SAMPAT LAL LODHA ,NATHDWARA vs. ITO, WARD-2, RAJSAMAND

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed

cash credit under Section 68 of the Act cannot be extended to unexplained investments under Section 69A of the Act.” iii] In view

SAMPAT LAL LODHA ,NATHDWARA vs. ITO, WARD-2, RAJSAMAND

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed

cash credit under Section 68 of the Act cannot be extended to unexplained investments under Section 69A of the Act.” iii] In view

RACHNA GOYAL,JODHPUR vs. ITO, WARD-1(2), JODHPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

68 amounting to Rs.\n7,45,080/- on account of unexplained cash credits.\n(iii)\nIn the assessment order there is no finding that any books of accounts were\nmaintained by the assessee and that the alleged amount was found credited in the\nbooks of accounts or even in the bank account.\nAs per section

M/S BHAGIRATH DAIRY PRIVATE LIMITED,NAGAUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,, NAGAUR

The appeal is allowed

Bench: Dr. Mitha Lal Meena, Hon’Ble & Shri Sudhir Pareek, Hon’Ble

unexplained cash credit and thereby making addition of Rs. 2,96,50,000/- by applying the provisions of Section 68

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, UDIPUR vs. M/S. WAGAD CONSTRUTION COMPANY, UDAIPUR

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Cash credits. 68. Where any sum is found credited in the books of an assessee maintained for any previous year, and the assessee offers no explanation about the nature and source thereof or the explanation offered by him is not, in the opinion of the Assessing Officer, satisfactory, the sum so credited may be charged to income

DCIT, CIRCLE, BHILWARA vs. SHRI PRAHALAD RAI RATHI, BHILWARA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri B. R. Baskaran & Dr. S. Seethalakshmithe Dcit Vs Shri Prahalad Rai Rathi Circle Prop: M/S.Kedar Mal Radhey Shyam, Bhiwlara Sadar Bazar, Gulabpura, Bhilwara (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Adxpr 0949 R

cash credit u/s 68 of the Act and relating to ground of Appeal no. 2 against the deletion of addition of Rs. 1,62,39,154/- made by the AO on account of unsecured loans treated as unexplained expenditure u/s 69C of the Act are that the AO noticed share trading loss of Rs 1,73,42,965/- incurred

DWARKA JEWELLERS PRIVATE LIMITED,JODHPUR vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, JODHPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr. Mitha Lal Meena, Hon'Ble & Anikesh Banerjee, Hon'Ble

unexplained cash credit within the meaning of section 68 of the I.T. Act, 1961. 4. Being aggrieved with the additions

DR. MANISH CHHAPARWAL ,UDAIPUR vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, UDAIPUR

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

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

cash found either during the course of assessment proceedings or the present appellate proceedings. Further the observation of the Ld. CIT(A) regarding applicability of section 115BBE are as per mandate, that as per the provisions of section 115BBE the income in nature of incomes prescribed u/s 68 to 69D (even though not assessed as such by AO) shall

RANJEET SHARMA,RAWATSAR vs. ITO, WARD NOHAR,, HANUMANGARH

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

section 68 of the I.T. Act (addition by ITO was made by invoking of the same) is applicable on the present case because there were not a single entry of cash credit during the year. The transactions (labour payment) were in the nature of trade creditors? 3. Whether notice u/s 148 by recording reasons to verify the suspicious transactions (cash

DCIT, CIRCLE, BHILWARA vs. M/S. SAILEELA SYNTHETICS PVT. LD. , BHILWARA

The appeal stands dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am (Hearing Through Video Conferencing Mode) आयकरअपील सं./ I.T.A. No.279/Jodh/2018 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16) Dcit- Bhilwara Circle M/S. Saileela Synthetics Pvt. Ltd. बनाम/ Shastri Nagar, Bhilwara 147, New Cloth Market Rajasthan. Pur Road, Bhilwara Vs. Rajasthan-311 001. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aadcs-1103-N (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) :

unexplained cash credit in terms of section 68 of the Act and added to the total income of the assessee

CREATIVE PROPMART PVT. LTD. ,UDAIPUR vs. ITO, WARD-2(3), UDAIPUR

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

Bench: The Date Of Hearing.”

