C.Pakirsamy v. ACIT (Mad)

315 ITR 293High Court#20457 most cited
4

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 348,252 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2019.

Judgments citing C.Pakirsamy v. ACIT (Mad)

Janardan Nath, Dhenkanal vs. ITO, Dhenkanal Ward, Dhenkanal

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 37/CTK/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack19 Aug 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg, Jm & Shri L.P. Sahu, Am आयकर अऩीऱ सं./Ita No.37/Ctk/2018 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2014-2015) Janardan Nath, Vs. Ito, Dhenkanal Ward, Chandan Bazar, Dhenkanal Dhenkanal स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ Pan No. : Abcpn 4137 A (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) ..

For Appellant: Shri D.Parida/C.Parida, ARsFor Respondent: Shri Subhendu Dutta, DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)

…आयकर अपीऱीय अधिकरण, कटक न्यायपीठ,कटक IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CUTTACK BENCH, CUTTACK श्री चन्द्र मोहन गगग, न्द्याययक सदस्य एवं श्री एऱ.ऩी.साहु, ऱेखा सदस्य के समऺ । BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA MOHAN GARG, JM AND SHRI L.P. SAHU, AM आयकर अऩीऱ सं./ITA No.37/CTK/2018 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2014-2015) Janardan Nath, Vs. ITO, Dhenkanal Ward, Chandan Bazar, Dhenkanal Dhenkanal स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ PAN No. : ABCPN 4137 A (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. यनधागररती की ओर से /Assessee by : Shri D.Parida/C.Parida, ARs राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue by : Shri Subhendu Dutta, DR सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of Hea…

Maganti Hema Sundara Rao, Eluru vs. The ITO, Eluru

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 305/VIZ/2017[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam19 Sept 2018AY 2009-2010

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.305/Viz/2017 (धििाारण िर्ा/Assessment Year:2009-10) Maganti Hema Sundara Rao Vs. The Income Tax Officer D.No.16B-12-2 Ward-2 Tangellamudi Eluru Near Venugopala Swam Temple Eluru [Pan :Ahnpm6745N] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri G.V.N.Hari, Ar प्रत्यार्थी की ओर से/ Respondent By : Shri V.Appala Raju, Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 11.09.2018 19 .09.2018 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement :

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N.Hari, ARFor Respondent: Shri V.Appala Raju, DR

…towards unexplained credit as genuineness of such credits was not established. 6.2.1. At the outset, the capital introduction of Rs.15,77,000/- was as on 01.07.2008, i.e. during F.Y.2008-09. Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case of C.Pakirsamy v. ACIT (Mad) 315 ITR 293 held as follows: "Rejection of opening capital on the ground that the appellant failed to prove the source and how it got accumulated over the years is justified." 6.2.2. Hence, AO. is justified in adding a sum of Rs.10,97,000/-- as much reliance cannot be placed on the confirmation letters filed in respect of above amount for the following rea…

ITO, Chennai vs. T.Chinnadurai, Chennai

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is allowed

ITA 1426/CHNY/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai10 Jul 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Abraham P.George & Shri George Mathanआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1426/Chny/2017 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2012-2013. Income Tax Officer, Vs. Shri. T. Chinnadurai, Non Corporate Ward 15(1) A7, Vi Cross Street, Chennai 600 034 Indira Nagar, Adayar, Chennai 600 020. [Pan Aeepc 9133N] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri. Shaji P. Jacob, Addl. CITFor Respondent: Shri. M. Gopinath, Advocate
Section 68

…ing the excess claim of opening capital even though assessee failed to substantiate the same and existence of such opening capital. 2.5)The Ld CIT(A) grossly erred in not following the binding decision of the Jurisdictional High Court in C.Pakirasamy VS.ACIT (315 ITR 293) on identical circumstances. 2.6) The Ld CIT(A) erred in holding that balance sheet of the assessee cannot be relied upon when asssessee furnished such signed balance sheet before bank authorities as well as enclosed with the income tax return filed under verification. 2.7) The Ld CIT(A) erred in holding that the opening capital is only a notiona…

Sankara Rao, Chennai vs. ACIT, Chennai

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

ITA 2027/CHNY/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Feb 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A. Mohan Alankamonyआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2027/Mds/2015 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10 Shri Sankara Rao, The Assistant Commissioner Of C/O Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate, V. Income Tax, New No.14, Old No.82, Flat No.5, Non Corporate Circle – 6, 1St Avenue, Indira Nagar, Adyar, Chennai - 600 006. Chennai - 600 020. Pan : Aacpr 1610 H (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. A.S. Sriraman, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. A.B. Koli, JCIT
Section 68

…the extent of `37,87,876/- from 22 creditors. 4 I.T.A. No.2027/Mds/15 Therefore, the Assessing Officer made addition under Section 68 of the Act. 5. The CIT(Appeals), by placing reliance on the judgment of Madras High Court in C. Pakirisamy v. ACIT 92009) 315 ITR 293, found that when the assessee failed to explain the source for the opening capital and how it was accumulated for the years, disallowance of opening balance can be made. In the case before us, the assessee has filed the details of the creditors and their addresses are also available. Therefore, the Assessing Officer herself could have called…