Section 115BBE of the Income Tax Act

Income-tax Act, 2025: s.195

Section 115BBE of the Income-tax Act, 1961 corresponds to section 195 (T ax on income referred to in sections 102 to 106) of the Income-tax Act, 2025.

Read section 195 of the 2025 Act

Correspondence checked against the ICAI tabular mapping of the two Acts and the BharatTax.co section commentary.

The decision most relied on for Section 115BBE is CIT v. Vegetable Products Ltd. (88 ITR 192), cited in 2,664 of the 8,662 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 115BBE

CIT v. Vegetable Products Ltd.
88 ITR 192 · 1973 · Supreme Court
2,664
citing judgments

When two equally plausible interpretations of a taxing provision are possible, or when conflicting views exist from non-jurisdictional High Courts, the interpretation that favors the assessee must be adopted.

Sumati Dayal v. CIT
214 ITR 801 · 1995 · Supreme Court
1,967
citing judgments

The Revenue is entitled to look behind the apparent form of a transaction to discover its true nature, applying the test of human probabilities and surrounding circumstances. If transactions defy logic or are unnatural, they can be treated as bogus, even if supported by some documentation, especially in cases of cash credits or unexplained investments.

CIT v. Durga Prasad More
82 ITR 540 · 1971 · Supreme Court
1,579
citing judgments

Tax authorities must judge evidence using the test of human probabilities and consider the apparent as real until there are reasons to believe it is not. They can rely on circumstantial evidence and the preponderance of probabilities to determine the genuineness of transactions.

CIT v. Vatika Township Pvt. Ltd.
367 ITR 466 · 2014 · Supreme Court
1,558
citing judgments

Taxing statutes are presumed to operate prospectively unless a clear contrary intention for retrospective application is evident. The law applicable for determining tax liability is that which stands on the first day of the assessment year, following the principle that law looks forward, not backward (lex prospicit non respicit).

Dhakeshwari Cotton Mills Ltd. v. CIT
26 ITR 775 · 1954 · Supreme Court
1,061
citing judgments

Corroborative evidence is essential to support evidence found on third-party premises, and an assessment cannot be based on suspicion, surmises, or conjecture.

K.P. Varghese v. ITO
131 ITR 597 · 1981 · Supreme Court
989
citing judgments

An addition to income cannot be made merely on the basis of a difference in valuation of assets or a Valuation Officer's report without establishing actual understatement of consideration or the source of unexplained funds through proper enquiry. The Assessing Officer must conduct proper enquiry and satisfy the conditions for making such additions.

Kale Khan Mohammad Hanif v. CIT
50 ITR 1 · 1963 · Supreme Court
581
citing judgments

The assessee bears the onus of proving the source and nature of any sum of money or receipt found to have been received by them. If the assessee fails to satisfactorily explain the receipt, the Income-tax Officer is entitled to treat it as taxable income.

ACIT v. Serajuddin & Co.
454 ITR 312 · 2023 · High Court
580
citing judgments

Approval under Section 153D of the Income Tax Act is mandatory for assessment orders in search cases. While elaborate reasons for approval are not required, the approving authority must provide some indication that it has examined the draft orders and found them to meet the requirements of law.

Lalchand Bhagat Ambica Ram v. CIT
37 ITR 288 · 1959 · Supreme Court
570
citing judgments

Where an assessee maintains regular books of account, and these books are not rejected or found defective by the Assessing Officer, any cash deposits or available cash shown in the cash book, if sufficient to cover the transaction, cannot be treated as unexplained income or an addition under sections 68 or 69A.

Gee Vee Enterprises v. Addl. CIT
99 ITR 375 · 1975 · High Court
543
citing judgments

An assessment order is erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of revenue if the Assessing Officer fails to make proper inquiries before accepting the assessee's statements or claims. The Commissioner can revise such an order under Section 263 without conducting further inquiries himself.

