HARSHAD HIMMATLAL RUPANI,PUNE vs. ITO WARD 5(2), PUNE

ITA 920/PUN/2025Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 January 2026AY 2014-15Bench: DR.DIPAK P. RIPOTE (Accountant Member), SHRI VINAY BHAMORE (Judicial Member)18 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the addition sustained by the CIT(A) of Rs. 11,55,891/- under Section 41(1) was unsustainable as the AO failed to prove the creditors had written off the liabilities. The issue of Rs. 1,06,940/- regarding differential receipts was set aside to the AO for verification.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal concerned additions made by the AO and confirmed by the CIT(A) regarding sundry creditors and differential gross receipts. The assessee argued that the sundry creditors were old and supported by documentation, while the differential receipts were due to deductions like VAT and TDS.

What were the issues?

Whether outstanding sundry creditors, not written off by the creditor, can be added as income under Section 41(1)? Whether differential gross receipts due to statutory deductions are taxable?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 41(1),Section 68

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(9)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, PUNE BENCHES “A” :: PUNE

Before: DR.DIPAK P. RIPOTE & SHRI VINAY BHAMORE

For Appellant: Shri Mahavir Jain
For Respondent: Smt Neha Thakur – (Virtual)
Hearing: 21/01/2026Pronounced: 28/01/2026

PER DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE, AM: This appeal filed by the Assessee is against the order of ld.Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeal)[NFAC], passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for A.Y.2014-15 dated 26.08.2024 emanating from the assessment order passed under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, dated 22.11.2016. The Assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal :

ITA No.920/PUN/2025 [A] “1] The learned CIT(A) has erred in confirming the additions aggregating Rs.12,62,833/- in respect of amount of sundry creditors and differential gross receipts without appre

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 41(1)

All 1,943 judgments and leading authorities on Section 41(1) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →