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.

32 results for “section 68”+ Unexplained Investmentclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai2,562Delhi2,498Kolkata1,028Chennai686Jaipur649Ahmedabad514Bangalore419Hyderabad391Indore257Chandigarh249Surat224Pune193Rajkot189Cochin147Raipur145Nagpur138Amritsar109Visakhapatnam86Guwahati79Lucknow61Calcutta54Allahabad50Agra49Jodhpur47Cuttack39Patna34Panaji33Ranchi32Dehradun18Karnataka16Telangana13Varanasi12Jabalpur11SC8Rajasthan4Orissa3Gauhati1Punjab & Haryana1ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1

Key Topics

Section 6833Addition to Income31Section 143(3)29Section 271(1)(c)15Unexplained Cash Credit15Unexplained Investment13Section 32(2)12Section 115B11Section 139(1)11Undisclosed Income

SALUJA STEEL AND POWER PVT. LTD.,,GIRIDIH vs. ACIT, C, C., DHANBAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 287/RAN/2025[13-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi07 Jan 2026

Bench: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATNESH NANDAN SAHAY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Devesh Poddar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Rajib Jain, CIT-DR
Section 131Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 156

Section 68), Unexplained Investments (Section 69), Unexplained Money (Section 69A), Amount of Investment, etc. not fully disclosed in books of account

Showing 1–20 of 32 · Page 1 of 2

11
Disallowance11
Section 132(4)10

M/S ANJENEYA ISPAT LTD.,SARAIKELA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONE OF INCOME TAX, CIRCELE-1, JAMSHEDPUR, JAMSHEDPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 75/RAN/2022[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi06 Jan 2026AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayi.T.A. No.75/Ran/2022 Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/S Anjeneya Ispat Ltd.…………….…….…............................……….……Appellant 29, Rain Basera, Sanjay Nagar Colony, Adityapur, Saraikela, Jharkhand- 831013. [Pan: Aagca1031N] Vs. Dcit, Circle-1, Jamshedpur.….....…..…..….........……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Devesh Poddar, Adv., Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Kanhaiya Lal Kanak, Cit, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : December 18, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : January 06, 2026 Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Cit(A), Jamshedpur (Hereinafter Referred To As “Cit(A)”) Dated 25.09.2017 Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The “Act”). 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Filed Its Return Of Income For The Assessment Year 2019–20 Declaring A Total Income Of ₹62,64,116. The Case Was Selected For Complete Scrutiny. During The Relevant Previous Year, A Survey Operation Under Section 133A Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 Was Conducted At The Business Premises Of The Assessee On 16.02.2019. Subsequently, Statutory Notices Under Sections 143(2) & 142(1) Of The Act Were Issued. In Response Thereto, The Assessee Appeared From Time To Time & Furnished Various Details & Documents As Called For. The Same Were Examined & Discussed By The Assessing Officer During The Course Of Assessment Proceedings. During

Section 10(23)Section 133ASection 133A(3)Section 145ASection 14ASection 250Section 40Section 69Section 69C

investment of ₹17,70,410 and unutilised raw material of ₹20,55,972 were set aside to the Assessing Officer for fresh verification. However, the CIT(A) sustained the addition of ₹1,07,26,895 towards excess stock, sustained the addition of ₹4,08,000 towards short cash, sustained disallowance of ₹14,38,359, but while doing so, changed

ADHUNIK AKSHAT UDYOG PVT. LTD.,,DUMKA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-3(1), DEOGHAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 163/RAN/2025[12-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi10 Oct 2025

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayi.T.A. No.163/Ran/2025 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Adhunik Akshat Udyog Pvt. Ltd……………............................……….……Appellant Industrial Area, Babupur, Muffasil Thana Dumka, Jharkhand – 814101. [Pan: Aabca4896Q] Vs. Acit, Circle-3(1), Deoghar…...…..….…..….........……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Sushil Pransukha, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Khubchand T. Pandya, Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : August 28, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : October 10, 2025 Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Nfac, Delhi [“Cit(A)”] Dated 11.03.2025 Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (The “Act”) For The Assessment Year 2012–13. 2. Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Company Filed Its Return Of Income For Ay 2012–13 Declaring Total Income Of ₹2,57,551. The Case Was Reopened Under Section 147 On The Ground That The Assessee Had Raised Share Capital & Share Premium From Certain Entities, Whose Financial Capacity & Genuineness Of Investment Remained Unexplained. During Assessment, The Ao Noted That The Assessee Had Introduced Share Capital Of ₹37,50,000 From The Following Four Private Limited Companies:

