How many judgments cite CIT v. Orissa Corporation P. Ltd.?

20 judgments on BharatTax cite CIT v. Orissa Corporation P. Ltd. (52 CTR 138), spanning 2017 to 2025.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does CIT v. Orissa Corporation P. Ltd. come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 133(6), Section 68, Section 143(3), Section 142(1), Section 145(3), Section 147.

CIT v. Orissa Corporation P. Ltd.

52 CTR 138Supreme Court of India1986#5909 most cited

What is CIT v. Orissa Corporation P. Ltd. authority for?

The assessee discharges its burden of proof under section 68 when it provides the names and addresses of creditors who are income-tax assessees, and the onus then shifts to the Revenue to further investigate. The assessee is not required to prove the source of the source from which the creditors advanced funds.

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2025.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Orissa Corporation P. Ltd. · section 68 · section 133(6) · onus of proof · source of source · genuineness of transaction · share application money · accommodation entry · unexplained cash credit · PAN · section 131

Also reported as

159 ITR 79

Sections most often in play

Section 133(6)Section 68 Section 143(3)Section 142(1)Section 145(3)Section 147 Section 148 Section 139(1)

Issues it is cited on

onus of proof permanent account number source of source addition under section 68 addition u/s 68 share application money section 133(6)genuineness of the transaction section 131 section 133 accommodation entry unexplained cash credit

Judgments citing CIT v. Orissa Corporation P. Ltd.

KEMOX CORPORATION,BHIWANDI vs. DCIT-CC-3, THANE, THANE

ITA 221/MUM/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Oct 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: Ms. Simran Dhawan, Ld. A.RFor Respondent: Shri Ritesh Misra, Ld. D.R

Section 131Section 131(1)(d)Section 142Section 250Section 68

…companies are non-existent at the address given and as per data available in Directorate, all three companies are shell companies. 8.1 We observe that Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax, Odisha Vs. Odisha Corporation Pvt. Ltd. (1986) 159 ITR 79 (SC) has also dealt with an identical issue wherein the Revenue apart from issuing the notices u/s 131 to the creditors, did not pursue the matter further and therefore the Hon'ble Apex Court affirmed the decision of the Hon'ble High Court in affirming the conclusion of the Tribunal to the effect that the Assessee had discharged the burden that la…

BRAND INDIA REAL ESTATE PRIVATE LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 6(1), JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 514/JPR/2025[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur29 Sept 2025AY 2012-2013

For Appellant: Shri Siddharth Ranka, Adv. &For Respondent: Shri Dharam Singh Meena, JCIT

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250

…nvestment Ltd. (200)251 ITR 263 (SC) Even if the subscribers to the\nincreased share capital of assessee-company were not genuine, the amount could not be regarded\nas undisclosed income of the assessee-company.\n(iii) CIT Vs Orissa Corporation (P) Ltd (1986) 159 ITR 79 (SC)\n13. In the assessment order the section under which the addition made has not been\nmentioned. Therefore, the addition made by Ld. A.O. in sustainable in the eyes of law. In this\nregard the reliance in placed on the following cases: -\ni) 2021 (12) TMI 584 - ITAT JODHPUR MR. NEERAJ PALIWAL VERSUS I.T.Ο.\nWARD-2, RAJSAMAND. Unexplained cash…

DCIT,CIRCLE-I, LUDHIANA, LUDHIANA vs. ADINATH TEXTILES LIMITED, LUDHIANA

In the result both the appeal filed by the Revenue and Cross objection filed by the Assessee are dismissed

ITA 122/CHANDI/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh23 Jul 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: the appeal is finally heard or disposed off.

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Manav Bansal, CIT, DR

Section 147Section 148Section 68Section 69C

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण,च"ीगढ़ "ायपीठ “ए” , च"ीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH BENCH “A”, CHANDIGARH HEARING THROUGH: PHYSICAL MODE "ी राजपाल यादव, उपा"" एवं "ी कृणव" सहाय, लेखा सद" BEFORE: SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, VP & SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY, AM आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No.122/Chd/ 2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13 The DCIT बनाम M/s Adinath Textiles Circle-1, Ludhiana Limited K-302/1, Bholapur, Sahabana, Chandigarh Road, Ludhiana "ायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: AABCA9074E अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""थ"/Respondent CROSS OBJECTION NO. 22/Chd/2024 In (आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No.122/Chd/ 2024) िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2…

OLIRIA FOODS AND BEVERAGES LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1531/JPR/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur17 Apr 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Sh. S. L. Poddar, Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. P. P. Meena, CIT

Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 144B(1)(ix)

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”B” JAIPUR Mk0 ,l- lhrky{eh] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh jkBksM deys'k t;UrHkkbZ] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 1531/JP/2024 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year : 2022-23 cuke Oliria Foods and Beverages Income Tax Officer, Vs. Limited, A-130(H) First Floor, Ward 1(2), Jaipur Road No. 9D VKI Area, Jaipur LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AACC09015G vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Sh. S. L. Poddar, Adv…

VENKATESHWARA WIRES PVT. LTD.,JAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 322/JPR/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur09 Sept 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: The Ld. Ao As Well As Before The Ld. Cit(A) As The Documents Submitted Was Only In Support Of Confirmations & Other Documents Already Submitted & No New Documents Were Submitted. 2. The Assessee Craves Your Indulgence To Add Amend Or Alter All Or Any Grounds Of Appeal Before Or At The Time Of Hearing.”

