Section 131(1)(d) of the Income Tax Act

Income-tax Act, 2025: s.246

Section 131(1)(d) 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)(d) is UmacharanSaha& Bros co. v. CIT (37 ITR 21), cited in 50 of the 80 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 131(1)(d)

UmacharanSaha& Bros co. v. CIT
37 ITR 21 · 1959 · Supreme Court
50
citing judgments

Suspicion, no matter how strong, cannot substitute for evidence in income tax proceedings. Assessments cannot be based on imagination or guesswork.

Chennai v. M/s. Accel Limited 421 of
286 ITR 126 · 2006 · High Court
39
citing judgments

A revision order under Section 263 is valid only if the Commissioner believes the assessment order is erroneous and prejudicial to the revenue. The assessee's actions to establish bona fides are relevant to this determination.

CIT v. Associated Food Products (P) Ltd.
280 ITR 377 · 2006 · High Court
36
citing judgments

The Commissioner can only invoke revisionary powers under section 263 if the Assessing Officer's order is erroneous and prejudicial to the revenue, requiring a prima facie finding on merits.

CIT v. Ganpat Ram Bishnoi
152 Taxmann 242 · 2006 · High Court
30
citing judgments

Revision under section 263 cannot be invoked merely because the Assessing Officer did not conduct exhaustive enquiries. Jurisdiction under section 263 is not for re-examining the assessment process or for conducting further enquiries if the initial assessment was based on the satisfaction of the Assessing Officer.

ITO 20(2)(5), Mumbai v. Smt. Pratima Ashar
107 Taxmann.com 135 · 2019 · ITAT
17
citing judgments

The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) considers arguments regarding additions made under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act, concerning loans and share application money, and arguments against such additions on merits. The tribunal's decisions often rely on the findings of lower authorities, including the Assessing Officer (AO) and Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (CIT(A)).

DCIT v. Hetal Nitin Shah
159 Taxmann.com 1618 · 2024 · ITAT
8
citing judgments
CIT v. Land Infrastructure Development Projects Ltd.
357 ITR 763 · 2013 · High Court
8
citing judgments
Chemicon Engineering Consultant (P.) Ltd. v. ACIT
142 Taxmann.com 297 · 2022 · Reported
7
citing judgments
Third Member) in CIT v. Rohtas Projects Ltd.
100 ITD 113 · 2006 · ITAT
6
citing judgments
S.M.I.L.E. Micro Finance Ltd. v. ACIT
479 ITR 172 · 2025 · High Court
6
citing judgments

Judgments on Section 131(1)(d)

Shree Gaurishankar Developers Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 5(3)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands partly allowed

ITA 6956/MUM/2025[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Sept 2026AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon’Ble Justice (Retd.) C. V. Bhadang & Shri Prabhash Shankarshree Gaurishankar Developers V/S. Income Tax Officer, Ward – Private Limited बनाम 5(3)(2), Dev House, Beside Rajpath Club Room No. 523, 5Th Floor, Sg Highway, Ahmedabad – Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, 380059, Gujarat Mumbai – 400 020, Maharashtra स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aamcs7641C Appellant/अपीलार्थी .. Respondent/प्रतिवादी

For Appellant: Shri Dhrunal Bhat, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rajgopal K. Parthsarthy, Sr. DR
Section 131(1)(d)Section 143(3)

Satish Kumar, Patiala vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Chandigarh

The appeal stand partly allowed

ITA 1424/CHANDI/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh01 Sept 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Rajesh Damodarlal Sharma, Jm आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.1424/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2019-20) Satish Kumar Dcit-Central Circle – 1 #388, Ward – 4, Near Ramu Photostat Ground Floor, C.R. Building बनाम/ Vs. Saligram Street, Bhagat Singh Chowk Sector – 17, Chandigarh – 160017 Patran, Patiala, Punjab – 147105 "ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Agypk-9758-R (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Sh. Ashwani Kumar (Ca) A/W Sh. Aditya Kumar (Ca) & Ms. Deepali Aggarwal (Ca) – Ld. Ars ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Dr. Ranjit Kaur (Addl. Cit) - Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 18-08-2026 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement 01-09-2026 :

For Appellant: Sh. Ashwani Kumar (CA) a/w Sh. AdityaFor Respondent: Dr. Ranjit Kaur (Addl. CIT) - Ld. Sr. DR
Section 131(1)(d)Section 132Section 133ASection 143(3)

Hanumantha Rao Kandregula, Guntur vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Visakhapatnam.

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 66/VIZ/2026[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam31 Aug 2026AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha G, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: AEBPK2161F
Section 132ASection 143(2)Section 69ASection 69C

Chitra Avdhesh Mehta, Mumbai vs. ITO 33 (1) (3), Mumbai

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee stands

ITA 3229/MUM/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Aug 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain

Section 10(38)Section 115BSection 143(3)Section 250Section 68

Hameed Abdul, Mysuru vs. ITO, Ward-1(1), Mysuru

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

ITA 1935/BANG/2026[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Aug 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Balakrishnan S & Shri Soundararajan K.नििधारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2018-19) Hameed Abdul Prop Of M/S. Bharath Cycle, The Income Tax Officer, Shop No.1 , 777, Ameer Tower, Near Gandhi Square Behind Rrr Ward – 1(1), Vs. Hotel, Mysore. Mysore-570001, Karnataka. अपीलधर्थी Appellant प्रत्यर्थी Respondent

For Appellant: ABSPH9351C
Section 131(1)(d)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 148Section 69A

Venkatesh Govindappa, Mysore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle - 1(1), Mysore

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

ITA 1076/BANG/2026[2018 - 2019]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 Aug 2026
Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 145(3)

ACIT CC 2 4 Mumbai, Mumbai vs. Citygold Investments Pvt Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is dismissed

ITA 2416/MUM/2026[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jul 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Girish Agrawalacit, Central Circle 2(4) Citygold Investments Pvt. Ltd. Room No. 802, 8Th Floor, Shop No.2, Ground Floor Ivy Pratishtha Bhavan, New Marine Lines, Buildings No.2, Hubtown Gardenia Vs. Mumbai-400 020 Shantivan Mira Road, Thane-401 107

For Respondent: Shri Ajay Soneji, Sr. DR
Section 131(1)(d)Section 68

Alok Singh, Gautam Buddha Nagar vs. ITO Ward-2(1)(1), Ghaziabad

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

ITA 3098/DEL/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Jul 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Ms Madhumita Royalok Singh, Vs. Income Tax Officer, Flat No. 1001, Mahagun, Ward-2(1)(1), Marvella Apartment, Mahagun Ghaziabad Moderne Society, Sector-78, Gautam Buddha Nagar, Noida (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Ffhps9131H Assessee By : Shri Nishant Agrawal, Ca Revenue By: Shri Om Prakash, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 12/05/2026 Date Of Pronouncement 15/07/2026

For Appellant: Shri Nishant Agrawal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Om Prakash, Sr. DR
Section 131(1)(d)Section 143(3)Section 56(2)(x)

Jayant Warping Works, Bhiwandi vs. DCIT-CC-3, Thane

ITSSA 1069/MUM/2025[2019-20]Status: HeardITAT Mumbai20 Apr 2026AY 2019-20
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 37(1)Section 68

Jayant Warping Works, Bhiwandi vs. DCIT-CC-3, Thane

ITSSA 1068/MUM/2025[2018-19]Status: HeardITAT Mumbai20 Apr 2026AY 2018-19
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 37(1)Section 68

Jayant Warping Works, Bhiwandi vs. DCIT-CC-3, Thane

ITSSA 1067/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: HeardITAT Mumbai20 Apr 2026AY 2017-18
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 37(1)Section 68

Jayant Warping Works, Bhiwandi vs. DCIT-CC-3, Thane

ITSSA 1066/MUM/2025[2016-17]Status: HeardITAT Mumbai20 Apr 2026AY 2016-17
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 37(1)Section 68

Jayant Warping Works, Bhiwandi vs. DCIT-CC-3, Thane

ITSSA 1065/MUM/2025[2015-16]Status: HeardITAT Mumbai20 Apr 2026AY 2015-16
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 37(1)Section 68

Jayant Warping Works, Bhiwandi vs. DCIT-CC-3, Thane

ITA 1070/MUM/2025[2020-21]Status: HeardITAT Mumbai20 Apr 2026AY 2020-21
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 37(1)Section 68

Tirumalaiah Soma, Proddatur vs. ACIT, Central Circle, Tirupati

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1742/HYD/2025[2019-20]Status: HeardITAT Hyderabad06 Feb 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: SHRI MANJUNATHA G., HON’BLE (Accountant Member), SHRI RAVISH SOOD, HON’BLE (Judicial Member)

Section 131(1)Section 132ASection 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 69A

Income Tax Officer, Ward-6(1)(1), Bengaluru, Bmtc Building, Koramangala vs. Shubhankar Estates Private Limited, Bangalore, Lalbagh Road

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1917/BANG/2024[2016]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore19 Dec 2025

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year: 2016-17

For Appellant: Sri Sandeep Goyal, A.RFor Respondent: Sri Subramanian S., D.R
Section 131Section 131(1)(d)Section 143(2)Section 250Section 68

