1) CIT v. Sahibganj Electric Cables Pvt. Ltd. (

151 ITR 150High Court1985#1446 most cited

What is 1) CIT v. Sahibganj Electric Cables Pvt. Ltd. ( authority for?

The assessee's burden under Section 68 to prove cash credits is discharged by establishing the identity of the creditor and the genuineness of the transaction; the assessee is not required to prove the creditor's source of funds or creditworthiness, as the department can use Section 131 for further investigation.

79

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2011 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Sahibganj Electric Cables Pvt. Ltd. · 151 ITR 150 · Section 68 · Section 131 · cash credits · onus of proof · identity of creditor · genuineness of transaction · creditor's creditworthiness · source of funds · addition u/s 68

Sections most often in play

Section 68Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 133(6)Section 131Section 69CSection 115BBE

Issues it is cited on

trade creditorsonus of proofaddition under section 68shell companynon application of mindaddition u/s 68share application moneysection 194aprincipal commissioner of income-taxgenuineness of the transactionsection 44asection 131

Judgments citing 1) CIT v. Sahibganj Electric Cables Pvt. Ltd. (

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CC-1, LUDHIANA, LUDHIANA vs. SHREE GANESH EDIBLES PVT. LTD., KHANNA

The appeal stand dismissed

ITA 308/CHANDI/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh24 Feb 2026AY 2022-23

Bench: SHRI RAJPAL YADAV (Vice President), SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL (Accountant Member)

For Respondent: Sh. Abhishek Pal Garg (CIT) – Ld. DR
Section 115JSection 132Section 147Section 148Section 68

…essee has discharged its burden. No additions can be made unless a contrary finding is established by the AO.” (On Genuineness) It has been held by Ld. Hon'ble High Court of Calcutta in the case of CIT vs. Sahibganj Electric Cables (P) Ltd. reported at [1978] 115 ITR 408 (Cal.) as under: “Amounts of loan were received by cheques through assessee’s bankers. The creditors gave confirmation letters mentioning therein their Income- tax file numbers. ITO without making any further enquiry, disbelieving the evidence of the assessee made addition. ITAT held the addition not justified as the assessee discharged the onus.…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CC-1, LUDHIANA, LUDHIANA vs. SHREE GANESH EDIBLES PVT. LTD., KHANNA

The appeal stand dismissed

ITA 307/CHANDI/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh24 Feb 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: SHRI RAJPAL YADAV (Vice President), SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL (Accountant Member)

For Respondent: Sh. Abhishek Pal Garg (CIT) – Ld. DR
Section 115JSection 132Section 147Section 148Section 68

…essee has discharged its burden. No additions can be made unless a contrary finding is established by the AO.” (On Genuineness) It has been held by Ld. Hon'ble High Court of Calcutta in the case of CIT vs. Sahibganj Electric Cables (P) Ltd. reported at [1978] 115 ITR 408 (Cal.) as under: “Amounts of loan were received by cheques through assessee’s bankers. The creditors gave confirmation letters mentioning therein their Income- tax file numbers. ITO without making any further enquiry, disbelieving the evidence of the assessee made addition. ITAT held the addition not justified as the assessee discharged the onus.…

RITIKA GEMS PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ITO-5(3)(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 4495/MUM/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Nov 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankar

Section 250Section 68

…t immediately after repayment, the creditors withdrew the money could not lead to any adverse inference when this was their modus operandi and assessee's case was not the solitary transaction. xiii. In the case of CIT Sahibganj Electric cables (p) Ltd. [1978] 115 ITR 408 (Cal.) where the amounts of loan received by cheques and repayments also made by cheques through asessec's bankers, the creditors gave confirmation letters mentioning therein their income enquiry. making tax file number. ITO without any further disbelieving the evidence of the assessee made addition. ITAT held the additions not justified as the a…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 2(1)(1), VADODARA, VADODARA. vs. TRUFORM TECHNO PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED, NAGPUR

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed

ITA 1776/AHD/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad18 Sept 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaassessment Year: 2009-10

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 68Section 78(2)

