ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), NAGPUR vs. M/S NITIN COAL PVT. LTD., NAGPUR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 91/NAG/2018Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur21 September 2023AY 2012-13Bench: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA (Judicial Member), SHRI GD PADMAHSHALI (Accountant Member)3 pages

In favour of the assessee: the Revenue's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the Revenue's sole substantive grievance involved an amount less than the minimum tax effect threshold limit of Rs. 50 lakhs as per CBDT Circular No. 17 of 2019. Consequently, the appeal was rejected.

What were the facts?

The Revenue appealed against the CIT(A)'s order deleting an addition of Rs. 70 lakhs made under Section 68 as unexplained cash credit. The Revenue's grounds focused on the lack of creditworthiness of creditors and genuineness of transactions.

What were the issues?

Whether the Revenue's appeal should be entertained when the tax effect is below the prescribed threshold limit. Whether the CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition of unexplained cash credit without establishing creditworthiness and genuineness of transactions.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 68

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, NAGPUR BENCHES : NAGPUR

Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA & SHRI GD PADMAHSHALI

Hearing: 29.08.2023Pronounced: 21.09.2023

This Revenue’s appeal for A.Y. 2012-13, arises against the CIT(A)-3, Nagpur’s order dated 23.02.2018, passed in Case No.CIT(A)-3/78/2016-17, in proceedings under section 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [“In short Act”].

2.

Heard both the parties. Case file perused.

2 ITA.No.91/Nag./2018 ACIT vs. M/s. Nitin Coal Pvt. Ltd. 3. The Revenue raises the following substantive grounds in the instant appeal:

“ 1. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CITA) erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 70 lakhs being unexplained cash credit u/s 68 of the IT Act, 1961.

2. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) failed to establish the creditworthiness of the creditors and genuineness of the transactions while deleting the additions on technical grounds and failing to appreciate that the same were not proved to the satisfaction of AO.

3.

On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT(A) failed to appreciate that details of reserve and surplus were not given in case of A.S.V Pvt. Ltd and in other case reserve and surplus comprises of premium only.

4.

On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the CITA) has failed to appreciate that the companies from whom share and premium was received did not have the creditworthiness to fund the share capital and premium and thereby neither the creditworthiness nor the genuineness of transaction is proved.

5. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) failed to appreciate the ground realities and documents in case of shell companies which are always in order so that they can act as a conduit in aiding tax evasion.

6.

On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has failed to appreciate that the two key ingredients in making addition u/s 68 namely creditworthiness of creditors and genuineness of the transactions were not proved to the satisfaction of the A.O.”

4. The Revenue could hardly dispute the clinching fact that its sole substantive grievance seeking to revive Section 68 unexplained cash credit addition of Rs.34,97,610/- only as per the relevant column in Form 36 herein; involves less than the minimum prescribed tax effect threshold limit of Rs.50 lakhs as per the CBDT’s latest Circular No.17 of 2019 dated 08/08/2019 made

3 ITA.No.91/Nag./2018 ACIT vs. M/s. Nitin Coal Pvt. Ltd. applicable to all pending appeals as well. The Revenue could hardly dispute any exception thereto in its above extracted grounds. This appeal is rejected in very terms. Ordered accordingly.

5.

This Revenue’s appeal is dismissed in above terms.

Order pronounced in the open court on 21.09.2023

More judgments on Section 68

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →