CIT v. Maduri Rajaiahgari Kistaiah

120 ITR 294High Court1979#4783 most cited

What is CIT v. Maduri Rajaiahgari Kistaiah authority for?

Where the Assessing Officer estimates business income after rejecting books of account, and unexplained sundry creditors are not referable to that estimated business income, the AO can treat such sundry creditors as income from other sources.

24

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,314 Indian tax judgments — from 2018 to 2025.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Maduri Rajaiahgari Kistaiah · unexplained sundry creditors · estimated business income · income from other sources · AO precluded from adding · income of which was determined on estimate basis · rejection of books of account · cash credits

Sections most often in play

Section 144Section 68Section 145(3)Section 153ASection 153DSection 250Section 269SSSection 271(1)(c)

Issues it is cited on

section 155bbesection 264asection 2(9)section 256(1)section 66section 256section 106onus of proofsection 155section 44adsundry creditorssection 269

Judgments citing CIT v. Maduri Rajaiahgari Kistaiah

M/S.Vibgyor Texotech Private Limited, Mumbai vs. ACIT-8(3)(2), Mumbai

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

ITA 487/MUM/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Apr 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2009-10 Income Tax Officer-8(3)(3), M/S Vibgyor Texotech Pvt. Ltd., Room No. 616, 6Th Floor, Aayakar 309, Navyug, T.J. Road, Sewree, Bhavan, M.K. Road, Vs. Mumbai-400015. Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aaccv 0752 D Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/S Vibgyor Texotech Pvt. Ltd., The Asst. Commissioner Of 309, Navyug, T.J. Road, Sewree, Income Tax-8(3)(2), Mumbai-400015. Vs. Mumbai. Pan No. Aaccv 0752 D Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. Pavan Ved, ARFor Respondent: Mr. Achal Sharma, CIT-DR/
Section 10ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 148Section 264ASection 40

…ce the same. As the assessee failed to explained these criteria, we have no hesitation in confirming the action of the CIT(A). For this purpose, we place reliance on the judgement of jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT v. Maduri Rajaiahgari Kistaiah (120 ITR 294). Further, we Smt. Shobha Gupta ==================== place reliance on the judgement of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Devi Prasad Viswanath Prasad (72 ITR 194) wherein held that on rejection of books of account, business income estimated, addition towards unexplained cash credit separately valued. 13. Further, the approach of the v…

Upender Ganna, Hyderabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-15(4), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 518/HYD/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad04 Dec 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi

For Appellant: Shri K.A.Sai Prasad, ARFor Respondent: Shri Nilanjan Dey, DR
Section 143(3)Section 68

…of the lower authorities and also placed reliance upon the following decisions: :- 4 -: i. Kale Khan Mohammad Hanif Vs. CIT (1963) [50 ITR 1] (SC); ii. CIT Vs. Devi Prasad Vishwanath (1969) [72 ITR 194] (SC); iii. CIT Vs. Maduri Rajaiahgari Kistaiah (1979) [120 ITR 294] (AP); 7. Having regard to the rival contentions and material on record, I find that in the case of Kale Khan Mohammad Hanif Vs. CIT (Supra), the assessee there-in was a trader, carrying on two businesses and he had submitted a return but as his accounts were not found to be complete and reliable, AO had assessed the Gross Profits of the busines…

Gudla Sriranganadham, Srikakulam vs. The ITO, Srikakulam

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 92/VIZ/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam09 Mar 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.92/Viz/2016 ("नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2011-12) Sri Gudla Sriranganadham Vs. Income Tax Officer Prop : Sri Krishna Wines Ward-1 D.No.15-24, A.B.Road, Kotturu Srikakulam Srikakulam District [Pan : Ajhpg3664J] (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""थ"/ Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri M.R.Bangari, DRFor Respondent: 28.02.2018
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 145

…se income had already been estimated, the ITO is entitled to treat unexplained cash credit as income from undisclosed sources. The Hon'ble Tribunal placed reliance on the judgment of jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT V. Maduri Rajaiahgari Kistaiah (120 ITR 294) and of the Apex Court in the case of Devi Prasad Viswanath Prasad 72 ITR 194. The 7 Gudla Sriranganadham, Srikakulam Hon'ble Tribunal also referred to the observation of Supreme Court in the case of Kale Khan Mohammed Hanif Vs. CIT (50 ITR 1 SC), "It cannot be said that the tax authorities were precluded from treating the amounts of the credit…

Shri Manoj Chainsukh Asawa, Nagpur vs. The ITO-Ward-4(1), Nagpur

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

ITA 179/NAG/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur08 Mar 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawal & Shri Mahavir Singh

For Appellant: Shri Deepak Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Shri R.K. Baral, Senior DR
Section 145(3)Section 68

…s 68 of the Act as the same are arising out of the trading entries i.e., cash sales made by the assessee which are unproved. Our view is supported by the decision of Hon’ble Andhra Pradesh High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Maduri Rajaiahgari Kistaiah – (1979) 120 ITR 294 (AP) and of Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Neema Ram Badlu Ram – (1980) 122 ITR 68 (All). Accordingly, we delete the addition of bank deposits treated by the Assessing Officer as cash credits being trade creditors and sustained the addition of gross profit applied by the Assessing Officer after rejecting the gross profit addi…