CIT v. Kamadhenu Vyapar Company Limited

263 ITR 692High Court2003#11394 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2018 to 2024.

Judgments citing CIT v. Kamadhenu Vyapar Company Limited

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

…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 to the depositors to justify or otherwise confirm the creditworthiness of depositors. (4) It is the duty of the Assessing Officer and the authorities up to and including the hon'ble Tribunal to consider all the facts and record which is before them and which i…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 1(1), Raipur vs. Mesers Vandana Ispat Limited, Raipur

In the result, the appeal of revenue is dismissed

ITA 183/RPR/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur31 Oct 2022AY 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri R.B.Doshi, CAFor Respondent: Shri G.N.Singh, Sr. DR

Section 68

…ints of law and facts and circumstances of the case, the Id. CIT(A) was justified in deleting the addition of Rs.2,59,00,000/-, as such a finding by the Id. CIT(A) is contrary to the ratio of the judgements in the cases of CIT Vs Kamdhenu Vyapar Co Ltd (2003) 263 ITR 692 (Cal), which held that simple disclosure of certain materials will not help the assessee to discharge the burden of proving the credits u/s 68 of the IT Act, until the onus is prima facie discharged by the assessee, it never shifts on the Department?” 8. “Whether on points of law and facts and circumstances of the case, the Id. CIT(A) was justifi…

DCIT 13(1)(2), Mumbai vs. Pebble Bay Developers P.Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the In the result, appeal of the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes, is allowed for statistical purposes, whereas the application of the assessee under rule 27 is ...

ITA 5744/MUM/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Oct 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale () Assessment Year: 2008-09 Dy. Commissioner Of Income- M/S Pebble Bay Developers Tax-13(1)(2), Pvt. Ltd., 2Nd Floor, Room No. 218, Vs. Raheja Chambers, Linking Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Road, Main Avenue Santacruz Mumbai-400020. (West), Mumbai-400054. Pan No. Aaccg 1645 E Appellant Respondent Revenue By : Ms. Vranda Matkari, Dr Assessee By : Mr. Nishit Gandhi, Ar Date Of Hearing : 26/08/2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 21/10/2022

For Appellant: Mr. Nishit Gandhi, ARFor Respondent: Ms. Vranda Matkari, DR

Section 143(1)Section 148Section 69C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “C” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) AND SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE (JUDICIAL MEMBER) Assessment Year: 2008-09 Dy. Commissioner of Income- M/s Pebble Bay Developers tax-13(1)(2), Pvt. Ltd., 2nd floor, Room No. 218, Vs. Raheja Chambers, Linking Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Road, Main Avenue Santacruz Mumbai-400020. (West), Mumbai-400054. PAN No. AACCG 1645 E Appellant Respondent Revenue by : Ms. Vranda Matkari, DR Assessee by : Mr. Nishit Gandhi, AR Date of Hearing : 26/08/2022 Date of pronouncement : 21/10/2022 ORDER PER OM PRAKASH KANT, AM This…

Shri Shri Niteshkumar Goyal, Raipur, Raipur (Cg) vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-4(4), Raipur, Raipur (Cg)

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 36/BIL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur30 Mar 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Jamlappa D Battullआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 36/Rpr/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13 Shri Nitesh Kumar Goyal Prop. Com Con India Net Work Solution Shop No.327 Lal Ganga, Shopping Mall, Raipur (C.G.) Pan : Aigpg6386B .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer Ward-4(4), Raipur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent Assessee By : Shri Prafulla Pandse, Ar Revenue By : Shri Sanjay Kumar, Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing :15.03.2022 घोषणा क" तार"ख / Date Of Pronouncement : 30.03.2022

For Appellant: Shri Prafulla Pandse, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar, DR

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 234BSection 40Section 68

…sted with the department u/s.131(1) of the Act. In support of his aforesaid claim, Mr. Pandse, the Ld. AR, had placed reliance on the judgment of the Hon’ble High Court of Calcutta in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax Vs, Khamdhenu Vyapar Co. Ltd. (2003) 263 ITR 692 ( Cal.). Relying on the aforesaid judgment, it was 12 Shri Niteshkumar Goyal Vs. ITO submitted by the Ld. AR that once a request is made by the assessee before the department to summon the parties u/s.131(1) of the Act, then, it is obligatory on the part of the department to exercise their said power. Although, we are principally in agreement wit…

