DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL), JABALPUR vs. TARUN DEVCON PRIVATE LIMITED, JABALPUR

ITA 18/JAB/2019Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur29 December 2020AY 2015-169 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the AO's reliance solely on the creditors' income tax returns to assess creditworthiness was incorrect. The Tribunal found that the credits were largely explained by the creditors' existing capital and/or current income, subject to verification of certain claims.

What were the facts?

The Assessing Officer (AO) treated credits of Rs. 117.60 lacs and Rs. 252.50 lacs from two directors as unexplained income under Section 68. The AO doubted the creditworthiness of the creditors due to a mismatch between their reported income and the credit amounts.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee discharged the onus under Section 68 by proving the identity, capacity, and genuineness of the creditors, and whether the AO erred in solely relying on the creditors' reported income.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 68,Section 131,Section 153C,Section 132

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(10)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, JABALPUR BENCH, JABALPUR

Before: SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN & SHRI SANJAY ARORA

For Appellant: Shri Pavan Ved, Adv. & Shri
For Respondent: Shri Phagu Oram, CIT-DR, Shri Pavan Ved, Adv. & Shri
Hearing: 14/10/2020Pronounced: 29/12/2020

Per Sanjay Arora, AM: This is an Appeal by the Revenue agitating the Order dated 11.02.2019 by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Jabalpur (‘CIT(A)’ for short), allowing the assessee’s appeal contesting its’ assessment under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’ hereinafter) for assessment year (AY) 2015- 16 vide order dated 26.12.2017. Dy. CIT vs. Tarun Devcon (P.) Ltd.

2.

1 The facts of the case in brief are that the assessee, a private limited company i

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 68

All 29,931 judgments and leading authorities on Section 68 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →