BharatTax.net
SearchITATHigh CourtsSupreme CourtPhrasesAI ResearchHistory

Filters

BharatTax.net

Free search engine for ITAT (Income Tax Appellate Tribunal) judgments across all 28 benches in India.

Quick Links

  • Search Judgments
  • Browse by Bench
  • Recent Judgments

About

BharatTax provides free access to Income Tax Appellate Tribunal orders for legal research and reference.

© 2026 BharatTax.net. All rights reserved.

169 results for “house property”+ Unexplained Cash Creditclear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi495Mumbai453Jaipur197Bangalore169Chennai119Hyderabad98Chandigarh90Cochin84Ahmedabad59Pune58Indore52Rajkot50Nagpur47Kolkata42Amritsar35Surat32Visakhapatnam27Guwahati27Agra24Lucknow20Raipur17Patna11Cuttack8Jodhpur7Allahabad7Varanasi6SC2Ranchi1Dehradun1Jabalpur1

Key Topics

Section 153A110Addition to Income89Section 13263Section 6860Section 6933House Property30Section 69A28Cash Deposit28Section 132(4)27

K.G. KRISHNA,BANGALORE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), BANGALORE

ITA 310/BANG/2020[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Jun 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Smt. Suman Lunkar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Kumar, CIT(DR) (Written submissions) &
Section 153A

unexplained cash credit u/s 68 of the Act on the ground that the appellant has not proved the cash deposits made in the bank accounts. On proper appreciation of facts and law applicable, the cash deposits are duly explainable. The addition as made/ confirmed is wholly erroneous is to be deleted. Me appellant denies the liability to pay interest

K.G. KRISHNA,BANGALORE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 1(4), BANGALORE

ITA 309/BANG/2020[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Jun 2022AY 2009-10

Showing 1–20 of 169 · Page 1 of 9

...
Section 69B26
Section 153C25
Undisclosed Income19

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Smt. Suman Lunkar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Kumar, CIT(DR) (Written submissions) &
Section 153A

unexplained cash credit u/s 68 of the Act on the ground that the appellant has not proved the cash deposits made in the bank accounts. On proper appreciation of facts and law applicable, the cash deposits are duly explainable. The addition as made/ confirmed is wholly erroneous is to be deleted. Me appellant denies the liability to pay interest

K. G. KRISHNA,BANGALORE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 1(4), BANGALORE

ITA 307/BANG/2020[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Jun 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Smt. Suman Lunkar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Kumar, CIT(DR) (Written submissions) &
Section 153A

unexplained cash credit u/s 68 of the Act on the ground that the appellant has not proved the cash deposits made in the bank accounts. On proper appreciation of facts and law applicable, the cash deposits are duly explainable. The addition as made/ confirmed is wholly erroneous is to be deleted. Me appellant denies the liability to pay interest

K.G. KRISHNA,BANGALORE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), BANGALORE

ITA 311/BANG/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Jun 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Smt. Suman Lunkar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Kumar, CIT(DR) (Written submissions) &
Section 153A

unexplained cash credit u/s 68 of the Act on the ground that the appellant has not proved the cash deposits made in the bank accounts. On proper appreciation of facts and law applicable, the cash deposits are duly explainable. The addition as made/ confirmed is wholly erroneous is to be deleted. Me appellant denies the liability to pay interest

K.G. KRISHNA,BANGALORE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 1(4), BANGALORE

ITA 312/BANG/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Jun 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Smt. Suman Lunkar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Kumar, CIT(DR) (Written submissions) &
Section 153A

unexplained cash credit u/s 68 of the Act on the ground that the appellant has not proved the cash deposits made in the bank accounts. On proper appreciation of facts and law applicable, the cash deposits are duly explainable. The addition as made/ confirmed is wholly erroneous is to be deleted. Me appellant denies the liability to pay interest

K.G. KRISHNA,BANGALORE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 1(4), BANGALORE