Vishal Singhal, Ghaziabad vs. ITO, Ward 2(2)(1), Ghaziabad

ITA 4106/DEL/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Dec 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Amitabh Shuklamr. Vishal Singhal Vs. Nfac, G-35, B, Patel Nagar Iii, Ward 2(2)(1) Ghaziabad Cgo Complex-Ii, Purani Uttar Pradesh - 201001 Hapur Chungi, Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh 201002 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Dijps2427H Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Sh. Gagan R. Khandelwal, Adv, Sh. Rajiv Khandelwal, Ca, Sh. Jaind Kumar Jaiswal, Adv. Respondent By : Sh. Om Prakash, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 15.12.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 17.12.2025

For Appellant: Sh. Gagan R. Khandelwal, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Om Prakash, Sr. DR
Section 10(38)Section 131(1)(d)Section 147Section 148Section 68Section 69C

ACIT, Central Circle-3, Patna vs. Radha Mohan Roy, Purnea

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and CO of the assessee is allowed

ITA 264/PAT/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Patna28 Nov 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vp & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am Acit, Central Circle-3, Patna Radha Mohan Roy, 6Th Floor, Room No.602 Mohan Nivas At Chopra Bazar, Central Revenue Building Ramnagar, Farshi Banmanki, Vs. (Annexe), Beer Chand Patel Purnea, Bihari-854102 Marg, Patna, Bihar-800001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Buzpr3181H Co No. 03/Pat/2025 (Arising In Ita No. 264/Pat/2025 For A.Y. 2019-20) Acit, Central Circle-3, Patna Radha Mohan Roy, 6Th Floor, Room No.602 Mohan Nivas At Chopra Bazar, Central Revenue Building Ramnagar, Farshi Banmanki, Vs. (Annexe), Beer Chand Patel Purnea, Bihari-854102 Marg, Patna, Bihar-800001 (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By : S/Shri A.K. Rastogi, Rakesh Kumar, Ars Revenue By : Shri Md. Ah Chowdhary, Dr Date Of Hearing: 26.11.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 28.11.2025 O R D E R Per Rajesh Kumar, Am:

For Appellant: S/Shri A.K. RastogiFor Respondent: Shri Md. AH Chowdhary, DR
Section 131(1)(d)Section 132ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 69C

M/S Blooms Realators & Hospitality Pvt. Ltd., Lucknow vs. Income Tax Officer-1(4), Lucknow

ITA 586/LKW/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow26 Nov 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. Kul Bharat & Sh. Nikhil Choudharya.Y. 2010-11 M/S Blooms Realators & Hospitality Vs. Income Tax Officer, Pvt. Ltd, B-1/66, Vivek Khand, 1-(4), Lucknow Gomti Nagar, Lucknow Pan: Aadcb6111H (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Sh. Rakesh Garg, Advocate Revenue By: Sh. R.K. Agarwal, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 28.08.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 26.11.2025 O R D E R Per Nikhil Choudhary, A.M.: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Orders Of The Ld. Cit(A)- Lucknow Dated 30.03.2015, Wherein The Ld. Cit(A) Has Dismissed The Appeal Of The Assessee Against The Orders Of The Assessing Officer Under Section 143(3) For The A.Y. 2010-11 Passed On 30.03.2013. The Grounds Of Appeal Are As Under: - “1. Because The Findings Recorded By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) That The Asasesse Has Failed To Discharge The Onus To Establish The Identity, Credit Worthiness Of Share Holder Company & Genuineness Of The Transaction Are Wholly Perverse Finding. 2. Because The Assessee During The Assessment Proceeding As Well As Before The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Has Filed The Documents Share Application Form, Certificate Of Incorporation, Acknowledgement Of Itr, Bank Statements & Copies Of Pan Card Of Share Holders Company. These Documents Are Sufficient To Establish The Identity, Credit Worthiness & Genuineness Of The Transaction. 3. Because It Is Well Settled Law That A Person, Making Investment In Share Capital Is Best Judge Regarding His Investment. The 9 Share Holder Companies On Their Own Have Made Investment In The Appellant Company. The Wrong Decision Of The Investor Cannot Be A Basis For Making Addition U/S 68 Of The Income Tax Act.

For Appellant: Sh. Rakesh Garg, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. R.K. Agarwal, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 68

Kemox Corporation, Bhiwandi vs. DCIT-CC-3, Thane

In the result, all the appeals of the Assessee under consideration are allowed as per terms set out in each appeal’s order

ITSSA 227/MUM/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Oct 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: Ms. Simran Dhawan, Ld. A.RFor Respondent: Shri Ritesh Misra, Ld. D.R
Section 131Section 131(1)(d)Section 142Section 250Section 68