CIT v. Baishnab Charan Mohanty

212 ITR 199High Court1995#6591 most cited
17

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2025.

Also reported as

78 Taxmann 183

Sections most often in play

Section 115BBESection 131Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 37(1)Section 68

Issues it is cited on

section 115beproximate nexussection 91preponderance of probabilityviolation of natural justicecreditworthiness of the creditoraddition under section 68section 148a(d)section 131section 133asection 115bbgenuineness of the transaction

Judgments citing CIT v. Baishnab Charan Mohanty

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE -5(2), MUMBAI, NARIMAN POINT, MUMBAI vs. AGV CONSULTANTS , BORIVALI (E), MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the revenue\nstands dismissed

ITA 4878/MUM/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 May 2025AY 2020-21
Section 131Section 133ASection 250Section 68

…e-tax Officer should be ignored. The credits\nwere prima facie genuine. The Tribunal was not justified in upholding the\naddition of Rs.2,15,000 in the income of the assessee and disallowing the\ninterest on the amount."\n\n3. CIT V/s. Baishnab Charan Mohanty 212 ITR 199 (SC)\n"Held, that the first appellate authority as well as the Tribunal\nhad accepted the identity of the persons who had entered into\nbusiness with the assessee. The Tribunal further, relying upon the\nconfirmation letters available in the paper book as well as all other\nrelevant materials, recorded the finding that the transaction\ntransactio…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE -5(2), MUMBAI, NARIMAN POINT, MUMBAI vs. AGV CONSULTANTS , BORIVALI (E), MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 4872/MUM/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 May 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain & Hon’Ble Shri Prabhash Shankar

Section 131Section 133ASection 250Section 68

…Income-tax Officer should be ignored. The credits were prima facie genuine. The Tribunal was not justified in upholding the addition of Rs.2,15,000 in the income of the assessee and disallowing the interest on the amount." 3. CIT V/s. Baishnab Charan Mohanty 212 ITR 199 (SC) "Held, that the first appellate authority as well as the Tribunal had accepted the identity of the persons who had entered into business with the assessee. The Tribunal further, relying upon the transactions were genuine. The Tribunal was justified in holding the transaction appearing in the names of M and MS to be genuine transactions and d…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-5(2), MUMBAI, NARIMAN POINT, MUMBAI vs. AGV CONSULTANTS , BORIVALI (E), MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the revenue\nstands dismissed

ITA 4866/MUM/2023[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 May 2025AY 2021-22
Section 131Section 133ASection 250Section 68

…-tax Officer should be ignored. The credits\nwere prima facie genuine. The Tribunal was not justified in upholding the\naddition of Rs.2,15,000 in the income of the assessee and disallowing the\ninterest on the amount.\"\n\n3. CIT V/s. Baishnab Charan Mohanty 212 ITR 199 (SC)\n\"Held, that the first appellate authority as well as the Tribunal\nhad accepted the identity of the persons who had entered into\nbusiness with the assessee. The Tribunal further, relying upon the\nconfirmation letters available in the paper book as well as all other\nrelevant materials, recorded the finding that the transaction\ntransacti…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 5(2), MUMBAI, NARIMAN POINT, MUMBAI vs. AGV CONSULTANTS , BORIVALI (E), MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 4865/MUM/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 May 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain & Hon’Ble Shri Prabhash Shankar

Section 131Section 133ASection 250Section 68

…Income-tax Officer should be ignored. The credits were prima facie genuine. The Tribunal was not justified in upholding the addition of Rs.2,15,000 in the income of the assessee and disallowing the interest on the amount." 3. CIT V/s. Baishnab Charan Mohanty 212 ITR 199 (SC) "Held, that the first appellate authority as well as the Tribunal had accepted the identity of the persons who had entered into business with the assessee. The Tribunal further, relying upon the transactions were genuine. The Tribunal was justified in holding the transaction appearing in the names of M and MS to be genuine transactions and d…

UDAYAN GROVER,MUMBAI vs. NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE(NFAC), DELHI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2880/MUM/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Feb 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Bleudayan Grover V. National Faceless Appeal Centre Panch Mahal Delhi Panch Sristhi Complex {Acit – 26(3), Bkc, Mumbai} Powai, Mumbai - 400072 Pan: Aclpg0572G (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented By : Shri Vimal Punmiya Department Represented By : Ms. Kavitha Kaushik

Section 10(38)Section 131Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 57Section 68

…that affidavit is a legal enforceable piece of evidence and cannot be ignored .None of the statement of the assessee has been controverted or proved false and hence the contents remained unchallenged and therefore has evidential value (2)`It has been held in 212 ITR 199 (Orissa), that where the assessee has established the source of credits, , the assessee can be said to have discharged the onus cast on him and the onus now shift on the Department. (3) The Calcutta High Court in case of CIT vs. Kamdhenu Vyapar Co 263 ITR 692 held that there is an inbuilt duty of the I.T.O.to help the assessee by issuing Summons…

KANCHAN PLASTICS PRIVATE LIMITED,CUTTACK vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ASMNT CIRCLE-2(1), CUTTACK

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 198/CTK/2022[2017-18]Status: HeardITAT Cuttack22 Mar 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Before S/Shri George Mathan, Judicial & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpiaassessment Year : 2017-18 Kanchan Plastics Pvt Ltd., Kanchan Plastics Pvt Ltd., Vs. Dcit, Asmnt Circle Dcit, Asmnt Circle-2(1), 222, Banka Bazar, Cuttack 222, Banka Bazar, Cuttack Cuttack Pan/Gir No. Pan/Gir No. (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Mohit Sheth, Ar Mohit Sheth, Ar Revenue By : Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr. S.C.Mohanty, Sr. Dr

For Appellant: Shri Mohit Sheth, ARFor Respondent: Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr
Section 133(6)Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CUTTACK BENCH, CUTTACK BEFORE BEFORE S/SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL JUDICIAL MEMBER AND ARUN KHODPIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND ARUN KHODPIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND ARUN KHODPIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year : 2017-18 Kanchan Plastics Pvt Ltd., Kanchan Plastics Pvt Ltd., Vs. DCIT, ASMNT Circle DCIT, ASMNT Circle-2(1), 222, Banka Bazar, Cuttack 222, Banka Bazar, Cuttack Cuttack PAN/GIR No. PAN/GIR No. (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Mohit Sheth, AR Mohit Sheth, AR…

AVIRAL INDUSTRIES LIMITED,KANPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER -1(1), INDORE

ITA 419/IND/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore11 Feb 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Manish Boradvirtual Hearing Assessment Year: 2014-15

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 68

…; and (c) prima-facie that the loan is genuine one. If the assessee establishes the aforesaid three pre-conditions, the burden gets shifted to the Department and then it would be for the Department to disprove the same. [CIT vs. Baishnab Charan Mohanti (1995) 212 ITR 199 (Ori)]. In the instant case, the nature of impugned credits are that of loans taken from certain parties and increase in creditors as shown in its books of account. As per the settled law, the appellant company was required to establish identity and creditworthiness of the lenders and creditors and the genuineness of the transactions. 22. During…

ITO, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. JAY SHIVA EARTHMOVERS & CONSTRUCTION PVT. LTD,, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3995/DEL/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Feb 2020AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishii.T.A. No. 3995/Del/2010 Ay: 2006-07 Ito, Ward 4(2), Vs. Jay Shiva Earthmovers & Construction Pvt. Ltd., Room No. 413A, Bu-60, Sfs Flats, Outer C.R. Building, Ring Road, Pitampura, I.P. Estate, Delhi – 85 New Delhi (Pan: Aabcj1414D) (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. Satyajeet Goel, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. R.K. Gupta, Addl. CIT(DR)
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 68

…Kant & Co. v. CIT [1980] 126 ITR 63, Oriental Wire Industries (P.) Ltd. v. CIT [1981] 131 ITR 688, Prakash Textile Agency vs. CIT (1980) 121 ITR 890 & CIT vs. Korlay Trading Company Ltd. (1999) 232 ITR 820, by Orissa High Court in CIT Vs. B.C. Mohanty (1995) 212 ITR 199 and by Gauhati High Court in lalan Timbers Vs. CIT (1997) 223 ITR 11 (Gau.).In view of above, the entire burden is upon the assessee and the assessee has to prove the following three conditions:- 4 (i) identity of the creditor; (ii) capacity of such creditor to ,advance money & (iii) genuineness of the transaction. If all the aforesaid three…

ITO, WARD - 36(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. SHRI RAKESH AGARWAL, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2008/KOL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata19 Dec 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.2008/Kol/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14)

For Appellant: Shri K. Mondal, Sr. DRFor Respondent: None
Section 143(3)Section 57Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B”, BENCH KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI S. S. GODARA, JM &DR. A.L.SAINI, AM आयकरअपीलसं./ITA No.2008/Kol/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) ITO, Ward-36(1), Kolkata Vs. Shri Rakesh Agarwal 7, Mangoe Lane, 1st Floor, Room 110, Shantipally, Kolkata – 700 107. No.103, Kolkata-1. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: ADLPA 6462 E (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant by :Shri K. Mondal, Sr. DR Respondent by :None सुनवाईक"तार"ख/ Date of Hearing : 25/09/2018 घोषणाक"तार"ख/Date of Pronouncement : 19/12/2018 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. A. L. Saini: The captioned appeal filed by the Re…

MUKUND KUMAR MANTRI,SILIGURI vs. I.TO.WD - 1(3),JALPAIGURI, JALPAIGURI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1878/KOL/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata04 Jul 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: : Shri P.M. Jagtapsh & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravia.Y 2007-08

For Appellant: Shri J.M. Thard, Advocate, ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri A. Bhattacharjee, Addl. CIT, ld.DR
Section 143(2)

…of the creditor is not enough [ref. Shankar Industries vs CIT (1978) 114 ITR 689 (Cal); Prakash Textile Agency vs CIT (1980) 121 ITR 890 (Cal) Mere filing of particulars of the cash­creditor is not enough. In the case of CIT vs Baishnav Charan Mahanti (1995) 212 ITR 199 (Ori), it was held that only when all 3 conditions fulfilled, then the burden shifts to the department. But in this case, the assessee failed to prove the creditworthiness of the alleged creditor and/or donor. Therefore, the burden never shifted to the department. The identity and creditworthiness should be proved and there should be genuine tran…

PRAMOD KUMAR AGARWALLA,ANGUL vs. ITO, ANGUL WARD, ANGUL

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 12/CTK/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack26 Dec 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.S.Sainiआयकर अपीऱ सं./Ita No.12/Ctk/2017 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2012-2013) Pramod Kumar Agarwalla, Vs. Ito Angul Ward-Angul Prop: Pramod Trading Co., Shankar Cinema Road, Angul- 759122 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aaxpa 8746 Q (अपीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. निर्ााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri D.K.Sheth, Ar राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri S.K.Bandyopadhyay, Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 13/12/2017 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement 26/12/2017 आदेश / O R D E R This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Cit(A)-2, Bhubaneswar, Dated 22.08.2016. 2. Ground No.1 Of The Appeal Is Directed Against The Order Of Cit(A) Confirming The Disallowance Of Payment Of Interest To Loan Creditors Rs.8,16,618/- U/S.40(A)(Ia) Of The Act For Non-Deduction Of Tds. 3. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Ao Made Addition Of Rs.8,16,618/- By Disallowing Interest U/S.40(A)(Ia) Of The Act For Non- Deduction Of Tax At Source. The Ao Observed That On Growing Through The Ledger Copy Of Unsecured Loan It Was Found That The Amount Of Interest Paid/Credited To The Payee Exceeded The Minimum Amount Not Chargeable To Tax And, Therefore, He Did Not Accept The Explanation Of The Assessee That Since The Assessee Had Collected Form No.15G For Non-Deduction Of Tax From The Payee, Hence, No Tds Was Deducted From The Payments Of Interest Made. According To The Ao Column No.4 Of The Form No.15G Read

For Appellant: Shri D.K.Sheth, ARFor Respondent: Shri S.K.Bandyopadhyay, DR
Section 40Section 68

…eceived by the cheque and confirmation letters were filed by the said creditors. Therefore, the addition made by the AO by citing irrelevant decisions is improper, arbitrary and unjustified. It was submitted that in the case of CIT Vs. Baishnab Charan Mohanty 212 ITR 199, the Hon’ble Orissa High Court held that if the assessee establishes (1) identity of the creditor & (2) genuineness of the transaction then the onus shifts to the department to 5 disprove the same. In these circumstances, the addition as made is uncalled for an unjustified. The CIT(A) after considering the submissions of the assessee held that in…

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…

ACIT, CIRCLE - 1, ASANSOL, ASANSOL vs. BURNPUR CEMENT LTD., ASANSOL

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 28/KOL/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata19 Oct 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh, Am & Shri K. Narasimha Chary, Jm आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.28/Kol/2012 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2010-2011) Acit, Circle-I, Lower Vs. Brunpur Cement Ltd., 141, Chelidanga, Asansol-4 Cement House, Saradapally, Ashok Nagar, Asansol, District-Burdwan- 713304 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aacca 1999 B .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Niraj Kumar Cit Dr "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri S.M.Surana Advocate सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 26/08/2016 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement 19/10/2016 आदेश / O R D E R Per M.Balaganesh, Am This Appeal Of The Assessee Arises Out Of The Order Of Learned Cit(A), Asansol, In Appeal No.296/Cit(A)/Asl/R-I/Asl/10-11 Dated 31.10.2011 Passed Against The Order Of Assessment Framed U/S.144 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’).

For Appellant: Shri S.M.Surana AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Niraj Kumar CIT DR
Section 144

…nd they are all income tax assessees and identiy of the subscribers were not even disputed by the ld AO. 4.6.4. We find that the reliance placed on the decision of the Hon’ble Orissa High Court in the case of CIT vs Baishnab Charan Mohanty reported in (1995) 212 ITR 199 (Ori) is in favour of the assessee. The head notes in the said case is reproduced below:- Cash credit – Genuineness – Tribunal relying upon confirmation letters as well as other relevant materials recorded the finding that the transactions are genuine – Finding not perverse – Tribunal justified in holding that the transactions are genuine – Direc…

ACIT, CIRCLE - 1, ASANSOL, ASANSOL vs. M/S. RAJA TRANSPORT, ASANSOL

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 29/KOL/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 Jul 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh, Am & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm]

For Appellant: Shri A. K. Sinha, JCIT, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Shri S. M. Surana, Advocate
Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 3Section 40

…e outstanding balances. The appellant has also mentioned that TDS was made on the payments given to these parties during the year and this fact was also noted by the A.O. in his assessment order. The A.O. has relied on the cases of: a) Baisnab Charan Mohanty [212 ITR 199 (Ori.)] b) Precision Finance (P.) Ltd. [208 ITR 465 (Cal.)] Both these cases deal with cash credits whereas, in the case of the appellant, balances due to trade creditors have been added back. Thus, in my opinion, the facts of these cases being different the decisions relied by the A.O. cannot be applicable in this case. I find from a perusal of…

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S LIFESTYLE TEXWORKS PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal is allowed partly for statistical purpose

ITA 1943/DEL/2011[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jun 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Sh. H.S. Sidhu & Sh. O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2006-07 Deputy Commissioner Of Income Vs. M/S. Lifestyle Texworks Pvt. Ltd., Tax, Circle-4(1), Room No. 407, 4Th Apartment 530, Tower Iii, Mount Floor, C.R. Building, I.P. Estate, Kailash, East Of Kailash, New Delhi New Delhi Gir/Pan : Aaacl7069F (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Sh. Amit Jain, Sr. Dr Respondent By None Date Of Hearing 16.05.2016 Date Of Pronouncement 30.06.2016 Order Per O.P. Kant, A.M.: This Appeal By The Revenue Is Directed Against Order Dated 21/02/2011 Of Learned Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)-Vii, New Delhi Raising Following Grounds; “01. The Order Of The Learned Cit (Appeals) Is Erroneous & Contrary To Facts & Law. 02. On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Ld Cit (Appeals) Has Erred In Deleting The Penalty Of Rs.52,29,408/- Made U/S 68 Of The Act, Being The Unconfirmed Unsecured Loan. 2.1 The Ld. Cit (A) Has Ignored The Findings Recorded By The Ao & The Fact That The Assessee Did Not Discharge The Onus Of Proving The Creditworthiness Of The Creditors & Genuineness Of The Transactions. 03. On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Learned Cit (Appeals) Has Erred I N Deleting The Addition Of Rs.12,62,503/- Made On Account Of Disallowance Excessive Expenditure. 3.1. The Ld. Cit (A) Ignored The Finding Recorded By The Ao & The Fact That The Assessee Did Not File Required Evidences To Substantiate Its Claim.

