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

151 ITR 150High Court1985#1445 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 366,339 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. (

ITO 31(1)(5), Mumbai vs. Gold Finger Establishment, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the Department as well as the cross objection of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 4212/MUM/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 May 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Rajesh Kumarassessment Year: 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Vimal Punmiya, A.RFor Respondent: Shri V. Vidhyadhar, D.R
Section 133(6)Section 69C

…493 (Cal HC) 5. Dy CIT V/s Rohini Builders [2002] 256 ITR 360 (CLI]). SLP was also dismissed by the Hon 'ble Supreme Court. 6. Anis Ahmed V/s CIT (2008) 297 ITR 441 (SC) 7. CIT V/s U K Shah (1973) 90 ITR 396 (Bom. HC) 8. Add. CIT V/s 1-lanuman Agarwal (1984) 151 ITR 150 (Patna HC) 9. Jhaver Bhai Bihar Lal & Co. v. CIT [1985] 154 ITR (1985] 154 ITR 591/21 Taxman 238 10. CIT vs. Sahibqanj Electric Cables (P) Ltd. 11978115 ITR 4087 Thus, in view of the above discussion and respectfully following the judicial pronouncement, the addition made by AO on account of mere non reply by parties in response to notice u/s 13…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. M.N. Securities Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the department are dismissed

ITA 3833/DEL/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Feb 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Ms. Suchitra Kamble, Jm Ita No. 3832/Del/2014 : Asstt. Year : 2005-06 Ita No. 3833/Del/2014 : Asstt. Year : 2006-07 Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Vs M/S M. N. Securities Pvt. Ltd., 8Th Floor, Statesman House, Tax, Central Circle-19, New Delhi Barakhamba Road, New Delhi-110001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aadcm0102D Assessee By : Sh. Shashi Tulsiyan, Adv. Revenue By : Smt. Shefali Swroop, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 06.02.2018 Date Of Pronouncement : 27.02.2018 Order Per N. K. Saini, Am: These Two Appeals By The Department Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Each Dated 25.04.2014 Of Ld. Cit(A)-Xii, New Delhi.

For Appellant: Sh. Shashi Tulsiyan, AdvFor Respondent: Smt. Shefali Swroop, CIT DR
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 68

…99 ITR 268 (Del.) " CIT Vs Lovely Export (P) Ltd. 319 ITR (ST) 5 (SC) " CIT Vs Value Capital Services (P) Ltd. 307 ITR 334 (Del.) " Orissa Corporation (P) Ltd. 159 ITR 78 (SC) " CIT Vs Dwarkadhish Investment ltd. 194 Taxman 43 (Del.) " ACIT Vs Hanuman Agarwal 151 ITR 150 (Patna) " CIT Vs Rohini Builders 256 ITR 360 (SC) " CIT Vs Orissa Corporation (P) Ltd. 159 ITR 78 (SC) " Nem Chand Kothari 264 ITR 254 (Gau) 11. It was further submitted that the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Lovely Exports (supra) have been followed by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the following case laws: " CIT Vs Oasis…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. M.N. Securities Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the department are dismissed

ITA 3832/DEL/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Feb 2018AY 2005-06

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Ms. Suchitra Kamble, Jm Ita No. 3832/Del/2014 : Asstt. Year : 2005-06 Ita No. 3833/Del/2014 : Asstt. Year : 2006-07 Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Vs M/S M. N. Securities Pvt. Ltd., 8Th Floor, Statesman House, Tax, Central Circle-19, New Delhi Barakhamba Road, New Delhi-110001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aadcm0102D Assessee By : Sh. Shashi Tulsiyan, Adv. Revenue By : Smt. Shefali Swroop, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 06.02.2018 Date Of Pronouncement : 27.02.2018 Order Per N. K. Saini, Am: These Two Appeals By The Department Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Each Dated 25.04.2014 Of Ld. Cit(A)-Xii, New Delhi.

For Appellant: Sh. Shashi Tulsiyan, AdvFor Respondent: Smt. Shefali Swroop, CIT DR
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 68

…99 ITR 268 (Del.) " CIT Vs Lovely Export (P) Ltd. 319 ITR (ST) 5 (SC) " CIT Vs Value Capital Services (P) Ltd. 307 ITR 334 (Del.) " Orissa Corporation (P) Ltd. 159 ITR 78 (SC) " CIT Vs Dwarkadhish Investment ltd. 194 Taxman 43 (Del.) " ACIT Vs Hanuman Agarwal 151 ITR 150 (Patna) " CIT Vs Rohini Builders 256 ITR 360 (SC) " CIT Vs Orissa Corporation (P) Ltd. 159 ITR 78 (SC) " Nem Chand Kothari 264 ITR 254 (Gau) 11. It was further submitted that the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Lovely Exports (supra) have been followed by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the following case laws: " CIT Vs Oasis…

M/S. Globus Projects Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, Faridabad

In the result all the three appeals filed by the assesses are allowed

ITA 2491/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Nov 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri H.S.Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishim/S. Globus Projects Private Ltd, Vs. Dcit, Unit No. 5D, 5Th Floor, Assets Aria Central Circle-1, Signature Offices, Jw Marriott Hotel, Faridabad Asset Area-4, Delhi Aerocity Hospitality District, New Delhi Pan:Aaccg5308E (Appellant) (Respondent) Bestech Hospitalities Pvt. Ltd, Vs. Dcit, Unit No. 5D, 5Th Floor, Assets Aria Central Circle-1, Signature Offices, Jw Marriott Hotel, Faridabad Asset Area-4, Delhi Aerocity Hospitality District, New Delhi Pan:Aaccg5308E (Appellant) (Respondent) Bestech India Pvt. Ltd, Vs. Dcit, Unit No. 5D, 5Th Floor, Assets Aria Central Circle-1, Signature Offices, Jw Marriott Hotel, Faridabad Asset Area-4, Delhi Aerocity Hospitality District, New Delhi Pan:Aaccg5308E (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Raj Kumar Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Smt Aparna Karan, CIT DR
Section 131Section 132Section 133ASection 153ASection 153A(1)(b)Section 153CSection 263

…ugh in our case no such confession has been made by BPSL), could not lead to the conclusion that assessee Company has indeed received the accommodation entry. In this regard, your honor‟s attention is hereby drawn to the case of Addl. CIT vs. Hanuman Agarwal (151 ITR 150), in which, Hon‟ble High Court of Patna Globus Projects Pvt. Ltd Vs. DCIT (ITA No. 2491/Del/2017) Bestech Hospitalities Pvt. Ltd, Vs.DCIT, (ITA No. 2484 /Del/2017) Bestech India Pvt. Ltd Vs. DCIT,(ITA No. 2485/Del/2017) (Assessment Year 2012-13) has stated that - “ The so-called confession by the creditor is not in relation to the amount in quest…

M/S. Bestech India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, Faridabad

In the result all the three appeals filed by the assesses are allowed

ITA 2485/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Nov 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri H.S.Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishim/S. Globus Projects Private Ltd, Vs. Dcit, Unit No. 5D, 5Th Floor, Assets Aria Central Circle-1, Signature Offices, Jw Marriott Hotel, Faridabad Asset Area-4, Delhi Aerocity Hospitality District, New Delhi Pan:Aaccg5308E (Appellant) (Respondent) Bestech Hospitalities Pvt. Ltd, Vs. Dcit, Unit No. 5D, 5Th Floor, Assets Aria Central Circle-1, Signature Offices, Jw Marriott Hotel, Faridabad Asset Area-4, Delhi Aerocity Hospitality District, New Delhi Pan: Aaccb2540F (Appellant) (Respondent) Bestech India Pvt. Ltd, Vs. Dcit, Unit No. 5D, 5Th Floor, Assets Aria Central Circle-1, Signature Offices, Jw Marriott Hotel, Faridabad Asset Area-4, Delhi Aerocity Hospitality District, New Delhi Pan: Aabcb6551B (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Raj Kumar Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Smt Aparna Karan, CIT DR
Section 131Section 132Section 133ASection 153ASection 153A(1)(b)Section 153CSection 263

