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

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

unexplained cash credits u/s 68 of the Act. “Section 68 - Cash credits: "Where any sum is found credited in the books

T.G. RANGANATH,BANGALORE vs. ACIT, BANGALORE

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2008-09

unexplained cash entries on 2/10/2007, 3/10/2008. 7/10/2007, 14/10/2007, etc. and made up his accounts. This is further substantiated by the fact that the opening balance as per both the cash book as on 1/10/2007 is the same. As these are related to cash credits and cash payments, which have been paid to various persons in cash within the month

T.G. RANGANATH,BANGALORE vs. DCIT, BANGALORE

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2008-09

unexplained cash entries on 2/10/2007, 3/10/2008. 7/10/2007, 14/10/2007, etc. and made up his accounts. This is further substantiated by the fact that the opening balance as per both the cash book as on 1/10/2007 is the same. As these are related to cash credits and cash payments, which have been paid to various persons in cash within the month

ACIT, BANGALORE vs. SRI. T.G. RANGANATH, BANGALORE

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2008-09

unexplained cash entries on 2/10/2007, 3/10/2008. 7/10/2007, 14/10/2007, etc. and made up his accounts. This is further substantiated by the fact that the opening balance as per both the cash book as on 1/10/2007 is the same. As these are related to cash credits and cash payments, which have been paid to various persons in cash within the month

ARJUN SHETTY,MANGALURU vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, TPS, CIRCLE - 1(1), MANGALURU

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri.Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri.Keshav Dubeyassessment Year : 2018-19 Arjun Shetty, Vs. Ito, 16-6-393/9 Shubha Krishna Building, Ward – Tps, Highland Falnir, Mangalore - 575002. Circle – 1(1), Pan :Ainps5294H Mangalore. Appellant Respondent Assessee By : S/Shri. Pranav G Ambekar, V. Narendra Sharma, Advocates Revenue By : Shri. Nilanjan Dey,Jcit(Dr)(Itat), Bangalore. Date Of Hearing : 15.09.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 29.10.2025

section 68 of the Act, it cannot be said to be an unexplained cash credit. The fictitious cash entry in the bank

AUGUST JEWELLERY PRIVATE LIMITED,BENGALURU vs. D.C.I.T., CIRCLE 1(1)(1), BENGALURU, BENGALURU

credit has arisen; No\ncash has entered the books; No jurisdictional foundation exists\nfor invoking Section 68. Accordingly, the addition made under\nSection 68 is contrary to the law, contrary to the facts on record,\nand contrary to the well-settled principles governing the scope\nof unexplained cash

AUGUST JEWELLERY PVT LTD,BENGALURU vs. D.C.I.T., CIRCLE 1(1)(1), BENGALURU, BENGALURU

credit has arisen; No\ncash has entered the books; No jurisdictional foundation exists\nfor invoking Section 68. Accordingly, the addition made under\nSection 68 is contrary to the law, contrary to the facts on record,\nand contrary to the well-settled principles governing the scope\nof unexplained cash

AUGUST JEWELLERY PVT LTD,BENGALURU vs. D.C.I.T., CIRCLE 1(1)(1), BANGALORE, BANGALORE

credit has arisen; No\ncash has entered the books; No jurisdictional foundation exists\nfor invoking Section 68. Accordingly, the addition made under\nSection 68 is contrary to the law, contrary to the facts on record,\nand contrary to the well-settled principles governing the scope\nof unexplained cash

M/S B B JEWELLERS AND FINANCE PVT LTD ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), BANGALORE

In the result, all the five appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri A. K. Garodia & Smt. Beena Pillai

unexplained cash credit under section 68 of the Act is improper and unwarranted under the facts and circumstances of the case

M/S B B JEWELLERS AND FINANCE PVT LTD ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), BANGALORE

In the result, all the five appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri A. K. Garodia & Smt. Beena Pillai

unexplained cash credit under section 68 of the Act is improper and unwarranted under the facts and circumstances of the case

M/S B B JEWELLERS AND FINANCE PVT LTD ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), BANGALORE

In the result, all the five appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri A. K. Garodia & Smt. Beena Pillai

unexplained cash credit under section 68 of the Act is improper and unwarranted under the facts and circumstances of the case

M/S B B JEWELLERS AND FINANCE PVT LTD ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), BANGALORE

In the result, all the five appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri A. K. Garodia & Smt. Beena Pillai

unexplained cash credit under section 68 of the Act is improper and unwarranted under the facts and circumstances of the case

M/S B B JEWELLERS AND FINANCE PVT LTD ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), BANGALORE

In the result, all the five appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri A. K. Garodia & Smt. Beena Pillai

unexplained cash credit under section 68 of the Act is improper and unwarranted under the facts and circumstances of the case

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

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Madhumita Roy

cash credit/ unexplained money for being taxed u/s. 115BBE of the Act having regard to the provisions of section 68

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

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Madhumita Roy

cash credit/ unexplained money for being taxed u/s. 115BBE of the Act having regard to the provisions of section 68

SHRI. SHANTHISAGAR CO OP CREDIT SOCIETY LIMITED,HUBLI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(1), HUBLI

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year: 2017-18

unexplained, especially when it is backed by verifiable records and cash books. 20.5 Further, reliance placed by the AO on section 68 of the Act is misplaced. In our considered view the provision of section 68 of the Act is invoked only when the source of credit

BMM ISPAT LIMITED,HOSPET vs. DCIT, BANGALORE

In the result, Revenue’s appeal for Assessment Year 2011-12 is dismissed

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri Jason P Boaz

unexplained cash credit under Section 68 of the Act. The assessee's appeal was dismissed by the learned CIT (Appeals

ACIT, CIRCLE-2(2)(1), BANGALORE vs. VASTIMAL BHIM RAJ SANCHETI, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri Soundararajan K

unexplained cash credits under section 68, in the light of evidence brought on record. The issue is being discussed, in the light