THREE SEASONS WARE HOUSING,KAKINADA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, KAKINADA
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal admitted additional evidence and found that the funds originated as a material advance from M/s. Three Seasons Exim Ltd to the assessee-firm, subsequently re-cycled through the partners back to the company. Since the original source of funds was established and transactions occurred via banking channels, the Tribunal held that the addition under Section 68 was not justified.
What were the facts?
The assessee, a partnership firm, received Rs. 16.23 crore as unsecured loans/advances from M/s. Three Seasons Exim Ltd. The Assessing Officer added this amount under Section 68 as unexplained cash credit, contending that the assessee failed to prove the identity, genuineness, and creditworthiness of the creditors, a decision upheld by the CIT(A).
What were the issues?
Whether the addition made under Section 68 for alleged unexplained unsecured loans/advances, where funds were claimed to be re-cycled between related entities, was justified.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
Section 143(3),Section 143(2),Section 142(1),Section 133(6),Section 68,Section 115BBE
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show listHide 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.
- Sumati Dayal v. CIT1,967 citing214 ITR 801 · 1995 · SC · Read judgment
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, VISAKHAPATNAM DIVISION BENCH, VISAKHAPATNAM
Before: SHRIK NARASIMHA CHARY, HON’BLE & SHRI S BALAKRISHNAN, HON’BLE
आदेशकीप्रनतनलनपअग्रेनर्त/Copy of the order forwarded to:- निर्धाररती/ The Assessee–Three Seasons Ware Housing, D.No. 2-62-8, 1. Pedhireddy Vari Street, Santhi Nagar, Kakinada, Andrha Pradesh- 533003. रधजस्व/The Revenue – Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, O/o. ITO, 2. Deepthi Towers, Main Road, Kakinada, Andhra Pradesh-533001. 3. The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, आयकरआयुक्त (अपील)/ The Commissioner of Income Tax 4. नवभधगीयप्रनतनिनर्, आयकरअपीलीयअनर्करण, नवशधखधपटणम/ DR,ITAT, 5. Visakhapatnam गधर्ाफ़धईल / Guard file 6.
आदेशधिुसधर / BY ORDER
Sr. Private Secretary ITAT, Visakhapatnam
More judgments on Section 142(1)
- Sar Business Tradelink Private Limited… vs Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1(2), RaipurITA 599/RPR/2026[2014-15]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
- Subhash Chand Saini, Jaipur vs ITO Ward, Behror, BherorITA 36/JPR/2023[2017-18]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2017-18
- Hemal Paresh Madeka, Rajkot vs Asst.Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 955/RJT/2026[2020-21]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2020-21
- Venish Vinodray Lalani, Rajkot vs Income Tax Officer, MorbiITA 197/RJT/2026[2019-20]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Gaurav Jiteshbhai Joshi, Rajkot vs Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(1)(1), RajkotITA 1000/RJT/2026[2022-23]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2022-23
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Mufti Clothing And Co vs. The Assistant Commissioner (St)Madras · 16 Oct 2026
- U Days Garments vs. The Adjudication OfficerMadras · 16 Oct 2026
- M/S Jsw Cement Limited,Jajpur vs. State Of OdishaOrissa · 16 Oct 2026
- M/S.Sreeshobi Enterprises vs. The Appellate AuthorityMadras · 16 Oct 2026
- S.T.Promotors vs. The Commercial Tax OfficerMadras · 16 Oct 2026