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.

50 results for “depreciation”+ Unexplained Cash Creditclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai441Delhi316Chennai109Bangalore91Jaipur90Ahmedabad87Kolkata80Hyderabad50Pune29Chandigarh29Indore25Raipur25Cochin22Lucknow21Guwahati17Visakhapatnam16Rajkot16Surat15Amritsar14Nagpur13Agra7Allahabad7Jodhpur7Varanasi6Cuttack6Ranchi5SC4Patna4Panaji3Karnataka3Jabalpur1Telangana1Kerala1ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1

Key Topics

Addition to Income43Section 6842Section 143(3)27Section 4019Section 153A17Section 14816Search & Seizure16Disallowance15Section 143(2)14

RAJENDER REDDY GUNNA ,HYDERABAD vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-6, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal ITA

ITA 1849/HYD/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad13 Aug 2025AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G

For Appellant: CA, P. Murali Mohan RaoFor Respondent: Shri Gurpreet Singh, Sr. AR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153A

unexplained cash credit of Rs.42,41,280/- towards additions made on account of undisclosed income from land transactions on the basis of ‘Lokpriya’ notebook found during the course of survey. Accordingly, ground no.6 of the assessee is allowed. 56. The next issue that came-up for consideration from ground no.7 of assessee’s appeal is, addition towards donation from undisclosed

RAJENDER REDDY GUNNA ,HYDERABAD vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-6, HYDERABAD

Showing 1–20 of 50 · Page 1 of 3

Depreciation14
Unexplained Cash Credit14
Section 13213
ITA 1848/HYD/2019[2007-8]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad13 Aug 2025
For Appellant: CA, P. Murali Mohan RaoFor Respondent: Shri Gurpreet Singh, Sr. AR
Section 132Section 153A

unexplained cash credit. During the\ncourse of appellate proceedings also, in absence of\nsupporting documentary evidence filed by the assessee to\nsubstantiate his case, the learned CIT(A) has sustained the\naddition made by the Assessing Officer. He, therefore\nsubmitted that, the argument of the assessee that, the cash\nreceipts are pertains to Partnership Firm is an afterthought

RAJENDER REDDY GUNNA ,HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CENTRAL CIRCLE-6, HYDERABAD

ITA 1851/HYD/2019[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad13 Aug 2025AY 2007-08
For Appellant: CA, P. Murali Mohan RaoFor Respondent: Shri Gurpreet Singh, Sr. AR
Section 132Section 153A

unexplained\ninvestment in purchase of Flat held by assessee's son Mr.\nKrishna Chandra, though, there is no evidence that, the\nassessee has invested the same. Therefore, he submitted\nthat, the addition made by the Assessing Officer should be\ndeleted.\n44.\nSri Gurpreet Singh learned Sr. AR for the\nRevenue, on the other hand. supporting the order of the\nAssessing

RAJENDER REDDY GUNNA ,HYDERABAD vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-6, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal ITA

ITA 1847/HYD/2019[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad13 Aug 2025AY 2006-07
For Appellant: CA, P. Murali Mohan RaoFor Respondent: Shri Gurpreet Singh, Sr. AR
Section 147Section 153A

unexplained investment in purchase of flat held\nby son Sri Krishna Chandra though there is no evidence that the\nassessee has invested the same.\n7. For these and other grounds that may be urged, it is prayed that\nthe Hon'ble Tribunal may be pleased to allow the appeal.”\n38.\nThe first issue that came-up for consideration\nfrom ground

RAJENDER REDDY GUNNA ,HYDERABAD vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-6, HYDERABAD

ITA 1850/HYD/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad13 Aug 2025AY 2009-10
For Appellant: CA, P. Murali Mohan RaoFor Respondent: Shri Gurpreet Singh, Sr. AR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153A

unexplained investment in purchase of flat held\nby son Sri Krishna Chandra though there is no evidence that the\nassessee has invested the same.\n6. The learned CIT(A) though states that the AO has discussed the\nreasons elaborately in the assessment order failed to deal with\nthe submissions of the assessee both at the time of assessment\nand

ITO., WARD-16(1), HYDERABAD vs. PHOENIX INFRAVENTURES AND PROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED, HYDERABAD

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

ITA 867/HYD/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad24 Feb 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon’Bleassessment Year: 2022-23 The Income Tax Officer, Vs. Phoenix Infraventures & Projects Private Limited, Ward – 16(1), Hyderabad. Hyderabad. Pan No.Aafcp5499L. (Assessee) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri R. Mohan Kumar, Advocate Revenue By: Shri B. Bala Krishna, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 24.12.2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 24.02.2025

For Appellant: Shri R. Mohan Kumar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri B. Bala Krishna, CIT-DR
Section 139(1)Section 68

depreciation. During the course of assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer noticed that the current liability in terms of sundry creditors was increased to Rs.82,40,35,474/- when compared to previous year sundry creditors balance of Rs.37,646/-. Therefore, the Assessing Officer called upon the assessee to file relevant evidence and also to justify the increase in sundry creditors

SUPREME AGRO,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-3 (1), HYDERABAD

In the result, all the appeals of assessees are dismissed

ITA 121/HYD/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad11 Jan 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Narahari BiswalFor Respondent: Shri K.P.R.R. Murthy
Section 115BSection 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 234ASection 68Section 69B

unexplained credit taxed in the hands of the firm, in their respective hands. The appellants and the firm are different entitites and therefore needs to be taxed separately in their own hands especially when the nature is different and it is important to note that when the incriminating documents of Rs.70,00,000/ - pertaining to both the appellants were found

KANISHKA GUPTA,,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, all the appeals of assessees are dismissed

ITA 119/HYD/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad11 Jan 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Narahari BiswalFor Respondent: Shri K.P.R.R. Murthy
Section 115BSection 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 234ASection 68Section 69B

unexplained credit taxed in the hands of the firm, in their respective hands. The appellants and the firm are different entitites and therefore needs to be taxed separately in their own hands especially when the nature is different and it is important to note that when the incriminating documents of Rs.70,00,000/ - pertaining to both the appellants were found

RONAK GUPTA,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, all the appeals of assessees are dismissed

ITA 120/HYD/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad11 Jan 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Narahari BiswalFor Respondent: Shri K.P.R.R. Murthy
Section 115BSection 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 234ASection 68Section 69B

unexplained credit taxed in the hands of the firm, in their respective hands. The appellants and the firm are different entitites and therefore needs to be taxed separately in their own hands especially when the nature is different and it is important to note that when the incriminating documents of Rs.70,00,000/ - pertaining to both the appellants were found

GONUGUNTLA NIRMALA DEVI,ANANTAPUR vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 1, ANANTAPUR, ANANTAPUR

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

ITA 455/HYD/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad18 Jan 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Respondent: Shri Shakeer Ahamed, Sr.AR
Section 143(3)Section 23Section 23(1)(a)Section 68

depreciation on Plant & Machinery claimed by the appellant. 8. That the Ld.CIT(A) is not justified in confirming the addition of Rs.32,00,000/- made by the Assessing Officer treating cash deposits in the bank account as unexplained cash credits

ACIT., CIRCLE-5(1), HYDERABAD vs. PENNA CEMENT INDUSTRIES LIMITED, HYDERABAD

ITA 1084/HYD/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad21 Jan 2026AY 2018-19
For Appellant: Shri Sourabh Soparkar, Advocate Represented by Department : Dr. Narendra Kumar NFor Respondent: Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik, CIT-DR Date of Conclusion of Hearing : 11/11/2025
Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 14ASection 68Section 80Section 801ASection 80GSection 92C

credit as envisaged in section 68 of the Act. As a result ground no 5 is allowed. 7. In result, the appeal is allowed.” 6. The revenue aggrieved with the CIT(A) order has carried the matter in appeal before us. 7. We have heard the Ld. Authorised Representatives of both parties, perused the orders of the authorities below

ACIT., CIRCLE-5(1), HYDERABAD vs. PENNA CEMENT INDUSTRIES LIMITED, HYDERABAD

ITA 1083/HYD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad21 Jan 2026AY 2017-18
Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 14ASection 68Section 80Section 801ASection 80GSection 92C

credited in P&L\naccount and the records show that goods were sold to Lakshin\nInfradev from whom the disputed amount was received. Once the\nsources are reflected in the books there is no question of unexplained\ncredit as envisaged in section 68 of the Act. As a result ground no 5 is\nallowed.\n7. In result, the appeal

DCIT., CIRCLE-3(1) , HYDERABAD vs. SOUTH ASIAN CERAMIC TILES PRIVATE LIMITED, HYDERABAD

ITA 1228/HYD/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 Jan 2026AY 2022-23
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 68Section 69

depreciation. 3. Thereafter, the AO issued notices under section 143(2)/142(1) of the Act. 4. During the course of the assessment proceedings, it was observed by the AO that the assessee company had in its balance sheet disclosed “unsecured loans” to the tune of Rs.17,38,91,674/-. As the assessee company out of the total loans

ACIT, CC-3(1), HYDERABAD vs. LEPL PROJECTS LIMITED, VIJAYAWADA

The appeal of the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 345/HYD/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad22 Feb 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Shri K.C. Devdas, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr.K.J. Rao, CIT-DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 68

unexplained cash credit u/s 68 of the Act in the books of accounts. The findings of the Assessing Officer vide page 7 of its order is to the following effect : “1. Income from Contract Receipts : From the above discussion it is clear that assessee company is never able to explain the reasons for earning huge profit of Rs.117

ALTIUX INNOVATIONS PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CIRCLE-1 (1), HYDERABAD

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

ITA 1006/HYD/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad16 Jan 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Manjunatha, G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.1006 To 1008/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2020-21) Altiux Innovations (P) Ltd Vs. Dy. Commissioner Of Hyderabad Income Tax, Circle 1(1) Pan: Aalca9069R Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri Sai Sarikonda, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri B Bala Krishna, Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 09/01/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 16/01/2025 आदेश/Order

For Appellant: Shri Sai Sarikonda, CAFor Respondent: : Shri B Bala Krishna, DR
Section 144Section 270ASection 271ASection 32Section 68

unexplained cash credit which was nothing but loan taken from the Director as well Page 2 of 8 ITA Nos 1006 to 1008 of 2024 Altiux Innovations P Ltd as the disallowance of depreciation

ALTIUX INNOVATIONS PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CIRCLE- 1(1), HYDERABAD

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

ITA 1008/HYD/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad16 Jan 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Manjunatha, G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.1006 To 1008/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2020-21) Altiux Innovations (P) Ltd Vs. Dy. Commissioner Of Hyderabad Income Tax, Circle 1(1) Pan: Aalca9069R Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri Sai Sarikonda, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri B Bala Krishna, Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 09/01/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 16/01/2025 आदेश/Order

For Appellant: Shri Sai Sarikonda, CAFor Respondent: : Shri B Bala Krishna, DR
Section 144Section 270ASection 271ASection 32Section 68

unexplained cash credit which was nothing but loan taken from the Director as well Page 2 of 8 ITA Nos 1006 to 1008 of 2024 Altiux Innovations P Ltd as the disallowance of depreciation

ALTIUX INNOVATIONS PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD

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

ITA 1007/HYD/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad16 Jan 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Manjunatha, G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.1006 To 1008/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2020-21) Altiux Innovations (P) Ltd Vs. Dy. Commissioner Of Hyderabad Income Tax, Circle 1(1) Pan: Aalca9069R Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri Sai Sarikonda, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri B Bala Krishna, Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 09/01/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 16/01/2025 आदेश/Order

