BHARAT KALWANI,INDORE vs. ITO-4(3), INDORE

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes, subject to the payment of costs as directed above

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

unexplained money under section 69A of the Act even when the appellant was not the proprietor of M/s Rukmani Roadlines and Shri Sunil Kumar Lalwani (PAN: AAJPL4938M) himself was the proprietor of M/s Rukmani Roadlines 6. The appellant reserves the right to add, alter and modify the grounds of appeal as taken by him.” 3. The brief facts

SURESH KUMAR,MANAS BHAWAN, RNT MARG, INDORE vs. ITO, BURHANPUR, INDORE

In the result we are of the considered

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M Joshisuresh Kumar, Ito –Burhanpur. बनाम/ 112, Manas Bhawan, Vs. 11 Rnt Marg, Indore (Pan: Eekps7728B) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Pankaj Shah & Soumya Bumb, Cas Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 13.01.2026 Date Of 22.01.2026 Pronouncement आदेश/ O R D E R

unexplained money is upheld. Further, the addition of Rs.2,59,581/- as Salary Income is also upheld. 5. As a result, this appeal is dismissed.” 2.7 The assessee being aggrieved by the “Impugned Order” has preferred the instant second appeal before this Tribunal & has raised the following grounds of appeal in the form No. 36 against the “Impugned Order” which

INDIRA BAI JINDAL,KHARGONE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, NFAC

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

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

money and ₹1,05,000/- as unexplained expenditure, and the Assessing Officer also initiated penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) and section 271F of the Act. 4. Aggrieved by the assessment order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(Appeals) raising multiple grounds. Grounds of Appeal Nos. 1, 2, 3, 6 and 7 pertained to the validity

SURESH JAT,BADNAWAR vs. THE INCOME-TAX OFFICER, DHAR, DHAR

Appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M Joshisuresh Jat, Ito, बनाम/ C/O S.V. Agrawal & Associate Dhar. Vs. Dadi Dham, 24-25, Joy Building Colony, Old Aplasia, Indore. (Pan: Anopj2666E) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri S.N. Agrawal, Ca Revenue By Shri Anup Singh, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 08.01.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 16.01.2026 आदेश/ O R D E R

unexplained money and added the same to the total income of the assessee u/s 69A r.w.s 115BBE of the Act for the year under consideration.” 2.9 In the “Impugned Assessment Order” the Ld. AO has also recorded finding in respect of the Income of Rs 4,19,451/-which was received as interest income from "Sh. Om Prakash gupta

RUPESH JAISWAL,DHARAMPURI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, INDORE

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

Bench: B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M Joshirupesh Jaiswal, Income Tax Officer, बनाम/ 111, Azad Marg, Indore Vs. Dist. Dhar, Tehsil Dharampuri, Dharampuri (Pan: Akopj7192C) (Appellant) (Revenue) Assessee By Shri Venus Rawka & Ms. Eva Rawka, Ars Revenue By Shri Anoop Singh, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 22.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 28.07.2025 आदेश / O R D E R

unexplained money u/s 69A of the Act and brought to tax u/s 115BBE of the Act. Page 3 of 10 Rupesh Jaiswal ITA No. 717/Ind/2024 - A.Y.2017-18 2.5 That the aforesaid order bears No. ITBA/AST/S/147/2021- 22/1041907689(1) and same is dated 29.03.2022 which is hereinafter referred to as the “impugned intimation order”. 2.6 That the assessee being aggrieved by the aforesaid

BAJRANG LAL,UJJAIN, M.P. vs. THE ASSESSMENT UNIT, NFAC, DELHI

In the result appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Manish Borad

unexplained money under section 69A r.w.s.115BBE of the Act even when the appellant was not liable to maintain books of accounts and therefore, provisions of section 69A of the Act was not applicable. 8. The appellant reserves the right to add, alter and modify the grounds of appeal as taken by him.” 1. That on the facts

BAJRANG LAL,UJJAIN, M.P. vs. THE ASSESSMENT UNIT, NFAC, DELHI

In the result appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Manish Borad

unexplained money under section 69A r.w.s.115BBE of the Act even when the appellant was not liable to maintain books of accounts and therefore, provisions of section 69A of the Act was not applicable. 8. The appellant reserves the right to add, alter and modify the grounds of appeal as taken by him.” 1. That on the facts

SHRI ARVIND KUMAR SINGH ,BHOPAL vs. THE PR CIT-1, BHOPAL

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

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

unexplained money u/s69A Rs.&4,87,360/- Assessed Income Rs-70,23,010/- 7. The appellant filed an appeal before the Ld.CIT(A), Bhopal vide Ack. No. 383778091020218 dated 02.02.2018 contesting the addition made in the order under Section 147 of the Act. 8. Subsequently, a notice dated 23.10.2019 was issued to the appellant under section 263 of the Income

SHRI ARVIND KUMAR SINGH ,BHOPAL vs. THE PR CIT-1, BHOPAL

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

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

unexplained money u/s69A Rs.&4,87,360/- Assessed Income Rs-70,23,010/- 7. The appellant filed an appeal before the Ld.CIT(A), Bhopal vide Ack. No. 383778091020218 dated 02.02.2018 contesting the addition made in the order under Section 147 of the Act. 8. Subsequently, a notice dated 23.10.2019 was issued to the appellant under section 263 of the Income