…ugh in our case no such confession has been made by BPSL), could not lead to the conclusion that assessee Company has indeed received the accommodation entry. In this regard, your honor‟s attention is hereby drawn to the case of Addl. CIT vs. Hanuman Agarwal (151 ITR 150), in which, Hon‟ble High Court of Patna Globus Projects Pvt. Ltd Vs. DCIT (ITA No. 2491/Del/2017) Bestech Hospitalities Pvt. Ltd, Vs.DCIT, (ITA No. 2484 /Del/2017) Bestech India Pvt. Ltd Vs. DCIT,(ITA No. 2485/Del/2017) (Assessment Year 2012-13) has stated that - “ The so-called confession by the creditor is not in relation to the amount in quest…

ACIT 24(3), Mumbai vs. Ramesh Ramswarupdas Jindal, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 3096/MUM/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Nov 2017AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri N.K. Pradhan, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Haridas BhattFor Respondent: Shri Saurabh Kumar Rai
Section 132(4)Section 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “I”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI C.N. PRASAD, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI N.K. PRADHAN, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.3091 TO 3096/MUM/2017 (A.Ys: 2008-09 TO 2013-14) Office of the ACIT 24(3) v. Shri Ramesh Ramswarupdas Jindal R.No.413, 4th floor, B/2/601, Greenland CHS Ltd, Piramal Chambers, J.B. Nagar, Andheri (E) Lalbaug, Parel, Mumbai – 400 059 Mumbai – 400 012 PAN No: AADPJ 1124 F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Haridas Bhatt Department by : Shri Saurabh Kumar Rai Date of Hearing : 02.11.2017 Date of Pronouncement : 15.11.2017 O R D E R PER BENC…

ACIT 24(3), Mumbai vs. Ramesh Ramswarupdas Jindal, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 3094/MUM/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Nov 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri N.K. Pradhan, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Haridas BhattFor Respondent: Shri Saurabh Kumar Rai
Section 132(4)Section 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “I”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI C.N. PRASAD, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI N.K. PRADHAN, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.3091 TO 3096/MUM/2017 (A.Ys: 2008-09 TO 2013-14) Office of the ACIT 24(3) v. Shri Ramesh Ramswarupdas Jindal R.No.413, 4th floor, B/2/601, Greenland CHS Ltd, Piramal Chambers, J.B. Nagar, Andheri (E) Lalbaug, Parel, Mumbai – 400 059 Mumbai – 400 012 PAN No: AADPJ 1124 F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Haridas Bhatt Department by : Shri Saurabh Kumar Rai Date of Hearing : 02.11.2017 Date of Pronouncement : 15.11.2017 O R D E R PER BENC…

ACIT 24(3), Mumbai vs. Ramesh Ramswarupdas Jindal, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 3093/MUM/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Nov 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri N.K. Pradhan, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Haridas BhattFor Respondent: Shri Saurabh Kumar Rai
Section 132(4)Section 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “I”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI C.N. PRASAD, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI N.K. PRADHAN, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.3091 TO 3096/MUM/2017 (A.Ys: 2008-09 TO 2013-14) Office of the ACIT 24(3) v. Shri Ramesh Ramswarupdas Jindal R.No.413, 4th floor, B/2/601, Greenland CHS Ltd, Piramal Chambers, J.B. Nagar, Andheri (E) Lalbaug, Parel, Mumbai – 400 059 Mumbai – 400 012 PAN No: AADPJ 1124 F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Haridas Bhatt Department by : Shri Saurabh Kumar Rai Date of Hearing : 02.11.2017 Date of Pronouncement : 15.11.2017 O R D E R PER BENC…

ACIT 24(3), Mumbai vs. Ramesh Ramswarupdas Jindal, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 3092/MUM/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Nov 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri N.K. Pradhan, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Haridas BhattFor Respondent: Shri Saurabh Kumar Rai
Section 132(4)Section 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “I”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI C.N. PRASAD, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI N.K. PRADHAN, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.3091 TO 3096/MUM/2017 (A.Ys: 2008-09 TO 2013-14) Office of the ACIT 24(3) v. Shri Ramesh Ramswarupdas Jindal R.No.413, 4th floor, B/2/601, Greenland CHS Ltd, Piramal Chambers, J.B. Nagar, Andheri (E) Lalbaug, Parel, Mumbai – 400 059 Mumbai – 400 012 PAN No: AADPJ 1124 F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Haridas Bhatt Department by : Shri Saurabh Kumar Rai Date of Hearing : 02.11.2017 Date of Pronouncement : 15.11.2017 O R D E R PER BENC…

ACIT 24(3), Mumbai vs. Ramesh Ramswarupdas Jindal, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 3091/MUM/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Nov 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri N.K. Pradhan, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Haridas BhattFor Respondent: Shri Saurabh Kumar Rai
Section 132(4)Section 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “I”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI C.N. PRASAD, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI N.K. PRADHAN, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.3091 TO 3096/MUM/2017 (A.Ys: 2008-09 TO 2013-14) Office of the ACIT 24(3) v. Shri Ramesh Ramswarupdas Jindal R.No.413, 4th floor, B/2/601, Greenland CHS Ltd, Piramal Chambers, J.B. Nagar, Andheri (E) Lalbaug, Parel, Mumbai – 400 059 Mumbai – 400 012 PAN No: AADPJ 1124 F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Haridas Bhatt Department by : Shri Saurabh Kumar Rai Date of Hearing : 02.11.2017 Date of Pronouncement : 15.11.2017 O R D E R PER BENC…

ITO, Ward-32(4), Kolkata vs. Shri Shaleen Khemani, Kolkata

ITA 1945/KOL/2014[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Oct 2017AY 2010-2011

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Aby. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A No. 1945/Kol/2014 Assessment Year : 2010-11 I.T.O., Ward-32(4), Kolkata -Vs- Shaleen Khemani [Pan: Agapk 6810 K] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri David Z. Chowngthu, Addl. CIT DRFor Respondent: Shri Miraj D. Shah, AR
Section 133(6)Section 143(3)

…e question of invoking section 68 does not arise. The above premise on which the addition has been made is itself erroneous. Further, the Learned Assessing Officer has questioned the credit worthiness of the Donors. In Additional CIT V. Hanuman Agarwal (1985) 151 ITR 150(PAT) it was held that the assessee is not bound with a duty to know the acceptability of the cash creditor. Where the assessee has officially filed full particulars about the creditor namely name and address, income tax number and confirmatory letter about the transaction and thereafter 10 Shaleen Khemani I.T.A. No. 1945/Kol/2014 Assessment Year…

DCIT, Cir-4(1), Kolkata vs. M/S Bhubrighat Tea Co. Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, Revenue’s appeal stands dismissed

ITA 663/KOL/2015[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata11 Oct 2017AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri Aby.T Varkey & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year :2006-07 Dcit, Cicle-4(1), V/S. M/S Bhubrighat Tea Co. P-7, Chowringhee Pvt. Ltd. 6D, Shyamkunj, Square, Kolkata-69 12C, Lord Sinha Road, Kolkata-71 [Pan No.Aabcb 2972 J] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Shri Saurabh Kumar, Addl. Cit-Dr अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri Arivnd Agarwal, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 14-09-2017 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 11-10-2017 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement आदेश /O R D E R Per Waseem Ahmed:- This Appeal By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Kolkata Dated 23.01.2015. Assessment Was Framed By Acit, Circle-4, Kolkata U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) Vide His Order Dated 17.12.2008 For Assessment Year 2006-07. The Grounds Of Appeal Raised By Revenue Are Reproduced Hereinbelow:- “1. That On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Holding That Cess On Green Leaf Of Rs.1172020/- Is An Allowable Expenditure Ignoring The Fact That Green Leaf Is Attributable To Agriculture Activities Which Is Taxable Under State Agriculture Income Tax Beyond The Purview Of Central Income Tax & As Per Rule 8 Only 40% Of The Composite Income Is Taxable Under Central Income Tax & Moreover On The Same Issue As Slp Is Pending Before Apex Court. 2. That On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Cit(A) Erred On Facts As Well As In Law In Holding That Employees Contribution To Pf Of Rs.244399/- Is Allowed If Deposited Before Filing Of Return, Ignoring The Fact That

Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(va)Section 68

…nted income of the appellant cannot be sustained. I find support to my point of view from the following judicial decisions;- i) CIT vs. Orissa Corporation (P) Ltd. reported in (1986) 159 ITR 78 (SC) ii) CIT vs. Sahibganaja Electric Cables (P) Ltd. reported in 115 ITR 408 (Cal) iii) CIT vs. Shree Gopal & Co. reported in 204 ITR 285 (Guj) iv) CIT vs. Tania Investments (P) Ltd. reported in 322 ITR 394 (Bom) v) MOD Creations (P) Ltd. vs. ITO reported in 354 ITR 282 (Del) vi) DCIT vs. Rohini Builders reported in 256 ITR 360 (Guj) vii) Nemi Chand Kothari vs. CIT reported in 264 ITR page 254 (Gauhati). In view of the fa…

Principal Commissioner of Income Tax - 7 vs. Bikram Singh

The appeal is allowed in the above terms

ITA/55/2017HC Delhi25 Aug 2017

Bench: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR,HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH

Section 68

…ITA No.55/2017 Page 1 of 25 $~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELH + ITA 55/2017 Reserved on: 03rd August, 2017 Date of decision: 25th August, 2017 PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX – 7 ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Ruchir Bhatia, Senior Standing Counsel with Mr. Gaurav Kheterpal, Advocate. versus BIKRAM SINGH ..... Respondent Through: Mr. C. S. Aggarwal, Senior Advocate with Ms. Pushpa Sharma, Advocate. CORAM: JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH JUDGMENT Prathiba M. Singh, J.: 1. In the present Appeal, the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax - 7, impugns the order dated 19th July, 2016 passed…

Sanjay Singh, Ghaziabad vs. DCIT, Ghaziabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 6097/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 May 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N. K. Saini

For Appellant: Sh. L. M. Aggarwal, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Bedobani, Sr. DR
Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘SMC’, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI N. K. SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 6097/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 Sanjay Singh, Vs DCIT, L.M. Agarwal & Co., CA, Circle-2, KA-32, Kavi Nagar, Ghaziabad-201001 Ghaziabad (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AONPS6917B Assessee by : Sh. L. M. Aggarwal, CA Revenue by : Ms. Bedobani, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 06.02.2017 Date of Pronouncement : 05.05.2017 ORDER This is an appeal by the assessee against the order dated 01.09.2016 of ld. CIT (A), Ghaziabad. 2. Following grounds have been raised in this appeal: “1. That the learned C…

Kailash Chander, Hisar vs. Income Tax Officer, Hisar

ITA 817/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Aug 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu

For Appellant: Sh. Gautam Jain, CAFor Respondent: None
Section 143(3)Section 68

…Page. 261 to 266 (Gau.) Nemichand Kothari vs. CIT ii) 220 CTR 622 (Raj) Aravali Trading Co. vs. ITO e) 256 ITR 360 (Guj) DCIT vs. Rohini Builders f) 219 CTR 571 (Raj.) Labh Chand Bohra vs. ITO g) 103 ITR 344 (Pat.) Saraogi Credit Corporation vs. CIT h) 151 ITR 150 (Pat.). Addl. CIT vs. Hanuman Aggarwal i) 154 ITR 244 (Pat.) Addl. CIT vs. Bahri Bros. (P) Ltd. j) 59 ITR 632 (Assam) Tolaram Daga vs. CIT k) 361 ITR 220 (Del) CIT vs. Kamdhenu Steel & Alloys Ltd. 6.1 As regards addition of Rs. 5,49,000/- representing loans received by the assessee and, held to be unexplained cash credit u/s. 68 of the Act,…