ITA 308/BANG/2020[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Jun 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Smt. Suman Lunkar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Kumar, CIT(DR) (Written submissions) &
Section 153A

unexplained cash credit u/s 68 of the Act on the ground that the appellant has not proved the cash deposits made in the bank accounts. On proper appreciation of facts and law applicable, the cash deposits are duly explainable. The addition as made/ confirmed is wholly erroneous is to be deleted. Me appellant denies the liability to pay interest

SRI. GIRISH MALLESH,BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE-6(2)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 837/BANG/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore19 Dec 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri V. Srinivasan, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Ashwin D Gowda, D.R
Section 115BSection 142Section 143Section 250Section 271ASection 44ASection 68

house property and other sources. The assessee has been maintaining books of account for the business carried on and the same is also subject to audit u/s 44AB of the Act. 2.2 For the year under appeal, the assessee e-filed his return of income on 27/10/2017 declaring a total loss of Rs.25,25,971/- from the aforesaid sources

SRI. GIRISH MALLESH,BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE-6(2)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 836/BANG/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore19 Dec 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri V. Srinivasan, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Ashwin D Gowda, D.R
Section 115BSection 142Section 143Section 250Section 271ASection 44ASection 68

house property and other sources. The assessee has been maintaining books of account for the business carried on and the same is also subject to audit u/s 44AB of the Act. 2.2 For the year under appeal, the assessee e-filed his return of income on 27/10/2017 declaring a total loss of Rs.25,25,971/- from the aforesaid sources

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), BANGALORE vs. SHRI C J VISHWANTH , CHIKKAMAGALURU

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1894/BANG/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Nov 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri Guruswamy H, ITPFor Respondent: Shri Sumer Singh Meena, CIT-OSD-DR
Section 131Section 132Section 153A

unexplained cash credits was not proved to be transformed in the form of any undisclosed asset/income and that being so it cannot be said that the cash credits in the Bank Account would constitute Income chargeable to tax. 30. The judicial decisions relied upon by the AR are considered and found that both the sides of the Bank accounts being

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), BANGALORE vs. SHRI C J VISHWANTH , CHICKAMANGALUR

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1892/BANG/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Nov 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri Guruswamy H, ITPFor Respondent: Shri Sumer Singh Meena, CIT-OSD-DR
Section 131Section 132Section 153A

unexplained cash credits was not proved to be transformed in the form of any undisclosed asset/income and that being so it cannot be said that the cash credits in the Bank Account would constitute Income chargeable to tax. 30. The judicial decisions relied upon by the AR are considered and found that both the sides of the Bank accounts being

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE - 2 (3), BENGALURU vs. SHRI C J VISHWANTHA, CHICKAMANGALURU

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1891/BANG/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Nov 2021AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri Guruswamy H, ITPFor Respondent: Shri Sumer Singh Meena, CIT-OSD-DR
Section 131Section 132Section 153A

unexplained cash credits was not proved to be transformed in the form of any undisclosed asset/income and that being so it cannot be said that the cash credits in the Bank Account would constitute Income chargeable to tax. 30. The judicial decisions relied upon by the AR are considered and found that both the sides of the Bank accounts being

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), BANGALORE vs. SHRI C J VISHWANATH , CHIKKAMAGALURU

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1896/BANG/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Nov 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri Guruswamy H, ITPFor Respondent: Shri Sumer Singh Meena, CIT-OSD-DR
Section 131Section 132Section 153A

unexplained cash credits was not proved to be transformed in the form of any undisclosed asset/income and that being so it cannot be said that the cash credits in the Bank Account would constitute Income chargeable to tax. 30. The judicial decisions relied upon by the AR are considered and found that both the sides of the Bank accounts being

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), BANGALORE vs. SHRI C J VISHWANTH , CHIKKAMANGALURU

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1893/BANG/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Nov 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri Guruswamy H, ITPFor Respondent: Shri Sumer Singh Meena, CIT-OSD-DR
Section 131Section 132Section 153A

unexplained cash credits was not proved to be transformed in the form of any undisclosed asset/income and that being so it cannot be said that the cash credits in the Bank Account would constitute Income chargeable to tax. 30. The judicial decisions relied upon by the AR are considered and found that both the sides of the Bank accounts being