Judgments on Section 115BBE

DCIT 19 1 Mumbai, Mumbai vs. Mafatlal Mangilal Kothari, Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed and all the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 7094/MUM/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 May 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar & & & Mafatlal Mangilal The Asst. C.I.T. Kothari Circle 19(1), 904, 9Th Floor, Vs. Room No. 506, 5Th Panchratna, Opera Floor, Piramal House, Mumbai Chamber, Lalbaug, Maharashtra – 400004. Mumbai, Maharashtra- 400012 Pan/Gir No. Agypk9896N (Applicant) (Respondent) & Dcit 19 (1), Mafatlal Mangilal 506 Piramal Chambers Kothari Lalbag, Mumbai Vs. 904, 9Th Floor, Maharashtra- 400012 Panchratna, Opera House, Mumbai Maharashtra – 400004. Pan/Gir No. Agypk9896N & Dcit 19 (1), Mafatlal Mangilal 506 Piramal Chambers Kothari Lalbag, Mumbai Vs. 904, 9Th Floor, Maharashtra- 400012 Panchratna, Opera House, Mumbai Maharashtra – 400004. Pan/Gir No. Agypk9896N Assessee By Mr. Shri Dharan Gandhi Revenue By Shri Umashankar Prasad Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 09.04.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 05.05.2026 आदेश / Order Per Bench These Six Appeals Comprise Four Appeals Filed By The Assessee & Two Appeals Filed By The Revenue, Arising Out Of Separate Orders Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As "Cit(A)"]Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961[Hereinafter Referred To As "The Act"], For Assessment Years 2016–17, 2017–18, 2019–20 & 2020–21. Since Common Issues Are Involved In All These Appeals, They Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By Way Of This Consolidated Order. For The Sake Of Convenience, Assessment Year 2016–17 Is Taken As The Lead Year. Common Facts 2. The Assessee Is An Individual. The Assessments For The Impugned Years Have Been Framed Under Section 147 Of The Actpursuant To Reopening Proceedings Initiated On The Basis Of Information Received From The Investigation Wing.

Section 131Section 131(1)Section 132Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151Section 250

DCIT 19 1 Mumbai, Mumbai vs. Mafatlal Mangilal Kothari, Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed and all the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 7093/MUM/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 May 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar & & & Mafatlal Mangilal The Asst. C.I.T. Kothari Circle 19(1), 904, 9Th Floor, Vs. Room No. 506, 5Th Panchratna, Opera Floor, Piramal House, Mumbai Chamber, Lalbaug, Maharashtra – 400004. Mumbai, Maharashtra- 400012 Pan/Gir No. Agypk9896N (Applicant) (Respondent) & Dcit 19 (1), Mafatlal Mangilal 506 Piramal Chambers Kothari Lalbag, Mumbai Vs. 904, 9Th Floor, Maharashtra- 400012 Panchratna, Opera House, Mumbai Maharashtra – 400004. Pan/Gir No. Agypk9896N & Dcit 19 (1), Mafatlal Mangilal 506 Piramal Chambers Kothari Lalbag, Mumbai Vs. 904, 9Th Floor, Maharashtra- 400012 Panchratna, Opera House, Mumbai Maharashtra – 400004. Pan/Gir No. Agypk9896N Assessee By Mr. Shri Dharan Gandhi Revenue By Shri Umashankar Prasad Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 09.04.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 05.05.2026 आदेश / Order Per Bench These Six Appeals Comprise Four Appeals Filed By The Assessee & Two Appeals Filed By The Revenue, Arising Out Of Separate Orders Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As "Cit(A)"]Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961[Hereinafter Referred To As "The Act"], For Assessment Years 2016–17, 2017–18, 2019–20 & 2020–21. Since Common Issues Are Involved In All These Appeals, They Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By Way Of This Consolidated Order. For The Sake Of Convenience, Assessment Year 2016–17 Is Taken As The Lead Year. Common Facts 2. The Assessee Is An Individual. The Assessments For The Impugned Years Have Been Framed Under Section 147 Of The Actpursuant To Reopening Proceedings Initiated On The Basis Of Information Received From The Investigation Wing.