Section 131Section 147Section 250Section 68

investment remained unexplained. During assessment, the AO noted that the assessee had introduced share capital of ₹37,50,000 from the following four private limited companies: Suvarna Pushpa Finance Pvt. Ltd. – Share capital ₹2,20,000, Premium ₹8,80,000 (2,200 shares) I.T.A. No.163/Ran/2025 Adhunik Akshat Udyog Pvt. Ltd Shree Sati Finvest Pvt. Ltd. – Share capital

RAJESH JALAN,DHANBAD vs. DCIT/ACIT, CIRCLE-1, DHANBAD

The appeal of the assessee is allowed in full

ITA 498/RAN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi26 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI SONJOY SARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI RATNESH NANDAN SAHAY (Accountant Member)

Section 133(6)Section 250Section 68Section 69A

68 of the Act alleged unexplained unsecured loan from M/s Grihsobha Interior Pvt. Ltd. 2. Addition of ₹20,86,500/- under Section 69A of the Act alleged unexplained investment

KAMESHWAR ALLOYS AND STEELS PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, RANCHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 49/RAN/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi14 Jan 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayi.T.A. No.49/Ran/2024 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Kameshwar Alloys & Steels Pvt. Ltd….…............................……….……Appellant 128/3, Hazra Road, Bhawanipur, Kol-700026.. [Pan: Aadck6558K] Vs. Acit, Cc-1, Ranchi.................……….…..….........……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Devesh Poddar, Adv., Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Md. Shadab Ahmed, Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : December 16, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : January 14, 2026 Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Cit(A)-3, Patna (Hereinafter Referred To As “Cit(A)”) Dated 05.02.2024 Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The “Act”). 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Company, Filed Its Return Of Income For The Assessment Year Under Consideration. The Case Was Originally Selected For Scrutiny On The Issue Of Share Capital & Share Premium Received During The Year. The Assessing Officer Completed The Assessment Ex Parte Under Section 144 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961, On The Ground Of Alleged Non-Compliance & Made An Addition Of ₹2,00,00,000 Being Share Capital & Share Premium Received From Various Companies, Treating The Same As Unexplained Under Section 68 Of The Act. Subsequently, A Search & Seizure Operation Under

Section 131Section 132(1)Section 133(6)Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 144Section 153ASection 250Section 68

section 68 of the Act as unexplained cash credit and also disallowed ₹14,182 towards penal expenses. 3. Aggrieved the order of the Assessing Officer, the assessee preferred an appeal before the CIT(A), where the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) sustained the addition of ₹2,00,00,000. 4. Dissatisfied with the order

HARISH KUMAR SARAWGI,GIRIDIH vs. ACIT, C.C., DHANBAD

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 425/RAN/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi05 Mar 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayassessment Year: 2021-22

Section 115BSection 132Section 132(4)Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 68

investment, unexplained cash credits etc. u/s. 68 to 69D of the Act. Consequently, the Assessing Officer invoked the provisions of section

AAKRITI SARAWGI,,GIRIDIH vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE, DHANBAD

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 83/RAN/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi05 Mar 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayassessment Year: 2021-22

Section 115BSection 132Section 132(4)Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 68

investment, unexplained cash credits etc. u/s. 68 to 69D of the Act. Consequently, the Assessing Officer invoked the provisions of section

RAJESH BADRI PD. MODI,GIRIDIH vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, DHANBAD

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 418/RAN/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi05 Mar 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayassessment Year: 2021-22

Section 115BSection 132Section 132(4)Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 68

investment, unexplained cash credits etc. u/s. 68 to 69D of the Act. Consequently, the Assessing Officer invoked the provisions of section

KANTA DEVI SARAWGI,GIRIDIH vs. ACIT, C.C., DHANBAD

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 422/RAN/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi05 Mar 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayassessment Year: 2021-22

Section 115BSection 132Section 132(4)Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 68

investment, unexplained cash credits etc. u/s. 68 to 69D of the Act. Consequently, the Assessing Officer invoked the provisions of section

SAMIR KUMAR SARAWGI,GIRIDIH vs. ACIT, C. C., DHANBAD

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 423/RAN/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi05 Mar 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayassessment Year: 2021-22