For Appellant: Shri Sai Sarikonda, CAFor Respondent: : Shri B Bala Krishna, DR
Section 144Section 270ASection 271ASection 32Section 68

unexplained cash credit which was nothing but loan taken from the Director as well Page 2 of 8 ITA Nos 1006 to 1008 of 2024 Altiux Innovations P Ltd as the disallowance of depreciation

VK WAREHOUSING ENTERPRISES,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CIRCLE-6(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee firm and the revenue are partly allowed for statistical purposes, in terms of our observations recorded hereinabove

ITA 737/HYD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad07 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G & Shri Ravish Soodआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.737/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2017-18) M/S. V K Warehousing Enterprises, Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Vs. Circle 6(1), Hyderabad. Hyderabad. Pan : Aakfv3288R (Appellant) (Respondent) आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.881/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2017-18) Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, M/S. V K Warehousing Enterprises, Circle 6(1), Hyderabad. Vs. Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri Rajesh Vaishnav, C.A. राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: Shri P. Dhivahar, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 22/12/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 07/01/2026

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh Vaishnav, C.AFor Respondent: Shri P. Dhivahar, CIT-DR
Section 143(2)Section 144Section 234BSection 271(1)(b)Section 40Section 69Section 69CSection 801B

depreciation of INR 3,11,24,473 under section(u/s) 37(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (the Act) , without proper verification of the relevant records and supporting documents. 4. The Hon’ble CIT(A) erred in sustaining the addition of INR 25,85,800 made by the Ld.AO u/s 69 of the Act, by treating the cash deposits

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ,CIRCLE-1(1) , TIRUPATI vs. VENKATA SWAMY RAVURI , CHITTOOR

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is allowed for\nstatistical purposes

ITA 257/HYD/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad17 Oct 2025AY 2017-18
For Appellant: Advocate Sashank Dundu
Section 143(3)Section 2Section 68

credits u/s\n68 r.w.s 115BBE of the I.T.Act, 1961 and added to the total income of the assessee and\nbrought to tax.\nAdditions 1:\nRs.10,25,104/-\nAs the above addition partakes the character of under-reporting of income, penalty is\ninitiated u/s 270A of the I.T.Act, 1961.\n7.1\nIt is evident from the above, that during the course

ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-15(1)., HYDERABAD vs. SRIDHAR REDDY JAGAN NAGARI SATYA., HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed”

ITA 1347/HYD/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad29 Jul 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year:2012-13 Sridhar Reddy Jagan Vs. Dy. C.I.T. Nagari Satya, Circle 15(1) Secunderabad Hyderabad Pan:Adapj3782D (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year:2012-13 A.C.I.T. Vs. Sridhar Reddy Jagan Circle 15(1) Nagari Satya, Hyderabad Secunderabad Pan:Adapj3782D (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Sri P. Murali Mohan, Ca Revenue By: Sri Rajendra Kumar, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing: 08/06/2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 29/07/2022 Order Per R.K. Panda, A.M These Are Cross Appeals. The First One Is Filed By The Assessee & The 2Nd One Is Filed By The Revenue & Are Directed Against The Order Dated 27.3.2017 Cit (A)-7, Hyderabad Relating To The A.Y 2012-13. For The Sake Of Convenience, These Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Common Order.

For Appellant: Sri P. Murali Mohan, CAFor Respondent: Sri Rajendra Kumar, CIT(DR)
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)

credit balance in the name of M/s. Saujana Universal Industries Ltd of Rs.9,46,43,968/-, M/s. Sujana Universal Industries Limited is showing debit balance in the account of the assessee for Rs.49,39,82,512/-. This according to the Assessing Officer clearly shows that the argument that deferment of payments to supplier M/s. Sujana Universal Industries Limited is transferred