Sri Balaji Educational & Acit, Charitable Public Trust, Vs. Central Circle 3(4), No. 60, First Avenue, Chennai. Jai Durga Complex, Ashok Nagar, Chennai – 600 083. Tamil Nadu. (&'थ"/Respondent) [Pan: Aacts-1386-D] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.:1471/Chny/2025 िनधा$रण वष$ / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Acit, M/S. Sri Balaji Educational & Central Circle 3(4), Vs. Charitable Public Trust, Chennai. No. 60, First Avenue, Jai Durga Complex, Ashok Nagar, Chennai – 600 083. Tamil Nadu. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) [Pan: Aacts-1386-D] (&'थ"/Respondent) िनधा$)रती की ओर से/Assessee By : Shri. Y.Sridhar, Fca राज4 की ओर से /Revenue By : Ms. E. Pavuna Sundari, Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 08.09.2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 01.12.2025

For Appellant: Shri. Y.Sridhar, FCAFor Respondent: Ms. E. Pavuna Sundari, CIT

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 245D(4)Section 250

record. In the instant case, the assessee has admitted the receipts as sales and offered for taxation. The assessing officer made the addition u/s 68 as unexplained cash credit of the same amount which was accounted in the books as sales. In this regard, it is worthwhile to look into

M/S. Sri Balaji Educational and Charitable Public Trust, Chennai vs. ACIT, Central Circle-3(4), Chennai

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee and that of the Department are dismissed

ITA 1249/CHNY/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai01 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri. Y.Sridhar, FCAFor Respondent: Ms. E. Pavuna Sundari, CIT

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 245D(4)Section 250

M/S Parasnath Fuels (P) Ltd., Dehradun vs. DCIT, Dehradun

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 213/DDN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun28 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Manish Agarwalparasnath Fuels Pvt. Ltd., The Dcit, Circle 1(1), 28 Feet Road, Dehradun Vikas Nagar, Vs Dehradun - 248198 Pan-Aaicp2190D Assessee Revenue Assessee By Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Adv., Shri Somil Agarwal, Adv. Revenue By Sh. Amar Pal Singh, Jcit Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 11.09.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 28.11.2025 Order Per Manish Agarwal, Am, This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appellate Centre [Cit(A), In Short], Dated 08.10.2024 In Appeal No. Nfac/2016-17/10104734 Arising Out Of The Order Passed U/S 147 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act’) Dt. 08.10.2024 For Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. The Assessee Has Raised Following Grounds Of Appeal: 1. That Having Regard To The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, Assumption Of Jurisdiction In Initiating The Proceedings U/S 147 & Passing The Impugned Order U/S 147/144B & That Too Without Complying With Mandatory Conditions U/S 147 To 151A Parasnath Fuels Pvt.Ltd. Vs. Dcit

Section 115BSection 147Section 234ASection 68

lender companies were also filed. However, the AO in absence of their financial statements held the credits as unexplained and made the addition u/s 68 of the Act and further invoked the provisions of section 115BBE of the Act. As per ld. AR before ld. CIT(A), assessee sought time

Ashish Mansukhlal Gokani, Mithapur vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Delhi

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 483/RJT/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot28 Nov 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Sainiआयकरअपील सं. /Ita No.483/Rjt/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year : 2013-14 बनाम Ashish Mansukhlal Gokani Commissioner Of Income Tax Mithapur, Dist: Devbhoomi, (Appeals), / Dwarka (Guj) – 361345 National Faceless Assessment Vs [Mahesh N. Paun Advocate, Centre (Nfac), Income Tax Taxation Consultant, Shreeji Department, Delhi Chambers, 17-Nava Para, Near S.B.I. (Adb), Jam-Khambhaliya, Gujarat – 361305] "ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aappg2259N (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Mahesh Paun, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr. DR

Section 139Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 250(6)Section 271BSection 68

with huge demand of Rs. 4,84,315/ (2) Learned A.O. erred in law as well facts in making addition u/s 68 sum of Rs.70,38,117/- as unexplained income with regard to bank credits which made out of normal course of business and initiate the separately penalty proceeding u/s

Mrs. Archana Anil Chechani, Jalna vs. ACIT Central Circle-1, Aurangabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1203/PUN/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 Nov 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: N O N EFor Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar

Section 132Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 254Section 68

observing as under : “4.2 I have considered the material placed before me. Brief facts of the case are that the Ld. AO made addition u/s 68 of Rs. 15,00,000/- in respect of the cash deposited in the bank account of the appellant. The appellant has contended that ... addition made u/s. 68 at Rs. 1500000/- for cash deposited in bank. The learned Assessing Officer is not justified in making addition u/s. 68 at Rs.1500000/-, the cash has deposited by my father-in-law from cash available with him in individual and as karta

Vivek Varma, Mumbai vs. ITO-41(4)(4) Erstwhile ITO -31(1)(9), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee stands allowed

ITA 5171/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Choudhryvivek Varma Ito - 41(4)(4), Mumbai (Erstwhile Ito – 26, Kytes India, Om Heera 31(1)(9), Mumbai. Panna Oshiwara Link Road, Vs. Andheri (West), Mumbai – 8Th Floor, Kautilya 400102. Bhavan, Mumbai – 400051. Pan: Adxpv5617Q (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Rahul HakaniFor Respondent: Shri Praveen K. Srivastav, Sr. DR

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 250Section 271ASection 68

relevant details in order to show that most of things purchased were of lady’s item. Alternatively, the Assessee has claimed that the addition u/s 68 of the Act, in absence of books of account is unsustainable. 9. This Court observe from the record that admittedly the Assessee ... cash credit is recorded in the said books of account. Since the credits have not been recorded in the books of account, the addition u/s 68 of the Act is not valid. As the appellant is found to be in possession of the said amount of money

Shri Rakesh Arora, Delhi vs. ITO Ward-30(8), Delhi

In the result, Ground no. 3 as raised by the assessee deserves to be allowed and the impugned addition cannot be sustained

ITA 2159/DEL/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Nov 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri M. Balaganesh[Assessment Year: 2012-13] Sh. Rakesh Arora Ito C-4, 4123 Ward- 30 (8) Vasant Kunj, Vs Delhi Delhi-110070 Pan No.Aaepa727P Appellant Respondent Appellant By Sh. Lalit Mohan, Ca Respondent By Sh. Ajay Kumar Arora, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 23.09.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 28.11.2025

Section 147Section 148Section 69Section 69A

Shreyas International. It has further been stated that assessment of M/s Shreyas International was also completed for the AY 2012-13 wherein addition u/s 68 of the Act has been made in respect of the cash credits. It has thus been held that the entire friendly loan given

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi vs. Manoj Kumar Bansal, Delhi

In the result the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1041/DEL/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Nov 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Sudhir Kumar & Shri Manish Agarwalassessment Year: 2019-20 Assistant Commissioner Of Vs. Manoj Kumar Bansal, 401 Income Tax Room No. New Delhi House, 27 Barakhamba 261-A 2Nd Floor F-2 Ara Road Delhi 110001 Centre, New Delhi- 110055 Pan No.Aahpb3143F (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 69Section 69ASection 69C

justified 15: The case of the appellant is squarely covered by the judgement of Delhi ITAT in the matter of was held that "Addition u/s 68 Boous loans identity genuineness and creditworthiness of the RR Carwell Pvt. Ltd. Versus The DCIT. Central Circled. New Delhi - 2022 (3) TMI 67 wherein

Atul Jindal, Ludhiana, Punjab vs. DCIT Circle-6 Ldh Current Jao ITO, Ward-1(5), Ludhiana, Punjab

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 377/CHANDI/2025[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh27 Nov 2025AY 2014-2015

Bench: This Tribunal. 3. Briefly, The Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Is An Individual Engaged In The Business Of Import & Trading Of Copper-Based Products Through His Proprietorship Concern, Usha Impex. The Assessee Filed The Return Of Income On 29.09.2014 Declaring Total Income Of Rs.42,83,680/-.

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardhan, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 68

wherein it has been held that when identity is proved, transaction is routed through banking channels, and the amount is repaid, addition u/s 68 is unjustified. 6. Per contra, the Ld. DR supported the orders of the lower authorities and submitted that the assessee failed to file a satisfactory explanation

Income Tax Officer, New Libra Kothi, Railway Road, Sirhind vs. Bhagwan Dass, Amloh Road, Mandi Gobindgarh

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1025/CHANDI/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh27 Nov 2025AY 2021-22

For Respondent: Shri Tej Mohan Singh, Advocate

Section 115BSection 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(vii)Section 68

point-wise manner, the summarized details of which are as follows: 7.1 Ground No.1- Ld. AR submitted that the AO made an addition u/s 68 of Rs. 24,82,734/- on account of unexplained creditors. Section 68 addition is unsustainable, relates to old balances, not current credits. Reference is made

DCIT, Central Circle-8, Delhi, Jhandewalan vs. Sanjay Sales Agency, Fatehpuri, Delhi

In the result, Appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 963/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 115BSection 132Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 68

stock while computing business income. Any would result into a double addition, which can never be considered as appropriate. Therefore, this is a addition u/s 68 without corresponding reduction in the sales figure and increase in closing stock figure case where books of accounts have been considered and complete, adequate ... Assessing Officer u/s 68 of Income Tax Act has already been considered and included in the sales figures of the appellant. Making another addition u/s 68 of the Income Tax Act for the same amount would result double addition. The trading results of the appellant cannot be doubted firstly because

Income Tax Officer-4(1), Raipur, Civil Lines vs. Smita Mukesh Kedia, Raipur

ITA 451/RPR/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur26 Nov 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No: 451/Rpr/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" Assessment Year: 2019-20)

For Appellant: Shri G. S. Agrawal, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR

Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 250Section 44ASection 69C

held that the AO ought to conduct an independent enquiry & bring some conclusive evidence to prove that transaction is non-genuine before king addition u/s 68 of the Act. However, the AO has not done so. The AO has made addition on the basis of presumption only ... conduct independent enquiry and to bring some conclusive evidence and to prove that the impugned transactions are non- genuine before making the addition u/s 68 of the Act. However, the Ld. AO has not done so, therefore, the addition made are not on the basis of facts and evidence

M/S Blooms Realators & Hospitality Pvt. Ltd., Lucknow vs. Income Tax Officer-1(4), Lucknow

ITA 586/LKW/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow26 Nov 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. Kul Bharat & Sh. Nikhil Choudharya.Y. 2010-11 M/S Blooms Realators & Hospitality Vs. Income Tax Officer, Pvt. Ltd, B-1/66, Vivek Khand, 1-(4), Lucknow Gomti Nagar, Lucknow Pan: Aadcb6111H (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Sh. Rakesh Garg, Advocate Revenue By: Sh. R.K. Agarwal, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 28.08.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 26.11.2025 O R D E R Per Nikhil Choudhary, A.M.: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Orders Of The Ld. Cit(A)- Lucknow Dated 30.03.2015, Wherein The Ld. Cit(A) Has Dismissed The Appeal Of The Assessee Against The Orders Of The Assessing Officer Under Section 143(3) For The A.Y. 2010-11 Passed On 30.03.2013. The Grounds Of Appeal Are As Under: - “1. Because The Findings Recorded By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) That The Asasesse Has Failed To Discharge The Onus To Establish The Identity, Credit Worthiness Of Share Holder Company & Genuineness Of The Transaction Are Wholly Perverse Finding. 2. Because The Assessee During The Assessment Proceeding As Well As Before The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Has Filed The Documents Share Application Form, Certificate Of Incorporation, Acknowledgement Of Itr, Bank Statements & Copies Of Pan Card Of Share Holders Company. These Documents Are Sufficient To Establish The Identity, Credit Worthiness & Genuineness Of The Transaction. 3. Because It Is Well Settled Law That A Person, Making Investment In Share Capital Is Best Judge Regarding His Investment. The 9 Share Holder Companies On Their Own Have Made Investment In The Appellant Company. The Wrong Decision Of The Investor Cannot Be A Basis For Making Addition U/S 68 Of The Income Tax Act.

For Appellant: Sh. Rakesh Garg, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. R.K. Agarwal, CIT DR

Section 143(3)Section 68

companies on their own have made investment in the appellant company. The wrong decision of the investor cannot be a basis for making addition u/s 68 of the Income Tax Act. 1 M/s Blooms Realators & Hospitality Pvt. Ltd. A.Y. 2010-11 4. Because the Apex Court had repeatedly held that

Aesha Ashishbhai Shah Legal Heir and Wife of Late Ashish Sumatibhai Shah, Ahmedabad vs. The ITO, Ward-1(2)(1) Previously Ward-5(3)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1480/AHD/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad26 Nov 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Divyang Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhijit, Sr DR

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 244ASection 250Section 40Section 68

Additions were made on account of interest u/s 244A, disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia), disallowance of bad debts and addition u/s 68 of the Act. The assessee’s appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) was dismissed on 24.10.2017. The matter then travelled to the Tribunal. Vide order dated ... u/s 244A 2,18,358/- ii. Disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia) 1,71,801/- iii. Disallowance of Bad Debts 4,50,000/- iv. Addition u/s 68 22,91,000/- 6. Aggrieved, the assessee filed appeal before the Ld. CIT(A), who confirmed the disallowances u/s

ACIT Central Circle 3(2), Mumbai vs. Greenscape Developers Private Limited, Navi Mumbai

ITA 4594/MUM/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Nov 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Shri Mani Jain and Prateek Jain, CAFor Respondent: Shri Swapnil Choudhary, Sr. DR

Section 133ASection 68

INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL 'G' BENCH ON 06.11.2025 Name of assessee AY ITAT No. Issues Amount(in Rs.) 2012-13 3698/MUM/2025 Addition u/s 68 on account of unsecured loan 12,00,00,000 Greenscape Developers Private limited 2014-15 4593/MUM/2025 Addition u/s 68 on account of unsecured loan ... Disallowance of Interest 2461059 13,05,61,059 2015-16 4594/MUM/2025 Addition u/s 68 on account of unsecured loan 4,00,50,000 4,00,50,000 2016-17 4675/MUM/2025 Addition u/s 68 on account of unsecured loan 6,36,50,000 6,36,50,000 2017-18 4687/MUM/2025 Addition

Quantum Real Estate & Property Development India Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer, WD-11(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 4591/MUM/2025[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Nov 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain& Shri Prabhash Shankara.Ys: 2009-10

Section 133(6)Section 250Section 68

relates to challenging the order of Ld. 2 Quantum Real Estate & Property Development Ind Pvt Ltd., Mumbai. CIT(A) in sustaining the addition u/s 68 of the Act, therefore we have decided to adjudicate these grounds through the present consolidated order. 4. We have heard the counsels for both ... forfeiture of advance. However, the revenue authorities considered the soaid advance of Rs. 1,55,00,000/- as accommodation entry and made addition u/s 68 of the Act. 8. During course of assessment and first appeal, the assessee had furnished the copies of Ledger account, Confirmation of account, PAN details