…extiles V. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(2), Surat in I.T.A No. 125/Ahd/2012. 5.2.3.5. While rendering the above decision, reliance is also placed on the following judicial pronouncements: (i) Orissa Corporation Pvt. Ltd - 159 1TR 88 (SC); (ii) Hanuman Agarwal - 151 ITR 150 (Pat.); (ii) ACIT vs. Govind Ram Agarwal - 76 ITD 120 (Cal.). In all the above cases, it has been stated by the Courts of Law that only the ITA Nos.1775 & 1776/Ahd/2024 & C.O. No.42/Ahd/2025 (Assessment Years: 2009-10 & 2012-13) DCIT vs. Truform Techno Products Pvt. Ltd. Page 16 of 22 initial burden rests upon the appellant to prove credit entri…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 2(1)(1), VADODARA, VADODARA vs. TRUFORM TECHNO PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED, NAGPUR

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed

ITA 1775/AHD/2024[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad18 Sept 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaassessment Year: 2009-10

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 68Section 78(2)

…extiles V. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(2), Surat in I.T.A No. 125/Ahd/2012. 5.2.3.5. While rendering the above decision, reliance is also placed on the following judicial pronouncements: (i) Orissa Corporation Pvt. Ltd - 159 1TR 88 (SC); (ii) Hanuman Agarwal - 151 ITR 150 (Pat.); (ii) ACIT vs. Govind Ram Agarwal - 76 ITD 120 (Cal.). In all the above cases, it has been stated by the Courts of Law that only the ITA Nos.1775 & 1776/Ahd/2024 & C.O. No.42/Ahd/2025 (Assessment Years: 2009-10 & 2012-13) DCIT vs. Truform Techno Products Pvt. Ltd. Page 16 of 22 initial burden rests upon the appellant to prove credit entri…

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, NOIDA vs. M/S RUDRA BUILDWELL HOMES PVT. LTD, DELHI

ITA 602/DEL/2025[2016]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Aug 2025

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwalassessment Year: 2016-17 Vs. M/S. Rudra Buildwell Homes Dcit, Central Circle-I, Noida Pvt. Ltd., 53, Okhla Phase, Delhi Pan: Aafcr6959P (Appellant) (Respondent) With C.O. No.106/Del/2025 [Arising Out Of Ita No.602/Del/2025] Assessment Year: 2016-17 M/S. Rudra Buildwell Vs. Dcit, Central Circle-I, Homes Pvt. Ltd., Noida A-66, Sector-63, Noida Pan: Aafcr6959P (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Sh. Rohit Kapoor, Adv. Sh. Veersen Agarwal, Itp Department By Sh. Rajesh Chandra, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 12.08.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 29.08.2025 Order Per Satbeer Singh Godara, Jm This Revenue’S Appeal Ita No.602/Del/2025 & Assessee’S Cross Objection C.O. No. 106/Del/2025 For Assessment Year 2016-

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 148ASection 151Section 151(1)Section 151(2)

…right in confirming order passed by Commissioner (Appeals) and holding that no addition could be made under section 68- Held, yes [Paras 21, 23 and 24] [In favour of assessee) The Hon'ble High Court of Patna in the case of Addl. CIT v. Hanuman Aggarwal (1985) 151 ITR 150 (Pat.) has held as under: "It can never be within the exclusive knowledge of the debtor to know the sources of income of the creditor. Once he is supplied the credit that he wants, he is satisfied. Once he has furnished the true identity, the correct address and the correct GIR number of the creditor, fulfils his obligation under the Act. The ass…

DCIT- CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), KOLKATA vs. VIKRMA IMPEX PRIVATE LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 317/KOL/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata25 Aug 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar&Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey]

Section 115BSection 132Section 133(6)Section 153ASection 68Section 69C

…ii)Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT s. Mahavir Crimpers 95 Taxman.com 323 (Guj). (iii) CIT vs. Karaj Singh (2011) 15 txmann.com 70 (P&H) & Panna Devi Chowdhary vs. CIT, 208 ITR 849 (Bom) etc. (iv) CIT v. Sahibganj Electric Cables (P.) Ltd. [1978] 115 ITR 408 (CAL.). (v) Principal Commissioner of Income-tax v. Ojas Tarmake (P.) Ltd.Reported as 156 taxmann.com 75 (Gujarat) (vi)CIT v. Rohini Builders [2003] 127 Taxman 523/[2002] 256 ITR360 (Guj.) (vii) Hon’ble Gujarat High Court’s decision in the PrincipalCommissioner of Income Tax 1 vs. Merrygold Gems Pvt. Ltd, reported in2024 (6) TMI 1371 (viii) CIT v…

DCIT, CC-2(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. VIKRMA IMPEX PRIVATE LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 316/KOL/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata25 Aug 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar&Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey]

Section 115BSection 132Section 133(6)Section 153ASection 68Section 69C

…ii)Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT s. Mahavir Crimpers 95 Taxman.com 323 (Guj). (iii) CIT vs. Karaj Singh (2011) 15 txmann.com 70 (P&H) & Panna Devi Chowdhary vs. CIT, 208 ITR 849 (Bom) etc. (iv) CIT v. Sahibganj Electric Cables (P.) Ltd. [1978] 115 ITR 408 (CAL.). (v) Principal Commissioner of Income-tax v. Ojas Tarmake (P.) Ltd.Reported as 156 taxmann.com 75 (Gujarat) (vi)CIT v. Rohini Builders [2003] 127 Taxman 523/[2002] 256 ITR360 (Guj.) (vii) Hon’ble Gujarat High Court’s decision in the PrincipalCommissioner of Income Tax 1 vs. Merrygold Gems Pvt. Ltd, reported in2024 (6) TMI 1371 (viii) CIT v…

INCOME TAX OFFICER, JAIPUR vs. KEDIA BUILDERS AND COLONIZERS PRIVATE LIMITED, JAIPUR

In the result, all appeals of the revenue are stands dismissed

ITA 901/JPR/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur11 Mar 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Sidharth RankaFor Respondent: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 147

…edit entry and in such case entry could not be treated as assessee's income when department failed to prove to contrary - Held, yes [Paras 9 and 10] [In favour of assessee]…” Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of SAHIBGANJ ELECTRIC CABLES (P) LTD. (1978) 115 ITR 408 (Cal-HC) held that where the amounts of loan were received by cheque and repayment was also made by cheque through assessee's bankers; and confirmation of creditors along with their income-tax file numbers were furnished the assessee discharged its initial burden and ITO was not Kedia Builders and Colonizers Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur justified, in the ab…

INCOME TAX OFFICER, JAIPUR vs. KEDIA BUILDERS AND COLONIZERS PRIVATE LIMITED, JAIPUR

In the result, all appeals of the revenue are stands dismissed

ITA 875/JPR/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur11 Mar 2025AY 2016-17
For Appellant: Sh. Sidharth RankaFor Respondent: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 147

…ntry and in such case entry could not be treated as assessee's income when\ndepartment failed to prove to contrary - Held, yes [Paras 9 and 10] [In favour of\nassessee]…”\n\nHon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of SAHIBGANJ ELECTRIC CABLES (P)\nLTD. (1978) 115 ITR 408 (Cal-HC) held that where the amounts of loan were\nreceived by cheque and repayment was also made by cheque through assessee's\nbankers; and confirmation of creditors along with their income-tax file numbers\nwere furnished the assessee discharged its initial burden and ITO was not\n\n160\nITA No. 872 & others/JP/2024\nKedia Builders and Colonize…

ITO WARD 14(2)(1), MUMBAI vs. MALVIKA HERBOPHARMA PRIVATE LIMITED, MUMBAI

ITA 4594/MUM/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Dec 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh ()

For Respondent: Mrs. Suby Srivastava
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 148Section 68

…sessment proceedings. On these given facts in the case of appellant, I am inclined to agree with the ground taken by the appellant relying upon decision given by the Honorable Calcutta High Court in case of - 1. CIT v Sahibganj Electric cables (p) Ltd. [1978] 115 ITR 408 (Cal.) - In this case the amounts of loan received by cheques and repayments also made by cheques through asessee's bankers, the creditors gave confirmation letters mentioning therein their income tax file numbers. ITO without making any further enquiry, disbelieving the evidence of the assessee made addition. ITAT held the additions not sustainb…

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, MEERUT, MEERUT vs. SMT. KAMLESH, DELHI