Section 115BSection 132Section 132(4)Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 68

investment, unexplained cash credits etc. u/s. 68 to 69D of the Act. Consequently, the Assessing Officer invoked the provisions of section

SUNILA DEVI SARAWGI,GIRIDIH vs. ACIT, C. C. , DHANBAD

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 427/RAN/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi05 Mar 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayassessment Year: 2021-22

Section 115BSection 132Section 132(4)Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 68

investment, unexplained cash credits etc. u/s. 68 to 69D of the Act. Consequently, the Assessing Officer invoked the provisions of section

PARAS KUMAR SARAWGI,GIRIDIH vs. ACIT, C. C., DHANBAD

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 420/RAN/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi05 Mar 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayassessment Year: 2021-22

Section 115BSection 132Section 132(4)Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 68

investment, unexplained cash credits etc. u/s. 68 to 69D of the Act. Consequently, the Assessing Officer invoked the provisions of section

SANTOSH KUMAR SARAWGI,GIRIDIH vs. ACIT, C. C., DHANBAD

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 426/RAN/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi05 Mar 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayassessment Year: 2021-22

Section 115BSection 132Section 132(4)Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 68

investment, unexplained cash credits etc. u/s. 68 to 69D of the Act. Consequently, the Assessing Officer invoked the provisions of section

SANGITA DEVI SARAWGI,GIRIDIH vs. ACIT, C.C., DHANBAD

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 421/RAN/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi05 Mar 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayassessment Year: 2021-22

Section 115BSection 132Section 132(4)Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 68

investment, unexplained cash credits etc. u/s. 68 to 69D of the Act. Consequently, the Assessing Officer invoked the provisions of section

MANJU DEVI SARAWGI,GIRIDIH vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, DHANBAD

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 82/RAN/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi05 Mar 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayassessment Year: 2021-22

Section 115BSection 132Section 132(4)Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 68

investment, unexplained cash credits etc. u/s. 68 to 69D of the Act. Consequently, the Assessing Officer invoked the provisions of section

M/S ANJENEYE ISPAT LTD.,SARAIKELA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, JAMSHEDPUR, JAMSHEDPUR

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 74/RAN/2022[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi06 Jan 2026AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayi.T.A. No.74/Ran/2022 Assessment Year: 2008-09 M/S Anjeneya Ispat Ltd.…………….…….…............................……….……Appellant 29, Rain Basera, Sanjay Nagar Colony, Adityapur, Saraikela, Jharkhand – 831013. [Pan: Aagca1031N] Vs. Dcit, Circle-1, Jamshedpur……....….…..….........……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Devesh Poddar, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Kanhaiya Lal Kanak, Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : November 11, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : January 06, 2026 Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Cit(A), Jamshedpur (Hereinafter Referred To As “Ld. Cit(A)”) Dated 21.08.2018 Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The “Act”). 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Company Is Engaged In The Manufacturing Of Pig Iron. It Filed Its Return Of Income Declaring Total Income Of ₹1,41,05,250, Which Was Processed Under Section 143(1). During The Assessment Proceedings, The Assessing Officer Noticed That The Assessee Had Received Share Capital & Share Premium Aggregating To ₹3,00,00,000 During The Relevant Previous Year. The Assessing Officer Issued Notices Under Sections 142(1) & 148 Requiring The Assessee To Furnish Complete Details Of The Share Applicants, Including Identity, Creditworthiness & Genuineness Of The Transactions. In Response, The Assessee Furnished Complete Details In Respect Of The Share Capital/Share Premium Received From The Following Parties:

Section 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 154Section 250Section 68

unexplained and made an addition of Rs.2,70,00,000 under section 68 of the Act. The Assessing Officer, however, did not conduct any independent enquiry, nor were notices issued under section 133(6) of the Act to the share applicants. 3. Aggrieved by the order of the AO assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) where

JAISWAL STEEL INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LIMITED,JAMSHEDPUR vs. ITO WARD 2(1), JAMSHEDPUR

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

ITA 284/RAN/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi19 Jan 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayi.T.A. No.284/Ran/2024 Assessment Year: 2016-17 Jaiswal Steel Industries Pvt. Ltd. ….…….…............................……….……Appellant Dropadi Bhawan, Station Road, Jugsalai, Jharkhand- 831006. [Pan: Aabcj4471C] Vs. Ito, Ward-2(1), Jamshedpur.….....…..…..….........……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Akshay Ringasia, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Sumit Dasgupta, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : January 15, 2026 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : January 19, 2026 Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Nfac, Delhi (Hereinafter Referred To As “Cit(A)”) Dated 02.04.2024 Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The “Act”).

