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.

131 results for “reassessment”+ Unexplained Cash Creditclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai1,404Delhi1,308Kolkata438Chennai407Ahmedabad368Jaipur365Bangalore227Chandigarh144Pune131Hyderabad130Rajkot121Indore116Surat112Visakhapatnam83Nagpur81Cochin73Amritsar71Raipur65Guwahati64Agra47Lucknow42Patna37Jodhpur25Allahabad20Cuttack20Calcutta6Dehradun5Ranchi5Telangana5Varanasi4SC2Panaji2Orissa2Karnataka2Gauhati1Jabalpur1

Key Topics

Section 148189Section 147132Addition to Income76Section 143(3)72Section 69A68Cash Deposit46Section 6844Reopening of Assessment41Reassessment38Section 148A

LEELAVATI VIJAYKUMAR KOTECHA,,JALGAON vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, appeal of the assessee for assessment year 2012-13 is

ITA 1295/PUN/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 Apr 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos. 1294 To 1297/Pun/2016 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2007-08, 2008-09, 2010-11, 2012-13

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Smt. Nirupama Kotru
Section 127Section 139Section 153ASection 68

Unexplained cash Personal cash from seized from Locker accumulated No. 98 at United 1,65,900/- savings (out of tax Western Bank Ltd. paid income) Navi Peth, Jalgaon during search. 5. Smt. Nirupama Kotru representing the Department vehemently relied on the impugned assessment orders confirming the additions. The ld. DR prayed for dismissing appeals of the assessee. 6. We have

Showing 1–20 of 131 · Page 1 of 7

34
Section 143(2)29
Section 13226

LEELAVATI VIJAYKUMAR KOTECHA,,JALGAON vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, appeal of the assessee for assessment year 2012-13 is

ITA 1294/PUN/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 Apr 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos. 1294 To 1297/Pun/2016 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2007-08, 2008-09, 2010-11, 2012-13

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Smt. Nirupama Kotru
Section 127Section 139Section 153ASection 68

Unexplained cash Personal cash from seized from Locker accumulated No. 98 at United 1,65,900/- savings (out of tax Western Bank Ltd. paid income) Navi Peth, Jalgaon during search. 5. Smt. Nirupama Kotru representing the Department vehemently relied on the impugned assessment orders confirming the additions. The ld. DR prayed for dismissing appeals of the assessee. 6. We have

KALPESH RATILAL GARDHARIA,KOLHAPUR vs. ITO WARD- 2(3), KOLHAPUR

In the result, the grounds on merit are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1850/PUN/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune19 Oct 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury

For Appellant: Shri S.N. PuranikFor Respondent: Shri Piyush Kumar Singh Yadav
Section 127Section 142(1)Section 148Section 151Section 152Section 68Section 69Section 69A

reassessment proceedings? Further it is requested that: 1. The assessee craves leave to amend, alter or delete any of the above grounds of appeal. 2. it is prayed that the above claims and allowances be allowed. 2. The assessee has also raised the additional grounds of appeal which is as follows : 1. Additional grounds: This is in substitution of Additional

RAJARSHI SHAHU SHIKSHAN SANSTHA INAM DHAMANI,SANGLI vs. ITO EXEMPTION, KOLHAPUR, KOLHAPUR

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed as per terms indicated hereinabove

ITA 1124/PUN/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune18 Dec 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.1121 To 1126/Pun/2024 Assessment Years : 2012-13 To 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Kishor B PhadkeFor Respondent: Shri Amit Bobde &
Section 115BSection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 155BSection 68

unexplained cash credits. The Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court of Bombay in the case of "CIT vs. Jet Airways (1) ltd." (2011) 239 CTR (Bom) 183, has categorically held that the AO may assess or reassess

RAJARSHI SHAHU SHIKSHAN SANSTHA INAM DHAMANI,SANGLI vs. ITO EXEMPTION, KOLHAPUR

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed as per terms indicated hereinabove

ITA 1121/PUN/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune18 Dec 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.1121 To 1126/Pun/2024 Assessment Years : 2012-13 To 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Kishor B PhadkeFor Respondent: Shri Amit Bobde &
Section 115BSection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 155BSection 68

unexplained cash credits. The Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court of Bombay in the case of "CIT vs. Jet Airways (1) ltd." (2011) 239 CTR (Bom) 183, has categorically held that the AO may assess or reassess

RAJARSHI SHAHU SHIKSHAN SANSTHA INAM DHAMANI,SANGLI vs. ITO EXEMPTION, KOLHAPUR, KOLHAPUR

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed as per terms indicated hereinabove

ITA 1126/PUN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune18 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.1121 To 1126/Pun/2024 Assessment Years : 2012-13 To 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Kishor B PhadkeFor Respondent: Shri Amit Bobde &
Section 115BSection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 155BSection 68

unexplained cash credits. The Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court of Bombay in the case of "CIT vs. Jet Airways (1) ltd." (2011) 239 CTR (Bom) 183, has categorically held that the AO may assess or reassess

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JALGAON vs. SIDHARTH RATANLAL BAFNA, JALGAON