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 2152/DEL/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Dec 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri M. Balaganeshassessment Year: 2014-15 Dcit, Vs. Smt. Kamlesh, Central Circle, 1402/1403, Vidhyanchal Meerut Tower, Kaushambi, Ghaziabad Pan :Akypk3905E (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Sh. Rohit Agarwal, Ca Department By Ms. Jaya Choudhary, Cit(Dr)

Section 153ASection 56(2)(vi)Section 68

…right in confirming order passed by Commissioner (Appeals) and holding that no addition could be made under section 68- Held, yes (Paras 21, 23 and 24] [In favour of assessee] The Hon'ble High Court of Patna in the case of Addl. CIT v. Hanuman Aggarwal [1985] 151 ITR 150 (Pat.) has held as under: "It can never be within the exclusive knowledge of the debtor to know the sources of income of the creditor. Once he is supplied the credit that he wants, he is satisfied. Once he has furnished the true identity, the correct address and the correct GIR number of the creditor, fulfils his obligation under the Act. The ass…

AMAR PRATAP STEELS PRIVATE LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. ITO, WARD-7(2), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 108/JPR/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur03 Oct 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Rohan Sogani, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Monisha Choudhary, Addl. CIT
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 36Section 68

…try and in such case entry could not be treated as assessee's income when department failed to prove to contrary - Held, yes [Paras 9 and 10] [In favour of assessee]…” 1.19. Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of SAHIBGANJ ELECTRIC CABLES (P) LTD. (1978) 115 ITR 408 (Cal-HC) held that where the amounts of loan were received by cheque and repayment was also made by cheque through assessee's bankers; and confirmation of creditors along with their income-tax file numbers were furnished the assessee discharged its initial burden and ITO was not justified, in the absence of any further investigation, to reject th…

M/S DIN DAYAL PURSOTAM LAL,SIRSA vs. PR.CIT, ROHTAK

ITA 148/CHANDI/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh04 Mar 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: SHRI A.D.JAIN (Vice President), SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Rohit Sharma, CIT-DR
Section 147Section 263Section 40A(3)

…and once the payment has been made through account payee cheque, that identity is well established. ITA 146,147 & 148/CHD/2021 A.Y. 2011-12, 2015-16 & 2016-17 48 13.6 The following decisions are eloquent on this issue : i) Addl.CIT, Bihal Vs Hanuman Agarwal 151 ITR 150 (Patna) ii) Mather & Platt (I) Ltd. V CIT 168 ITR 493 (Cal) iii) Addl. CIT V Bahri Bros P.Ltd. 154 ITR 244 iv) Order of the Mumbai Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Prabhat Gupta V ITO in ITA No. 271/Mum/2017 and in M/s Vision Advertising P Ltd. V CIT, order dated 12.08.2018, in ITA No. 890/Mum/2015 13.7 Then, it has rightly been contended…

M/S DIN DAYAL PURSOTAM LAL,SIRSA vs. PR.CIT, ROHTAK

ITA 147/CHANDI/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh04 Mar 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: SHRI A.D.JAIN (Vice President), SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Rohit Sharma, CIT-DR
Section 147Section 263Section 40A(3)

…and once the payment has been made through account payee cheque, that identity is well established. ITA 146,147 & 148/CHD/2021 A.Y. 2011-12, 2015-16 & 2016-17 48 13.6 The following decisions are eloquent on this issue : i) Addl.CIT, Bihal Vs Hanuman Agarwal 151 ITR 150 (Patna) ii) Mather & Platt (I) Ltd. V CIT 168 ITR 493 (Cal) iii) Addl. CIT V Bahri Bros P.Ltd. 154 ITR 244 iv) Order of the Mumbai Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Prabhat Gupta V ITO in ITA No. 271/Mum/2017 and in M/s Vision Advertising P Ltd. V CIT, order dated 12.08.2018, in ITA No. 890/Mum/2015 13.7 Then, it has rightly been contended…

M/S DIN DAYAL PURSOTAM LAL,SIRSA vs. PR.CIT, ROHTAK

ITA 146/CHANDI/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh04 Mar 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: SHRI A.D.JAIN (Vice President), SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Rohit Sharma, CIT-DR
Section 147Section 263Section 40A(3)

…and once the payment has been made through account payee cheque, that identity is well established. ITA 146,147 & 148/CHD/2021 A.Y. 2011-12, 2015-16 & 2016-17 48 13.6 The following decisions are eloquent on this issue : i) Addl.CIT, Bihal Vs Hanuman Agarwal 151 ITR 150 (Patna) ii) Mather & Platt (I) Ltd. V CIT 168 ITR 493 (Cal) iii) Addl. CIT V Bahri Bros P.Ltd. 154 ITR 244 iv) Order of the Mumbai Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Prabhat Gupta V ITO in ITA No. 271/Mum/2017 and in M/s Vision Advertising P Ltd. V CIT, order dated 12.08.2018, in ITA No. 890/Mum/2015 13.7 Then, it has rightly been contended…

CHORDIA SAFEDEPOSIT AND VAULTS PRIVATE LTD ,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1(1), JAIPUR

In the result, appeal by the assessee is allowed

ITA 509/JPR/2023[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur17 Jan 2024AY 2013-2014

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Saurav Harsh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mrs. Monisha Choudhary, Addl. CIT
Section 142(1)Section 143(1)

…cash in their bank account. The learned Counsel has rightly placed reliance on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court rendered in the case of Orissa Coporation Pvt. Ltd., 159 ITR 78 (SC) and Hon'ble Patna High Court in the case of ACIT Vs. Hanuman Agarwal 151 ITR 150 (Patna) for the proposition that without issuing summons under section 131 of the Act to a party who filed confirmation, no adverse inference can be drawn by the AO. In the light of the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the view that 17 ITA NO.509-/JP/2023 CHORDIA SAFEDEPOSIT AND VAULTS PVT LTD VS ITO, WARD 1 (1), JAIPUR the addition…

T.G. RANGANATH,BANGALORE vs. DCIT, BANGALORE

ITA 173/BANG/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Oct 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2008-09

For Appellant: Shri Satyanarayana Rao, A.R. &For Respondent: Shri Sathyasai Rath, D.R
Section 147Section 68

…e learned assessing officer concerned to test the veracity or the genuineness of the transaction, the assessee succeeds in his submissions. The assessee placed reliance on the decision of the Hon'ble High Court of Patna in the case of ACIT Vs. Hanuman Agarwal 151 ITR 150 (Patna) for the above proposition. Even if the assessee is following mercantile system of accounting, as per AS — 9, the income shall be recognized in the books of account on certainty rather on an anticipation. Accordingly, the assessee has filed correct profit and loss account by ignoring the draft/provisional profit and loss account statement…

T.G. RANGANATH,BANGALORE vs. ACIT, BANGALORE

ITA 1467/BANG/2012[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Oct 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2008-09

For Appellant: Shri Satyanarayana Rao, A.R. &For Respondent: Shri Sathyasai Rath, D.R
Section 147Section 68

…e learned assessing officer concerned to test the veracity or the genuineness of the transaction, the assessee succeeds in his submissions. The assessee placed reliance on the decision of the Hon'ble High Court of Patna in the case of ACIT Vs. Hanuman Agarwal 151 ITR 150 (Patna) for the above proposition. Even if the assessee is following mercantile system of accounting, as per AS — 9, the income shall be recognized in the books of account on certainty rather on an anticipation. Accordingly, the assessee has filed correct profit and loss account by ignoring the draft/provisional profit and loss account statement…

ACIT, BANGALORE vs. SRI. T.G. RANGANATH, BANGALORE

ITA 1457/BANG/2012[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Oct 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2008-09

For Appellant: Shri Satyanarayana Rao, A.R. &For Respondent: Shri Sathyasai Rath, D.R
Section 147Section 68

…e learned assessing officer concerned to test the veracity or the genuineness of the transaction, the assessee succeeds in his submissions. The assessee placed reliance on the decision of the Hon'ble High Court of Patna in the case of ACIT Vs. Hanuman Agarwal 151 ITR 150 (Patna) for the above proposition. Even if the assessee is following mercantile system of accounting, as per AS — 9, the income shall be recognized in the books of account on certainty rather on an anticipation. Accordingly, the assessee has filed correct profit and loss account by ignoring the draft/provisional profit and loss account statement…

Showing 1–20 of 79 · Page 1 of 4

1) CIT v. Sahibganj Electric Cables Pvt. Ltd. ( (151 ITR 150) — Cited in 79 Judgments | BharatTax