Parmanand K Hinduja, Thane vs. ACIT Cir 2, Kalyan

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA N0

ITA 1049/MUM/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Apr 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 1049/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2007-08) Shri Parmanand K. Hinduja, Asst. Comm. Of Income बनाम/ 402, Banswani Tower, Tax – Circle – 2, V. Near Corporation Bank, Mohan Plaza, Ist Floor, Municipal Road, Khadakpada, Ulhasnagar, Kalyan (West). Dist. Thane – 401003. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Aacph9702N (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent)

For Respondent: Shri Kailash Gaikwad
Section 131Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…section 68 of the Act. The assessee relied on the following judicial pronouncements:- ITA 1049/Mum/2014 5 i) Orient Trading Co. Ltd. v. CIT, 49 ITR 723 (Bom) ii) CIT v. Mahalakshmi Textiles Mills Ltd. , 100 ITR 360 (Mad.) iii) Addl. CIT v. Hanuman Agarwal, 151 ITR 150 (Patna) iv) Sarogi Credit Corporation v. CIT, 103 ITR 344 v) Addl. CIT v. Bahri Bros (P) Ltd., 154 ITR 244 (Patna) vi) Bhadarmal Hajarimal v. ITO, 5TTJ 297 vii) ITO v. Hindustan Cold Storage and Refrigeration Company,19 TTJ 467 viii) ITO v. Sikkanthan Stores, 7 TTJ 294 (Mad.) ix) Champaklal Dhamanwala HUF v. ITO, 34 ITD 209 (Ahm.) x) Atmaram J. M…

ACIT 25(3), Mumbai vs. Rajeev G Kalathil, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the revenue stands dismissed and the cross-objection filed by the assessee is also dismissed

ITA 5312/MUM/2013[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Feb 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: S/Shri B.R.Baskaran & Shri Sandeep Gosainआयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No.5312/Mum/2013 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year :2010-11) बिधम/ Dy. Commissioner Of Income Rajeev G Kalathil, Tax -25(3), M-605, Regency Park, Vs. 308, C-11, Rna Millennium Township, Bandra-Kurla Complex, M G Road, Kandivali (W), Bandra (E), Mumbai-400067 Mumbai-400051 (अपीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) ..

For Appellant: Shri Devendra JainFor Respondent: Shri Uday B Jakke
Section 69C

…ee and without enquiring the details in respect of other parties added full amount to the income of the assessee. In support of his contention, the assessee placed reliance on the decision of Patna High Court in the case of Addl.CIT V/s Hanuman Agarwal (1985) 151 ITR 150 and stated that the Hon’ble High Court has held that the confession made by the third party behind the back of the assessee cannot be used against the assessee and the addition made on this basis cannot be held to be proper. 4 CO No.249/M/14 4. The ld. CIT(A) has deleted the addition made by the AO for the following reasonings: a) That the AO ma…

Sri. Manickam Murugan, Bangalore vs. ACIT, Bangalore

In the result, appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 577/BANG/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Sept 2015AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri. N. V. Vasudevan & Shri. Abraham P. George

For Appellant: Shri. Srinivasan, CAFor Respondent: Shri. Kaleemulla Khan, Addl. CIT
Section 69

…t was rejected for reasons which were not logical. According to him, nobody verified from Dr. Krithika Murugan how she had paid money to her father. Reliance was placed on the judgment of Hon’ble Patna High Court in the case of ACIT v. Hanuman Agarwal [(1985) 151 ITR 150]. 05. Per contra Ld. DR submitted that the credits in the bank account were in cash. It was impossible to presume that assessee had received money in cash from his daughter in London. 06. We have perused the orders and heard the rival contentions. Confirmation letter given by Dr. Krithika Murugan is reproduced hereunder : ITA.577/Bang/2015 Pag…

Commissioner of Income Tax-I, Visakhapatnam vs. Agricultural Market Committee, Paderu

ITTA/125/2011HC Telangana21 Apr 2011

Bench: V.V.S.RAO,RAMESH RANGANATHAN