Section 69D of the Income Tax Act

Income-tax Act, 2025: s.106

Section 69D of the Income-tax Act, 1961 corresponds to section 106 (Amount borrowed or repaid through negotiable instrument, hundi, etc) of the Income-tax Act, 2025.

Read section 106 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 69D is CIT v. Rajasthan Financial Corporation (134 CTR 145), cited in 19 of the 184 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 69D

CIT v. Rajasthan Financial Corporation
134 CTR 145 · 1996 · High Court
19
citing judgments

An Assessing Officer's decision allowing a claim based on the assessee's detailed written explanation and inquiries made during assessment cannot be deemed erroneous simply because the order lacks elaborate discussion on the matter.

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)).

Dr Prakash Tiwari v. CIT
160 Taxmann.com 83 · 2024 · High Court
15
citing judgments

An assessment order is not bad in law solely for failing to specify the section under which an addition is made, provided the addition is justified on merits.

DCIT v. Hetal Nitin Shah
159 Taxmann.com 1618 · 2024 · ITAT
8
citing judgments
Chemicon Engineering Consultant (P.) Ltd. v. ACIT
142 Taxmann.com 297 · 2022 · Reported
7
citing judgments
Principal\nCommissioner of Income-tax-2, Thane v. Shree Rajlakshmi Textile\nPark (P.) Ltd.
113 Taxmann.com 2 · 2020 · High Court
5
citing judgments
CIT v. Ram Niwas
170 Taxmann 5 · 2008 · High Court
5
citing judgments
COMPANY v. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, MYSORE
112 ITR 12 · 1978 · Reported
4
citing judgments

Judgments on Section 69D

Sarangabani Kirubagaran, Chennai vs. DCIT, Circle-1(2), Chennai

The appeal stand allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 1236/CHNY/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai04 Sept 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1236/Chny/2023 (िनधा)रण वष) / Assessment Year: 2013-14) Shri Sarangabani Kirubakaran Dcit बनाम/ 17/6, First Pillayar Koil Street, Circle-1(2) Vs. Ekkatuthangal, Chennai-600 032. Chennai. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Bumpk-0892-B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Ms.T.V. Muthu Abirami (Advocate)-Ld.Ar " थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri Nilay Baran Som (Cit) -Ld. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 25-07-2024 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 04-09-2024 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1. Aforesaid Appeal By Assessee For Assessment Year (Ay) 2013-14 Arises Out Of The Common Order Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-18, Chennai, [Cit(A)] Dated 13-09-2023 In The Matter Of An Assessment Framed By The Ld. Ao U/S.153C R.W.S. 153A R.W.S. 143(3) Of The Act On 31-03-2022. The Only Grievance Of The Assessee Is Confirmation Of Addition U/S 69 For Rs.30 Lacs & Assessment Of Short- Term Capital Gain (Stcg) For Rs.12.19 Lacs. 2. The Ld Ar Advanced Arguments & Submitted That Impugned Addition Of Rs.30 Lacs U/S 69 Represent Advance Received Through

For Appellant: Ms.T.V. Muthu Abirami (Advocate)-Ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri Nilay Baran Som (CIT) -Ld. DR
Section 132Section 133ASection 153CSection 271(1)(c)Section 69Section 69ASection 69BSection 69C

Sarangabani Kirubakaran, Chennai vs. DCIT, Circle-1(2), Chennai

The appeal stand allowed

ITA 1235/CHNY/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai04 Sept 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1235/Chny/2023 (िनधा)रण वष) / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Shri Sarangabani Kirubakaran Dcit बनाम/ 17/6, First Pillayar Koil Street, Circle-1(2) Vs. Ekkatuthangal, Chennai-600 032. Chennai. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Bumpk-0892-B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Ms.T.V.Muthu Abirami,(Advocate)-Ld.Ar " थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri Nilay Baran Som (Cit) -Ld. Sr.Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 25-07-2024 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 04-09-2024 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1. Aforesaid Appeal By Assessee For Assessment Year (Ay) 2012-13 Arises Out Of The Common Order Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-18, Chennai, [Cit(A)] Dated 13-09-2023 In The Matter Of An Assessment Framed By The Ld. Ao U/S.153C R.W.S. 153A R.W.S. 143(3) Of The Act On 30-03-2022. The Only Grievance Of The Assessee Is Confirmation Of Addition U/S 69 For Rs.6.50 Lacs. 2. The Ld. Ar Advanced Arguments & Submitted That Impugned Addition Represents Receipt Of Loan From A Friend Through Banking Channels Which Could Not Be Added U/S 69. This Addition Does Not Satisfy

For Appellant: Ms.T.V.Muthu Abirami,(Advocate)-Ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri Nilay Baran Som (CIT) -Ld. Sr.DR
Section 132Section 133ASection 153CSection 69Section 69ASection 69BSection 69C