Section 131Section 131(1)Section 132Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151Section 250

M/S Mafatlal Mangilal Kothari, Mumbai vs. The Asstt. CIT Circle 19(1), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed and all the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 5897/MUM/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 May 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar & & & Mafatlal Mangilal The Asst. C.I.T. Kothari Circle 19(1), 904, 9Th Floor, Vs. Room No. 506, 5Th Panchratna, Opera Floor, Piramal House, Mumbai Chamber, Lalbaug, Maharashtra – 400004. Mumbai, Maharashtra- 400012 Pan/Gir No. Agypk9896N (Applicant) (Respondent) & Dcit 19 (1), Mafatlal Mangilal 506 Piramal Chambers Kothari Lalbag, Mumbai Vs. 904, 9Th Floor, Maharashtra- 400012 Panchratna, Opera House, Mumbai Maharashtra – 400004. Pan/Gir No. Agypk9896N & Dcit 19 (1), Mafatlal Mangilal 506 Piramal Chambers Kothari Lalbag, Mumbai Vs. 904, 9Th Floor, Maharashtra- 400012 Panchratna, Opera House, Mumbai Maharashtra – 400004. Pan/Gir No. Agypk9896N Assessee By Mr. Shri Dharan Gandhi Revenue By Shri Umashankar Prasad Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 09.04.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 05.05.2026 आदेश / Order Per Bench These Six Appeals Comprise Four Appeals Filed By The Assessee & Two Appeals Filed By The Revenue, Arising Out Of Separate Orders Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As "Cit(A)"]Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961[Hereinafter Referred To As "The Act"], For Assessment Years 2016–17, 2017–18, 2019–20 & 2020–21. Since Common Issues Are Involved In All These Appeals, They Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By Way Of This Consolidated Order. For The Sake Of Convenience, Assessment Year 2016–17 Is Taken As The Lead Year. Common Facts 2. The Assessee Is An Individual. The Assessments For The Impugned Years Have Been Framed Under Section 147 Of The Actpursuant To Reopening Proceedings Initiated On The Basis Of Information Received From The Investigation Wing.

Section 131Section 131(1)Section 132Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151Section 250

M/S Mafatlal Mangilal Kothari, Mumbai vs. The ACIT Circle 19 (1), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed and all the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 5896/MUM/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 May 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar & & & Mafatlal Mangilal The Asst. C.I.T. Kothari Circle 19(1), 904, 9Th Floor, Vs. Room No. 506, 5Th Panchratna, Opera Floor, Piramal House, Mumbai Chamber, Lalbaug, Maharashtra – 400004. Mumbai, Maharashtra- 400012 Pan/Gir No. Agypk9896N (Applicant) (Respondent) & Dcit 19 (1), Mafatlal Mangilal 506 Piramal Chambers Kothari Lalbag, Mumbai Vs. 904, 9Th Floor, Maharashtra- 400012 Panchratna, Opera House, Mumbai Maharashtra – 400004. Pan/Gir No. Agypk9896N & Dcit 19 (1), Mafatlal Mangilal 506 Piramal Chambers Kothari Lalbag, Mumbai Vs. 904, 9Th Floor, Maharashtra- 400012 Panchratna, Opera House, Mumbai Maharashtra – 400004. Pan/Gir No. Agypk9896N Assessee By Mr. Shri Dharan Gandhi Revenue By Shri Umashankar Prasad Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 09.04.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 05.05.2026 आदेश / Order Per Bench These Six Appeals Comprise Four Appeals Filed By The Assessee & Two Appeals Filed By The Revenue, Arising Out Of Separate Orders Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As "Cit(A)"]Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961[Hereinafter Referred To As "The Act"], For Assessment Years 2016–17, 2017–18, 2019–20 & 2020–21. Since Common Issues Are Involved In All These Appeals, They Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By Way Of This Consolidated Order. For The Sake Of Convenience, Assessment Year 2016–17 Is Taken As The Lead Year. Common Facts 2. The Assessee Is An Individual. The Assessments For The Impugned Years Have Been Framed Under Section 147 Of The Actpursuant To Reopening Proceedings Initiated On The Basis Of Information Received From The Investigation Wing.