DCIT-13(3)(2), Mumbai vs. M/S Vedartha Entertainment Ltd., Mumbai

ITA 4169/MUM/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Nov 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman () & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale () Assessment Year: 2014-15 Dcit-13(3)(2), M/S Vedartha Entertainment Ltd., Room No. 229/219, 2Nd Floor, Vs. 201, 2Nd Floor, Jaimala Apartment, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Near Hotel Shimmers, Link Road, Mumbai-400020. Malad (E), Mumbai-400064. Pan No. Aaecv 0129 N Appellant Respondent Revenue By : Mr. Usha Gaikwad, Dr Assessee By : Ms. Neelkant Khandelwal, Ar Date Of Hearing : 21/09/2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 25/11/2021

For Appellant: Ms. Neelkant Khandelwal, ARFor Respondent: Mr. Usha Gaikwad, DR

Section 131Section 142(1)Section 143Section 143(3)

…l); R.S. Seth Gopikisan Agarwal v. A.C. of S.T., (1971) Tax LR 355 (MP). Also see, Ashok Electro Diamonds v. Jt. CTO, (1971) 28 TC 21 (Mad); Mahboob Singh Subhash Chand Arhanti v. CST, (1988) 69 STC 229, 230 (All); CIT v. Ter Karadhenu Vyapar Co. Ltd., (2003) 263 ITR 692, 696(cal)]. In a proper case, the learned AO should exercise all his power to collect all evidence and collate all material before coming to proper conclusion. This is the legal duty of the officer concerned who is vested under section 131 with certain powers in respect to certain matters. We earnestly request your honour to direct the AO to issu…

Smt. Saroj Bansal, Jaipur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1, Jaipur

In the result, both these appeals of the assesses are allowed

ITA 1226/JPR/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur14 Sept 2020AY 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri S.R. Sharma &For Respondent: Smt. Runi Pal (Addl.CIT)

Section 139Section 143Section 143(3)

…a Bansal Vs ACIT & 1 Anr assessee and it is denial to the assessee of opportunity to produce evidence in support of its case. Reliance is also placed on the decision of Hon'ble MP High Court in the case of CIT vs. Kamadhenu Vyapar Company Limited reported in 263 ITR 692 wherein it was held that where the assessee requests the AO for issue of summons u/s 131 to the subscribers of capital in course of investigation into the source for share capital the AO must issue summons. 18. Since, the assessee has duly filed confirmations from all the brokers to whom commission has been paid and they are also assessed to tax…

Smt. Chitra Bansal, Jaipur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1, Jaipur

In the result, both these appeals of the assesses are allowed

ITA 1225/JPR/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur14 Sept 2020AY 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri S.R. Sharma &For Respondent: Smt. Runi Pal (Addl.CIT)

Section 139Section 143Section 143(3)

Shri Om Prakash Singh, Mathura vs. ACIT Circle-3, Agra

In the result appeal is partly allowed

ITA 331/AGR/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Agra22 Mar 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Dr. Mitha Lal Meena

Section 144Section 234BSection 44ASection 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AGRA BENCH, AGRA BEFORE SHRI SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER, AND DR. MITHA LAL MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A No. 331/Agra/2016 (ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2011-12) Shri Om Prakash Singh, 2307, Vs.. Asst. Commissioner of Jheengur Pura, Mathura. Income Tax, Circle-3, Mathura. PAN: ADMPS3229F (Respondent) (Appellant) Appellant by Shri Anurag Sinha, AR Respondent by Shri Waseem Arshad, Sr. DR. Date of Hearing 21.02.2019 Date of Pronouncement 22.03.2019 ORDER Per Dr.Mitha Lal Meena, A. M.: This appeal, by the assesse, is directed against the order dated 30.06.2016 passed b…

ITO, Ward - 36(1), 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

…es have been furnished by the assessee absolve the assessee from any further liability. In an interesting judgment, the Hon'ble Jurisdictional Calcutta High Court in case of CIT vs. Assessment Year: 2013-14 Shri Rakesh Agarwal Kamdhenu Vyapar Co, reported in 263 ITR 692 has held that there is an inbuilt duty of the LT.O. to help the assessee by issuing Summons to the depositors to justify or otherwise confirm the creditworthiness of depositors. In the circumstances, it is to be stated that Section 68 is a charging section and it applies when the assessee's explanation with respect to the cash credit is rejected…