unexplained cash credit by applying the provision of section 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 3. The assessee craves

ISLAUDDIN,JODHPUR vs. ITO-PHALODI, PHALODI

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

credit basis, against which cash is realized in due course. This cash keeps on\naccumulating and is deposited in the bank account as per the convenience of the assessee.\nThe assessee also receives cash from sale of his agricultural produce. Out of the cash\nbalance of earlier year, the assessee had also accommodated his friends and relatives.\nComplete books

SITA DEVI CHOUDHARY,AHORE JALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, JALORE

In the result, stands allowed

Bench: The Cit(A) Challenging The Additions Made By The Ao. The Ld.Cit(A) Upheld Both The Additions Made By Observing-

cash credits, the onus shifted to the AO, who did not make any enquiry, whatsoever, to hold the loan as bogus.Therefore, holding the same to be unexplained and making addition u/s 68 is unwarranted. 21 Sita Devi Choudhary, Jalore The provisions of Section

BADAMI DEVI ,BARMER vs. ITO, WARD-1, BARMER

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr. Mitha Lal Meena, Hon’Ble & Shri Sudhir Pareek, Hon’Blebadami Devi Income Tax Officer, M/S Sbl & Co Llp Ward No. -1 Barmer. (Chartered Accountant) E-75, Kalpatru Shopping Center, Opp. Bioscope Cinemas, Shastri Nagar, Jodhpur, Rajasthan–342003. Pan No. Aaopd1969R Assessee By Shri Gautam Chand Baid, Ca (Physical) Revenue By Shri Lalit Kumar Bishnoi, Addl. Cit-Dr Virtual Date Of Hearing 28.01.2026. Date Of Pronouncement 26.02.2026. Order Dr. Mitha Lal Meena, A.M.: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Addl/Jcit (A) Panaji, [Hereinafter Referred To As The Jcit (A)] Dated 28.06.2024 With Respect To Assessment Year 2017-18. 2 2. The Appellant Assessee Has Taken Following Grounds Of Appeal:-

unexplained cash credit in the hands of Assessee that too without providing any opportunity of hearing about the said inquiry with these three persons carried by way of an autocratic approach which is contrary to the specific statutory provision of Section 142(3) of the Act. In support, he filed a list of case laws of judicial pronouncements (APB pages

M/S. SUPER SHIV SHAKTI MINCHEM PVT. LTD.,JODHPUR vs. ITO, WARD-3, , BHILWARA

In the result, both the above appeals filed by the Assessee are dismissed

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), DR. MITHA LAL MEENA (Accountant Member)

unexplained cash credit. The addition so sustained may kindly be deleted. 3. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT (A) erred in sustaining the addition made by Ld. AO for Rs. 1,17,900/-presuming that such payment was made by assessee. The addition so sustained may kindly be deleted. 4. The appellant

M/S. SUPER SHIV SHAKTI MINCHEM PVT. LTD.,JODHPUR vs. ITO, WARD-3, , BHILWARA

In the result, both the above appeals filed by the Assessee are dismissed

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), DR. MITHA LAL MEENA (Accountant Member)

unexplained cash credit. The addition so sustained may kindly be deleted. 3. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT (A) erred in sustaining the addition made by Ld. AO for Rs. 1,17,900/-presuming that such payment was made by assessee. The addition so sustained may kindly be deleted. 4. The appellant

ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE-1, JODHPUR , PAOTA C ROAD vs. J.M. METALS, BASNI

Section 68 is not applicable where the subjected amounts were\nreceived from the customers towards the products sold by the assessee to them,\nthe credit shown of outstanding amounts (realized later), are the credits which\nare self-explanatory and doesn't require a consideration u/s 68 of the Act which\nis a law settled. This view gets support from

ASHOK PANWAR HUF,JODHPUR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JODHPUR

In the result, both the appeals of the assesses ITA No

Bench: Dr. Mitha Lal Meena, Hon'Ble & Shri Anikesh Banerjee, Hon'Ble

section 68 of the Act to the total income of the assessee. The Ld.AO also calculated the commission amount to Rs. 6,55,255/- and total amount comes to Rs.1,65,22,302/-. The Assessing Officer further added Rs.8,08,458/- related to 145(3) of the Act on account of increase of net profit from