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), BANGALORE vs. SHRI C J VISHWANTH , CHIKKAMAGALURU

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1895/BANG/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Nov 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri Guruswamy H, ITPFor Respondent: Shri Sumer Singh Meena, CIT-OSD-DR
Section 131Section 132Section 153A

unexplained cash credits was not proved to be transformed in the form of any undisclosed asset/income and that being so it cannot be said that the cash credits in the Bank Account would constitute Income chargeable to tax. 30. The judicial decisions relied upon by the AR are considered and found that both the sides of the Bank accounts being

VISHWANATHAREDDY CHENNAREDDY,BANGALORE vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(2)(7), BENGALURU

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

ITA 900/BANG/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore01 Feb 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI (Accountant Member), SMT. BEENA PILLAI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Hemasundara Rao P., A.RFor Respondent: Shri Subramanian S., D.R
Section 250Section 251Section 68Section 69A

unexplained cash credit under section 68 of the Act in the books of the Assessee. The learned CIT (Appeals) completely erred in including the expenditure in the taxable income under Section 68 of the Act, a section that the learned Assessing Officer did not invoke. Moreover, the learned CIT (Appeals) failed to provide adequate justification for applying cash credit provisions

CHANDRA SHEKHAR ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), BANGALORE

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

ITA 863/BANG/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore19 Aug 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari (Accountant Member), Shri Soundararajan K. (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Ms. Pooja Maru, CAFor Respondent: Shri Kiran D., Addl. CIT-DR
Section 132Section 153ASection 68Section 69C

house property, income from construction business, income from contract work and income from travel business. The AO also treated the cash credits as unexplained

VEERANNA MURTHY RAGHAVENDRA DEEKSHITH,BENGALURU vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 6(2)(4), BENGALURU

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

ITA 1072/BANG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore18 Sept 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Ms. Lakshmi S., AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri.Chinmay Anand Jain, JCIT-DR
Section 115BSection 143(2)Section 234BSection 250Section 271A

unexplained cash credit just because cash was accepted during demonetisation which is against the intention of demonetisation which was not to penalise genuine business transactions in the facts and circumstances of the case. 7. Without prejudice, the Learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) erred in making an addition of Rs. 50,25,540/- without reducing the equivalent turnover

MR. BHASKAR JOSEPH,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD- 6(2)(2), BANGALORE

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

ITA 1737/BANG/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore07 Jun 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojariassessment Year: 2015-16

For Appellant: Sri Rajeev Nulvi, A.RFor Respondent: Sri Ganesh R. Ghale, A.R., Standing counsel for Revenue
Section 131Section 68

cash flow statement provided by the assessee the basis of his addition. 10. Section 44 AD of the Act reads as under: "44AD (1) Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in sections 28 to 43C, in the case of an eligible assessee engaged in an eligible business, a sum equal to eight per cent of the total turnover or gross

SMT. REHANA ABDUL JABBAR,MANGALURU vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), MANGALURU

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

ITA 309/BANG/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 Jul 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Narendra Sharma, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Nischal B., D.R
Section 234Section 24Section 45Section 54F

unexplained cash credits under the facts and in the circumstances of the appellant's case. 5. Without prejudice to the right to seek waiver with the Hon'ble CCIT/DG, the appellant denies herself liable to be charged to interest u/s. 234-B and 234-D of the Act, which under the facts and in the circumstances of the appellant

SANDEEP REDDY YARABAKA CHENCHU,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-7(1)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 941/BANG/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore10 Jan 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri George George K. & Shri Chandra Poojariassessment Year: 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri B.R. Sudheendra, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Nischal B., D.R
Section 143(3)Section 234BSection 250Section 69A

unexplained cash to bank account due to demonetization. Against this, assessee is in appeal before us. 3.3 The ld. A.R. submitted that assessee has been earning rental income from house property and consistently and continuously keeping huge amount of cash in hand so as to meet the unforeseen maintenance cost to be incurred by the assessee and this has been