ITA 1555/PUN/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Oct 2025AY 2013-14
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 153A

unexplained cash credit under Section 68 of the Act. The\ntribunal while dismissing the appeals filed by the Revenue also observed\non facts that these shares were purchased by respondent on the floor of\nStock Exchange and not from the said broker, deliveries were taken,\ncontract notes were issued and shares were also sold on the floor of\nStock Exchange

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JALGAON vs. SIDHARTH RATANLAL BAFNA, JALGAON

ITA 1565/PUN/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Oct 2025AY 2018-19
For Appellant: S/Shri Suchek Anchaliya andFor Respondent: Shri Amit Bobde, CIT
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 153A

unexplained cash credit under Section 68 of the Act. The\ntribunal while dismissing the appeals filed by the Revenue also observed\non facts that these shares were purchased by respondent on the floor of\nStock Exchange and not from the said broker, deliveries were taken,\ncontract notes were issued and shares were also sold on the floor of\nStock Exchange

PRASAD RAMCHANDRA PATIL,URAN, PANVEL vs. ITO WARD 3, PANVEL, PANVEL

Accordingly, the grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2340/PUN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune18 Feb 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Prakash PanditFor Respondent: Shri Amit Bobde
Section 132ASection 144Section 153ASection 69A

credits within the meaning of section 69A of the Act but are the business receipts of the assessee. Considering the totality of the facts and in the circumstances of the case, in our view, adoption of the profit rate of 10% on the total deposits in the bank account will meet the ends of justice. The Ld. AO is accordingly

PRASAD RAMCHANDRA PATIL,URAN, PANVEL vs. ITO - WARD 3, PANVEL, PANVEL

Accordingly, the grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2339/PUN/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune18 Feb 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Prakash PanditFor Respondent: Shri Amit Bobde
Section 132ASection 144Section 153ASection 69A

credits within the meaning of section 69A of the Act but are the business receipts of the assessee. Considering the totality of the facts and in the circumstances of the case, in our view, adoption of the profit rate of 10% on the total deposits in the bank account will meet the ends of justice. The Ld. AO is accordingly

PRASAD RAMCHANDRA PATIL,URAN, PANVEL vs. ITO WARD 3, PANVEL, PANVEL

Accordingly, the grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2338/PUN/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune18 Feb 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Prakash PanditFor Respondent: Shri Amit Bobde
Section 132ASection 144Section 153ASection 69A

credits within the meaning of section 69A of the Act but are the business receipts of the assessee. Considering the totality of the facts and in the circumstances of the case, in our view, adoption of the profit rate of 10% on the total deposits in the bank account will meet the ends of justice. The Ld. AO is accordingly

AADHUNIK INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT PRIVATE LIMITED,JALGAON vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, JALGAON

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

ITA 439/PUN/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune18 Sept 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoreassessment Year : 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Kishor B PhadkeFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 271(1)(c)Section 68

cash credits in the books which stands unexplained to the extent of Rs.50,00,000/- and thus the corresponding loan received from Cambridge financials of Rs. 50,00,000/- in bank accounts stands unexplained. 9.8 In the cases where assessee has received loan from entities but the genuineness and creditworthiness were neither explained nor such money offered for taxation

RAJARSHI SHAHU SHIKSHAN SANSTHA INAM DHAMANI,SANGLI vs. ITO EXEMPTION, KOLHAPUR, KOLHAPUR

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are\npartly allowed as per terms indicated hereinabove

ITA 1125/PUN/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune18 Dec 2025AY 2016-17
Section 115BSection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 155BSection 68

unexplained cash credit u/s 68 of the ITA, 1961.\n11. Final assessment_u/s_115BBC-As against the firm belief till\n29/11/2019, the learned AO, vide 147 order dated 24/12/2019,\nhas taxed the donations of Rs.1.39 CR as 'Anonymous donations'\nu/s 115BBC of the ITA, 1961.\nGround of Appeal No. 1 & 2\n12. Conention-1-Substantial difference between S. 68 ν. S. 115BBC

RAJARSHI SHAHU SHIKSHAN SANSTHA INAM DHAMANI,SANGLI vs. ITO EXEMPTION , KOLHAPUR, KOLHAPUR

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are\npartly allowed as per terms indicated hereinabove

ITA 1123/PUN/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune18 Dec 2025AY 2014-15
Section 115BSection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 155BSection 68

unexplained cash credit u/s 68 of the ITA, 1961.\n11. Final assessment_u/s_115BBC-As against the firm belief till\n29/11/2019, the learned AO, vide 147 order dated 24/12/2019,\nhas taxed the donations of Rs.1.39 CR as 'Anonymous donations'\nu/s 115BBC of the ITA, 1961.\nGround of Appeal No. 1 & 2\n12. Conention-1-Substantial difference between S. 68 ν. S. 115BBC

RAJARSHI SHAHU SHIKSHAN SANSTHA INAM DHAMANI,SANGLI vs. ITO EXEMPTION, KOLHAPUR

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are\npartly allowed as per terms indicated hereinabove

