Section 115BE of the Income Tax Act

The decision most relied on for Section 115BE is CIT v. Naresh Kumar Aggarwala (331 ITR 510), cited in 26 of the 43 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 115BE

CIT v. Naresh Kumar Aggarwala
331 ITR 510 · 2011 · High Court
26
citing judgments

Loose sheets found during a search can form the basis for additions to undisclosed income unless the assessee successfully disproves the entries. The presumption under Section 132(4A) is automatic, placing the onus on the assessee to provide a plausible explanation to rebut it.

Judgments on Section 115BE

Nirmal Minda, New Delhi vs. ACIT Central Circle-13, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed and that of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1511/DEL/2020[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 May 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Sh. N. K. Billaiya & Sh. Anubhav Sharmaassessment Year: 2018-19 Sh. Nirmal Kumar Minda Acit Central Circle-13 House No.A-15, Ashok Vs New Delhi Vihar, Phase-I, New Delhi-110052 Pan No.Afypm4910J (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2018-19 Dy. Cit Central Circle-13 Sh. Nirmal Kumar Minda New Delhi Vs House No.A-15, Ashok Vihar, Phase-I, New Delhi-110052 Pan No.Afypm4910J (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 132Section 69B

Bakir Pachoriwala, Valsad vs. ITO, Ward-1, Valsad

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 280/SRT/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Surat04 Aug 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini(Virtual Hearing) Bakir Pachorwala, I.T.O., Raj Sheet Metal Engg. Works, C- Ward-1, Vs. 1/16-B, Gidc Estate, Pardi, Valsad. Valsad. Pan No. Adxpp 9237 G Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

Section 115BSection 168Section 234ASection 254(1)Section 271(1)(c)

Naveen Goel, Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle- 36(1), New Delhi

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

ITA 310/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Jun 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. N. K. Sainiita No. 310/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2014-15 Naveen Goel, Vs Acit, C/O Rajesh Kukreja & Circle-36(1), Associates, 211, Lsc, Ashok New Delhi Vihar, Phase-Ii, New Delhi-110052 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaipg3199C Assessee By : Sh. Saurav Rohatgi, Ca Revenue By : Sh. B. R. Mishra, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 05.06.2018 Date Of Pronouncement : 08.06.2018 Order This Is An Appeal By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 31.10.2017 Of Ld. Cit(A)-12, New Delhi. 2. Following Grounds Have Been Raised In This Appeal: “1. That The Impugned Order Is Bad In Law As Well As On Merits. 2. That The Impugned Order Is Illegal As Without Jurisdiction. 3. That The Impugned Order Is Barred By Limitation. 4. That No Proper Opportunity Of Hearing Has Been Allowed. 5. That Ld. Cit (Appeal) Has Not Allowed Proper & Reasonable Opportunity Of Hearing.

For Appellant: Sh. Saurav Rohatgi, CAFor Respondent: Sh. B. R. Mishra, Sr. DR
Section 115BSection 143(1)Section 234BSection 68