SHRI ARVIND KUMAR SINGH ,BHOPAL vs. THE PR CIT-1, BHOPAL

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

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

unexplained money u/s69A Rs.&4,87,360/- Assessed Income Rs-70,23,010/- 7. The appellant filed an appeal before the Ld.CIT(A), Bhopal vide Ack. No. 383778091020218 dated 02.02.2018 contesting the addition made in the order under Section 147 of the Act. 8. Subsequently, a notice dated 23.10.2019 was issued to the appellant under section 263 of the Income

SHRI ARVIND KUMAR SINGH ,BHOPAL vs. THE PR CIT-1, BHOPAL

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

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

unexplained money u/s69A Rs.&4,87,360/- Assessed Income Rs-70,23,010/- 7. The appellant filed an appeal before the Ld.CIT(A), Bhopal vide Ack. No. 383778091020218 dated 02.02.2018 contesting the addition made in the order under Section 147 of the Act. 8. Subsequently, a notice dated 23.10.2019 was issued to the appellant under section 263 of the Income

HARISH CHANDRA PUROHIT,RATLAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER - 1, RATLAM, RATLAM

In the result- the Impugned order is set aside as and by way

Bench: Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani & Shri Paresh M Joshiassessment Year: 2018-19

unexplained money under Section 69A of the Act. Accordingly, the addition made by the AO is hereby confirmed, and all the grounds raised by the appellant are hereby dismissed. 6. In the result the appeal is Dismissed.” 2.11 That the assessee being aggrieved by the “Impugned Order” has preferred the instant second appeal before this tribunal & has raised the following

DILIP BUDHADEV,INDORE, MADHYA PRADESH vs. THE ITO, SENDHWA, SENDHWA, MADHYA PRADESH

In the result appeal of the assesse is allowed for statistical\npurpose

unexplained money\nunder section 69A r.w.s.115BBE of the Act even when only th\npeak balance could have been subject to tax\n5. The appellant reserves the right to add, alter and modify the\ngrounds of appeal as taken by him\n6. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in\nlaw, the Ld CIT(A) erred

SHRI KHEMRAJ SINGH CHAUHAN,GWALIOR vs. THE DCIT 1(1), BHOPAL

In the result these bunch of fourteen appeals of the assessee’s for Assessment Year 2009-10 are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Hon'Ble Kul Bharat & Hon'Ble Manish Borad

unexplained investment towards payment of on money for purchase of land is merely supportive to the finding of Ld. CIT(A). Since we have confirmed the view of Ld. CIT(A) deleting the addition of Rs.87,46.600/- , Ground No.4 becomes infructuous. 70. Ground No.5 relates to the addition for unexplained unsecured loan of Rs.70 lakhs and Rs.5 lakhs. While adjudicating

SHRI SANJAY KUMAR SAHU,GWALIOR vs. THE DCIT 1(1), BHOPAL

In the result these bunch of fourteen appeals of the assessee’s for Assessment Year 2009-10 are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Hon'Ble Kul Bharat & Hon'Ble Manish Borad

unexplained investment towards payment of on money for purchase of land is merely supportive to the finding of Ld. CIT(A). Since we have confirmed the view of Ld. CIT(A) deleting the addition of Rs.87,46.600/- , Ground No.4 becomes infructuous. 70. Ground No.5 relates to the addition for unexplained unsecured loan of Rs.70 lakhs and Rs.5 lakhs. While adjudicating

SHRI LALTA PRASAD CHOUDHARY,GWALIOR vs. THE DCIT 1(1), BHOPAL

In the result these bunch of fourteen appeals of the assessee’s for Assessment Year 2009-10 are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Hon'Ble Kul Bharat & Hon'Ble Manish Borad

unexplained investment towards payment of on money for purchase of land is merely supportive to the finding of Ld. CIT(A). Since we have confirmed the view of Ld. CIT(A) deleting the addition of Rs.87,46.600/- , Ground No.4 becomes infructuous. 70. Ground No.5 relates to the addition for unexplained unsecured loan of Rs.70 lakhs and Rs.5 lakhs. While adjudicating

SHRI DHARMENDRA KUMAR CHOUDHARY,GWALIOR vs. THE DCIT 1(1), BHOPAL

In the result these bunch of fourteen appeals of the assessee’s for Assessment Year 2009-10 are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Hon'Ble Kul Bharat & Hon'Ble Manish Borad

unexplained investment towards payment of on money for purchase of land is merely supportive to the finding of Ld. CIT(A). Since we have confirmed the view of Ld. CIT(A) deleting the addition of Rs.87,46.600/- , Ground No.4 becomes infructuous. 70. Ground No.5 relates to the addition for unexplained unsecured loan of Rs.70 lakhs and Rs.5 lakhs. While adjudicating

SHRI SUKHDEV SINGH DHARIWAL,GWALIOR vs. THE DCIT 1(1), BHOPAL

In the result these bunch of fourteen appeals of the assessee’s for Assessment Year 2009-10 are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Hon'Ble Kul Bharat & Hon'Ble Manish Borad

unexplained investment towards payment of on money for purchase of land is merely supportive to the finding of Ld. CIT(A). Since we have confirmed the view of Ld. CIT(A) deleting the addition of Rs.87,46.600/- , Ground No.4 becomes infructuous. 70. Ground No.5 relates to the addition for unexplained unsecured loan of Rs.70 lakhs and Rs.5 lakhs. While adjudicating