Section 131Section 131(1)Section 132Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151Section 250

M/S Mafatlal Mangilal Kothari, Mumbai vs. The ACIT Circle 19(1), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed and all the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 5895/MUM/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 May 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar & & & Mafatlal Mangilal The Asst. C.I.T. Kothari Circle 19(1), 904, 9Th Floor, Vs. Room No. 506, 5Th Panchratna, Opera Floor, Piramal House, Mumbai Chamber, Lalbaug, Maharashtra – 400004. Mumbai, Maharashtra- 400012 Pan/Gir No. Agypk9896N (Applicant) (Respondent) & Dcit 19 (1), Mafatlal Mangilal 506 Piramal Chambers Kothari Lalbag, Mumbai Vs. 904, 9Th Floor, Maharashtra- 400012 Panchratna, Opera House, Mumbai Maharashtra – 400004. Pan/Gir No. Agypk9896N & Dcit 19 (1), Mafatlal Mangilal 506 Piramal Chambers Kothari Lalbag, Mumbai Vs. 904, 9Th Floor, Maharashtra- 400012 Panchratna, Opera House, Mumbai Maharashtra – 400004. Pan/Gir No. Agypk9896N Assessee By Mr. Shri Dharan Gandhi Revenue By Shri Umashankar Prasad Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 09.04.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 05.05.2026 आदेश / Order Per Bench These Six Appeals Comprise Four Appeals Filed By The Assessee & Two Appeals Filed By The Revenue, Arising Out Of Separate Orders Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As "Cit(A)"]Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961[Hereinafter Referred To As "The Act"], For Assessment Years 2016–17, 2017–18, 2019–20 & 2020–21. Since Common Issues Are Involved In All These Appeals, They Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By Way Of This Consolidated Order. For The Sake Of Convenience, Assessment Year 2016–17 Is Taken As The Lead Year. Common Facts 2. The Assessee Is An Individual. The Assessments For The Impugned Years Have Been Framed Under Section 147 Of The Actpursuant To Reopening Proceedings Initiated On The Basis Of Information Received From The Investigation Wing.

Section 131Section 131(1)Section 132Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151Section 250

M/S Mafatlal Mangilal Kothari, Mumbai vs. The ACIT Circle 19(1), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed and all the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 5894/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 May 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar & & & Mafatlal Mangilal The Asst. C.I.T. Kothari Circle 19(1), 904, 9Th Floor, Vs. Room No. 506, 5Th Panchratna, Opera Floor, Piramal House, Mumbai Chamber, Lalbaug, Maharashtra – 400004. Mumbai, Maharashtra- 400012 Pan/Gir No. Agypk9896N (Applicant) (Respondent) & Dcit 19 (1), Mafatlal Mangilal 506 Piramal Chambers Kothari Lalbag, Mumbai Vs. 904, 9Th Floor, Maharashtra- 400012 Panchratna, Opera House, Mumbai Maharashtra – 400004. Pan/Gir No. Agypk9896N & Dcit 19 (1), Mafatlal Mangilal 506 Piramal Chambers Kothari Lalbag, Mumbai Vs. 904, 9Th Floor, Maharashtra- 400012 Panchratna, Opera House, Mumbai Maharashtra – 400004. Pan/Gir No. Agypk9896N Assessee By Mr. Shri Dharan Gandhi Revenue By Shri Umashankar Prasad Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 09.04.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 05.05.2026 आदेश / Order Per Bench These Six Appeals Comprise Four Appeals Filed By The Assessee & Two Appeals Filed By The Revenue, Arising Out Of Separate Orders Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As "Cit(A)"]Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961[Hereinafter Referred To As "The Act"], For Assessment Years 2016–17, 2017–18, 2019–20 & 2020–21. Since Common Issues Are Involved In All These Appeals, They Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By Way Of This Consolidated Order. For The Sake Of Convenience, Assessment Year 2016–17 Is Taken As The Lead Year. Common Facts 2. The Assessee Is An Individual. The Assessments For The Impugned Years Have Been Framed Under Section 147 Of The Actpursuant To Reopening Proceedings Initiated On The Basis Of Information Received From The Investigation Wing.

Section 131Section 131(1)Section 132Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151Section 250