ITA 1122/PUN/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune18 Dec 2025AY 2013-14
Section 115BSection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 155BSection 68

unexplained cash credit u/s 68 of the ITA, 1961.\n11. Final assessment_u/s_115BBC-As against the firm belief till\n29/11/2019, the learned AO, vide 147 order dated 24/12/2019,\nhas taxed the donations of Rs.1.39 CR as 'Anonymous donations'\nu/s 115BBC of the ITA, 1961.\nGround of Appeal No. 1 & 2\n12. Conention-1-Substantial difference between S. 68 ν. S. 115BBC

JAIBHAGWAN BANARASIDAS JINDAL,JALNA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, JALNA

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

ITA 2016/PUN/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Feb 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri Jaiprakash BairagraFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde
Section 10(38)Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151

unexplained cash credit u/s 68 of the Act. He accordingly determined the total income of the assessee at Rs.97,03,015/-. 7. Before the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC, it was argued that the assessee got allotted 20000 shares of Rs.10 each of Anax Com Trade limited in private placement on 15.09.2012. The same were registered in the name

ASHOK HIRACHAND SHAH,PANVEL vs. ASSESSING OFFICER WARD 2, PANVEL

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

ITA 812/PUN/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune17 Dec 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.812/Pun/2025 धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2011-12 Ashok Hirachand Shah, Assessing Officer, Plot No. 4, Mangal Bunglow, Ward – 2, Panvel Road No. 5, Sector No. 19, Vs. New Panvel, Tal.-Panvel-410206 Pan : Acdps4800M अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent Assessee By : Shri Ajinkya Shah Department By : Shri Rajesh Gawali Date Of Hearing : 09-12-2025 Date Of 17-12-2025 Pronouncement : आदेश / Order Per Astha Chandra, Jm : The Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 20.01.2025 Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Nfac, Delhi [“Cit(A)/Nfac”] Pertaining To Assessment Year (“Ay”) 2011-12. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “1. Denial Of Natural Justice & Proper Opportunity The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Erred In Dismissing The Appeal Without Considering That The Appellant Was Denied Proper Opportunity & Natural Justice During The Assessment Proceedings. The Assessing Officer Called For Information At The Far End Of The Assessment Proceedings On 19/11/2018 & Despite The Appellant'S Authorized Representative Submitting The Details On 19/12/2018, The Ao Failed To Discuss Or Consider The Same. The Matter Ought To Have Been Remanded Back For Fresh Adjudication To Allow Proper Analysis Of The Transactions. 2. Addition Without Specifying The Section The Cit(A) Erred In Upholding The Addition Of Rs. 1,49,05,289/- Made By The Ao Without Specifying The Section Under Which The Addition Was Made. The Non-Mention Of The Specific Section Renders The Assessment Order Bad In Law, As It Violates The Principles Of Natural Justice & Transparency In Taxation. 3. Failure To Discharge Onus Under Section 69A

For Appellant: Shri Ajinkya ShahFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Gawali
Section 147Section 69A

cash deposits in the appellant's bank accounts were unexplained under Section 69A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The appellant contends that the AO failed to discharge the initial onus of establishing that the credits were unexplained, and the CIT(A) failed to appreciate that the appellant was not given a fair chance to explain the nature and source

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JALGAON vs. TARADEVI RATANLAL BAFNA, JALGAON

ITA 497/PUN/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Oct 2025AY 2013-14
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 153A

unexplained cash credit under Section 68 of the Act. The\ntribunal while dismissing the appeals filed by the Revenue also observed\non facts that these shares were purchased by respondent on the floor of\nStock Exchange and not from the said broker, deliveries were taken,\ncontract notes were issued and shares were also sold on the floor of\nStock Exchange

SONU GOMA BHANGALE,JALGAON vs. ITO WARD 2(1) JALGAON, JALGAON

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

ITA 2350/PUN/2025[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Nov 2025AY 2010-11
For Appellant: Shri Vinay Kawadia (virtual)For Respondent: Shri Umesh Phade, Addl.CIT
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 263Section 68

reassessment order dated 22/12/2017 became subject\nmatter of revisionary proceedings u/s.263 of the Act. Ld.PCIT\nvide order dated 30/03/2020 has given directions to the\nLd.AO for carrying out necessary verification of the source of\nalleged cash deposit and claim of agricultural income made by\nthe assessee in the income tax return and accepted by the\nLd.AO. In compliance

A.C.I.T ,WARDHA CIRCLE , WARDHA , WARDHA vs. M/S KAPIL SOLVEX PVT .LTD , YAVATMAL

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

ITA 221/NAG/2017[2009-20010]Status: Trans-OutITAT Pune26 Sept 2024

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil S PathakFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde
Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148

unexplained cash credits u/s 68 of the Act. An addition of Rs.4,55,00,000/- is therefore made to the income of the assessee. [Addition: Rs. 4,55,00,000/-] 6. Before the CIT(A) the assessee, apart from challenging the addition on merit, challenged the validity of reopening of the assessment on the ground that the reasons for reopening