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 250Section 69Section 69A

68,519. Further, additions aggregating to ₹1,93,35,493 were made I.T.A. No.284/Ran/2024 Jaiswal Steel Industries Pvt. Ltd. on account of unexplained money under section 69A, unexplained investment

GOLDEN GOENKA COMMERCE PVT. LTD.,,KOLKATA vs. ACIT CIRCLE-2(1),, JAMSHEDPUR

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

ITA 11/RAN/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi10 Oct 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayi.T.A. No.11/Ran/2024 Assessment Year: 2011-12 Golden Goenka Commerce Pvt. Ltd. (Earlier Known As Rajgaj Traders Pvt. Ltd.)............................……….……Appellant 25A, S.P Mukherjee Road, 4Th Floor, Bhawanipore, Kol-25, [Pan: Aabcr7503F] Vs. Acit, Circle-2(1), Jamshedpur..…..….…..….........……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Devesh Poddar, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Kumar Pranab, Cit- Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : September 4, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : October 10, 2025 Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) [“Cit(A)”], Dated 21.12.2018, Arising Out Of Assessment Framed Under Section 147 Read With Section 143(3) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (The “Act”) For The Assessment Year 2011–12. 2. The Assessee Has Raised Multiple Grounds, The Sum & Substance Of Which Is That The Learned Cit(A) Erred In Upholding The Addition Of ₹4,73,00,000 Made By The Assessing Officer (“Ao”) Under Section 68 Of The Act Towards Share Capital & Share Premium, Ignoring The Documentary Evidences Placed On Record & Without Conducting Any Independent Enquiry. 3. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Company Filed Its Return Of Income For The Assessment Year 2011–12 Declaring Total Income Of ₹16,67,088. Subsequently, The Case Of The Assessee Was Reopened

Section 131Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

68 of the Act. Accordingly, the entire amount of ₹4.73 crores was treated as unexplained cash credit and added to the income of the assessee. Apart from the above, the AO also disallowed set-off of certain losses against capital gains and finally assessed the total income at ₹4,89,67,090 vide order dated 21.12.2018. 4. On appeal

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1,, RANCHI vs. SHRI KAMAL BHUSHAN, RANCHI

In the result, the appeals of the revenue and the cross-objections of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 8/RAN/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi15 Nov 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma] I.T.(Ss)A. No. 1/Ran/2021 I.T.(Ss)A. No. 5/Ran/2019

Section 132(1)Section 153ASection 37(1)Section 68Section 69C

section 68 which has been cross checked with the details submitted in the paper book and as such. It is also observed that the assessing officer at time of assessment has failed to look into the submissions of the appellant and for that matter give any categorical finding for making the addition as from the order of assessment

SRI KAMLESH KUMAR SINGH,DALTONGANJ vs. ACIT,CIR-1, RANCHI

ITA 53/RAN/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi07 Aug 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A. No. 49/Ran/2017 Assessment Year: 2009-2010 Smt. Madhu Singh,...................................Appellant Hamidganj, Daltonganj-822101 [Pan: Bbjps0426B] -Vs.- Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax,....Respondent Circle-1, Ranchi & I.T.A. Nos. 53 & 54/Ran/2017 Assessment Years: 2008-2009 & 2009-2010 Shri Kamlesh Kumar Singh,...................Appellant Hamidganj, Daltonganj-822101 [Pan: Afzps8288J] -Vs.- Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax,....Respondent Circle-1, Ranchi Appearances By: Shri Devesh Poddar, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri P.K. Koley, Sr. D.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing : May 22, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : August 7Th, 2023 1 Assessment Year: 2009-2010 Smt. Madhu Singh & Ita Nos. 53 & 54/Ran/2017 Assessment Years: 2008-2009 & 2009-2010 Shri Kamlesh Kr. Singh

Section 10(38)Section 143(3)Section 234A

unexplained money in the hands of Kamlesh Kumar Singh 4 Assessment Year: 2009-2010 Smt. Madhu Singh & ITA Nos. 53 & 54/RAN/2017 Assessment Years: 2008-2009 & 2009-2010 Shri Kamlesh Kr. Singh and made a substantive addition under section 69A of the Act and for loan taken from her son, substantive addition of Rs.3,54,000/- made in the hands