Section 131(1) of the Income Tax Act

Income-tax Act, 2025: s.246

Section 131(1) falls under section 131 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, which corresponds to section 246 (Power regarding discovery, production of evidence, etc) of the Income-tax Act, 2025.

Read section 246 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 131(1) is 282(Del) 3. Pee Aar Securities Ltd. v. DCIT (97 Taxmann.com 398), cited in 40 of the 149 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 131(1)

282(Del) 3. Pee Aar Securities Ltd. v. DCIT
97 Taxmann.com 398 · 2018 · Supreme Court
40
citing judgments

The genuineness of transactions, particularly the creditworthiness of creditors for share capital, is a key factor in the addition under section 68. The assessee must provide sufficient evidence to prove the genuineness of such transactions.

CIT v. N. Swamy
241 ITR 363 · 2000 · High Court
38
citing judgments

The revenue bears the burden of proving that an assessee has undisclosed income. A mere assertion by the assessee, especially without evidence or linkage to seized documents, cannot be accepted.

Pavankumar M. Sanghvi v. ITO, Wd. 3(1)(2), Baroda
81 Taxmann.com 308 · 2017 · ITAT
23
citing judgments

Unexplained cash credits, accommodation entries, and share application monies from shell companies can be added to income under Section 68 if the assessee fails to prove the genuineness and bonafides of the transactions. The genuineness of a transaction is a matter of perception based on facts and ground realities.

Banerjee v. CIT, (1963) 49 ITR (SC) 112, 120, 121, D. YasodammaGudur v. CIT
84 ITR 307 · 1972 · High Court
20
citing judgments

The Assessing Officer's addition under section 68 is deleted if the Commissioner (Appeals) has thoroughly examined the facts and material on record and judicial pronouncements.

Lal Mohan Krishna Lal Paul v. CIT
12 ITR 441 · 1944 · High Court
15
citing judgments

The assessing officer cannot arbitrarily reject the explanation and documents furnished by the assessee regarding the identity and creditworthiness of creditors without sufficient material. The onus lies on the revenue to prove that the transaction was not genuine.

Aravali Infrapower Ltd. v. DCIT
390 ITR 456 · 2017 · High Court
14
citing judgments

Reopening of assessment is valid when based on tangible material, such as information from the Directorate of Income Tax (Investigation) or evidence of accommodation entries, especially where the assessee fails to provide satisfactory details regarding share applicants with meagre income investing large sums.

Pavankumar M Sanghvi v. ITO
258 Taxmann 160 · 2018 · Supreme Court
11
citing judgments
CIT v. Odeon Builder Pvt. Ltd.
17 SCC 311 · 2020 · Reported
9
citing judgments
Contel Medicare Systems P. Ltd. v. CIT
349 ITR 649 · 2012 · High Court
5
citing judgments
M Aboobacker v. CIT
81 Taxmann.com 299 · Reported
5
citing judgments

Judgments on Section 131(1)

Gorantla Rahul Kumar, Visakhapatnam vs. The Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Visakhapatnam

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 670/VIZ/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam16 Oct 2026AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G

For Appellant: CIQPG4938P
Section 131(1)Section 132Section 132(4)Section 147Section 148

Gorantla Rahul Kumar, Visakhapatnam vs. The Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Visakhapatnam

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 669/VIZ/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam16 Oct 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G

For Appellant: CIQPG4938P
Section 131(1)Section 132Section 132(4)Section 147Section 148

Assam Wood and Allied Products, Jagadhri, Yamuna Nagar vs. Income Tax Office, Ward-1, Yamuna Nagar

The appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1031/CHANDI/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow28 Sept 2026AY 2014-15
For Appellant: Ms. Meenal Goyal &For Respondent: Smt. Jaishree Sharma, CIT, DR
Section 131(1)Section 133ASection 144Section 145(3)Section 148Section 250Section 69Section 69A

Assam Wood and Allied Products, Jagadhri, Yamuna Nagar vs. Income Tax Office, Ward-1, Yamuna Nagar

The appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1031/CHANDI/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh28 Sept 2026AY 2014-15
For Appellant: Ms. Meenal Goyal &For Respondent: Smt. Jaishree Sharma, CIT, DR
Section 131(1)Section 133ASection 144Section 145(3)Section 148Section 250Section 69Section 69A

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2, Guwahati vs. Mukesh Kumar Chaurasia, Guwahati

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

ITA 82/GTY/2020[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati23 Sept 2026AY 2017-18
For Appellant: Shri S. P. Bhati, FCAFor Respondent: Shri M.C. Omi Ningshen, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 132(1)Section 132(3)Section 13ASection 143(3)Section 153Section 153ASection 250

Sunil Shantilal Mehta, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax - Central Circle 7(3), Mumbai

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

ITA 4576/MUM/2026[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Sept 2026AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee () & Smt Ratna Dasgupta () Assessment Year: 2002-03

For Respondent: Shri Vijay Mehta
Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 250Section 271A(2)(c)Section 272A(2)(c)

Byrapura Gowde Gowda Deepu, Bangalore vs. DCIT Central 3(1), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2540/BANG/2026[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 Sept 2026AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K.

For Appellant: AJFPD7727F
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 263

Income Tax Officer, M A Road Varanasi vs. Manoj Kumar Gupta, Chandauli

ITA 48/VNS/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Varanasi31 Aug 2026AY 2011-12

Bench: Justice (Retd.) C.V. Bhadang & Shri Nikhil Choudhary: A.Y. : 2011-12 Income Tax Officer, M.A. Road, Vs. Manoj Kumar Gupta Varanasi (Appellant) Dhanapur, Sakaldiha, Chandauli, U"Ar Pradesh 232 105. Pan : Amopg2759G (Respondent)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Amalendu Nath Mishra, CIT-DR
Section 131(1)Section 144

Sagar Rajendra Maske, Vadodara vs. The ITO, Ward 1(2)(2), Vadodara

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 2433/AHD/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad22 Jul 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Shri Rahul Chaudharysagar Rajendra Maske, The Income Tax Officer, Vs. B-205 Tulaja Bhavani Complex, Ward-1(2)(2), Opposite My Apple School, Vadodara. Visvamitri Road Vadodara-390011. [Pan : Atqpm8259 E] (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant Represented By : Shri Sanket Bakshi, A.R Respondent Represented By: Shri Amit Pratap Singh, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 20.07.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 22.07.2026

Section 132Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 234ASection 234CSection 250Section 270ASection 80G

Jignesh Mahendralal Bharuchi, Ankleshwar, Bharuch vs. ITO, Ward 2(1), Bharuch

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

ITA 1285/SRT/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Surat18 Jun 2026AY 2017-18
Section 115BSection 131(1)Section 142(1)Section 68

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

Kishorsinh Henduji Solanki, Ahmedabad vs. The Dy.CIT, Circle-2(1)(1), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 2683/AHD/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad27 Apr 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-

For Appellant: Shri Harsh Jain, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Kumbhare, Sr. D.R
Section 131(1)Section 132(4)Section 133(6)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 80G

Shri Ganesh Ramchandra More, Panvel vs. ITO, Ward-9(3), Pune

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2747/PUN/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune17 Apr 2026AY 2017-18
For Appellant: Shri B. C. Malakar &
Section 269Section 269SSection 275(1)(c)Section 45

Income Tax Officer, Delhi vs. Goverdhan Transport Company Pvt. Ltd., Delhi

ITA 4731/DEL/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Mar 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sudhir Kumar

For Appellant: Ms. Rano Jain, Adv., Sh. Pranshu SinghalFor Respondent: Sh. Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, Sr. DR
Section 131Section 131(1)Section 143(3)Section 68

Arjun Singh, Palwal vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 1(1), Faridabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5095/DEL/2025[A.Y. 2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Feb 2026

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri M. Balaganesharjun Singh, Vs. Income Tax Officer, H. No. 1014, Prithla, Palwarl, Ward-1(1), Haryana Faridabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Eicps8476L

For Appellant: Shri Charitra Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Ankush Kalra, Sr. DR
Section 131(1)Section 143(3)