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: ‘D’: NEW DELHI BEFORE SH. H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SH. O.P. KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2006-07 Deputy Commissioner of Income Vs. M/s. Lifestyle Texworks Pvt. Ltd., Tax, Circle-4(1), Room No. 407, 4th Apartment 530, Tower III, Mount Floor, C.R. Building, I.P. Estate, Kailash, East of Kailash, New Delhi New Delhi GIR/PAN : AAACL7069F (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Sh. Amit Jain, Sr. DR Respondent by None Date of hearing 16.05.2016 Date of pronouncement 30.06.2016 ORDER PER O.P. KANT, A.M.: This appeal by the Revenue is directed against or…

ACIT, CIRCLE - 1, ASANSOL, ASANSOL vs. ASHIRBAD REAL ESTATE & TRANSPORT PVT. LTD., ASANSOL

In the result, the cross objection of the assessee in CO 1/2012 is dismissed and revenue appeal in ITA No

ITA 1591/KOL/2011[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Sept 2015AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am] Assessment Year : 2008-09 (Appellant ) (Respondent) A.C.I.T., Circle-1, -Versus- Ashirbad Real Estate & Asansol Transport Pvt.Ltd. Burdwan (Pan:Aaeca 8075 C) C.O.No.1/Kol/2012 A/O Ita No.1591/Kol/2011 Assessment Year : 2008-09 Ashirbad Real Estate & -Versus- A.C.I.T., Circle-1, Transport Pvt.Ltd., Burdwan Asansol (Pan Aaeca 8075 C) (Cross Objector) (Respondent) For The Appellant : Shri S.S.Alam, Cit (Dr) For The Respondent : Shri Aravind Agarwal, Advocate Date Of Hearing : 10.09.2015. Date Of Pronouncement : 18.09.2015. Order Per Shri M.Balaganesh, Am 1. This Appeal Of The Revenue & Cross Objection Of The Assessee Arises Out Of The Order Of The Learned Cit(A) In Appeal No142/Cit(A)/Asl/Range-1/Asl/10-11 Dated 27.09.2011 For The Asst Year 2008-09 Arising Out Of The Order Of The Learned Assessing Officer Framed U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’).

For Appellant: Shri S.S.Alam, CIT (DR)For Respondent: Shri Aravind Agarwal, Advocate
Section 143(3)Section 271CSection 40

…which it had made purchases. The A.O.’s case is that no reply in response to notice u/s 133(6) had been received and, therefore, the creditworthiness of the sundry creditor has not been established. The A.O. has relied on the case of Baishnab Charan Mohanty [212 ITR 199 (Orissa)] and Precision Finance (P) Ltd. [208 ITR 465 (Cal.)] in support of his stand. The appellant’s case is that bills in support of its purchases were duly submitted before the A.O. and he has not doubted that these purchases have been actually made. It has also disputed the application of the case laws relied on by the A.O. on the facts of i…

M/S. RAJSADAN OVERSEAS SALES(P)LTD,SILIGURI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-2, SILIGURI, SILIGURI

In the result, appeal of assessee is dismissed

ITA 1076/KOL/2012[2008-2009]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata17 Sept 2015AY 2008-2009

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri M. Balaganesh, Am]

For Appellant: Shri Subhas Agarwal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Amitabha Choudhury, Addl. CIT
Section 143(3)Section 68

…e three things are proved prima facie, then the burden shifts to the Department. Merely establishing the identity of the creditor is not enough [ref. Prakash Textile Agency vs CIT (1980) 121 ITR 890 (Cal)]. In the case of CIT vs Baishnav Charan Mahanti (1995) 212 ITR 199 (Ori), it was held that only when three conditions are fulfilled by the assessee then the burden shifts to the Department. The assessee has utterly failed to discharge the onus of proving prima-facie the creditworthiness of these five loan creditors and genuineness of the transactions. The contention of the AR that the very fact that statements u…

CIT v. Baishnab Charan Mohanty (212 ITR 199) — Cited in 17 Judgments | BharatTax