For Appellant: Sh. S. L. Poddar, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Anoop Singh, Addl. CIT

Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 68Section 801ASection 80I

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”B” JAIPUR Mk0 ,l- lhrky{eh] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh jkBksM deys'k t;UrHkkbZ] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 322/JP/2024 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year: 2018-19 cuke Venkateswara Wires Pvt Ltd., Assistant Commissioner of Vs. E-55, Road No. 5, VKI Area, Income Tax, Jaipur Jaipur LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AACCV 5085 F vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Sh. S. L. Poddar, Adv. jktLo dh vksj…

SHRI PRAVEEN GUPTA,GURGAON vs. ACIT, MEERUT

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 3189/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Feb 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri M. Balaganeshshri Praveen Gupta, Vs. Acit, D-101, First Floor, Tower Circle-2, No. D, Caitriona Meerut Residential Apartment Complex, Ambience Island, Gurgoan-22001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Acjpg4777H Assessee By : None Revenue By: Shri Vivek Vardha, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 12/02/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 15/02/2024

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardha, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 37Section 68

…of Hon'ble ITAT New Delhi at page 42-51 of the paper book dated 22.06.2016 in the case of ITO Bulandshahar v/s Smt. Raj Rani. In the said order the Hon'ble ITAT relying on the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v/s Orissa Corporation (P) Ltd 52 CTR 138 and the judgment of Hon'bleGauhati High Court in the case of Nemi Chand Kothari v/s CIT 264 ITR 254 wherein it has been held that the assessee is not required to prove the source of source from which the creditors has advance to assessee. Therefore when the assessee has proved the identity and genuineness of the transaction and the lenders are ass…

D V PROPERTIES PVT. LTD,SURAT vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CC-1(1)(1), SURAT, SURAT

ITA 519/SRT/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Surat20 Nov 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr Arjun Lal Sainiआ.अ.सं./Ita No.519/Srt/2023 (Ay 2015-16) (Hearing In Physical Court) D.V. Properties Pvt, Ltd. Deputy Commissioner Of 748-749 Golden Plaza Market, Income Tax, Circle-1(1)(1) Vs Ring Road, Surat-395002 Surat, Aaykar Bhavan, Nr. Pan No. Aaacd 8392 B Majura Gate, Opp. New Civil Hospital, Surat-395001 अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""थ" /Respondent

Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 254(1)Section 69C

…To support such contention, the assessee relied on decision of Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of DCIT vs. Rohini Builders (2003) 127 Taxman 523/256 ITR 360/182 CTR 373 (Guj); CIT vs. Orissa Corporation Pvt. Ltd. (1986) 25 Taxman 80F/159 ITR 78/52 CTR 138 (SC); CIT Vs. Ayachi Chandrashekhar Narsangji (2014) 42 taxmann.com 251 (Guj). For proposed interest disallowance, the assessee submitted that loan is genuine, therefore interest expenses incurred by it also genuine. On proposed addition of commission @ 2% of loan amount, the assessee stated that there is no evidence that assessee has given any co…

M/S KASHIRAM ATMARAM,SURAT vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - 1(1)(1), SURAT

In the result, ground No.1 of assessee is allowed

ITA 236/SRT/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Surat13 Mar 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr Arjun Lal Sainiआ.अ.सं./Ita No.236/Srt/2022 (Ay 2015-16) (Hearing In Physical Court) Kashiram Atmaram Deputy Commissioner Of 3/1949, Siddhi Sheri, Income-Tax, Vs Salabatpura, Surat-395003 Central Circle-(1)(1)(1), Pan No. Aadfk 2670 H Room No.108, Aayakar Bhawan, Majura Gate, Surat-395001 ""थ" /Respondent अपीलाथ"/Appellant

Section 115BSection 143(3)Section 254(1)Section 68

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, सुरत "ायपीठ, सुरत IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, SURAT BENCH, SURAT BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND Dr ARJUN LAL SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आ.अ.सं./ITA No.236/SRT/2022 (AY 2015-16) (Hearing in Physical Court) Kashiram Atmaram Deputy Commissioner of 3/1949, Siddhi Sheri, Income-tax, Vs Salabatpura, Surat-395003 Central Circle-(1)(1)(1), PAN No. AADFK 2670 H Room No.108, Aayakar Bhawan, Majura Gate, Surat-395001 ""थ" /Respondent अपीलाथ"/Appellant िनधा"रती की ओर से /Assessee by Shri Hiren M. Diwan, C.A राज" की ओर से /Revenue by Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr-DR सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of h…

SURYA MANUFACTURING P.LTD,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-24(2), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 6014/DEL/2017[2014-15]Status: HeardITAT Delhi15 Mar 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. Saktijit Deydr. B. R. R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing) Ita No. 6014/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2014-15 M/S Surya Manufacturing Pvt. Ltd. Vs Dcit, 2937/3, Chuna Mandi, 1St Floor, Circle-24(2), Paharganj, New Delhi-110055 New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaccs2412B Assessee By : None Revenue By : Sh. Umesh Takyar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 09.03.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 15.03.2022

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. Umesh Takyar, Sr. DR

Section 131(1)(d)Section 143(2)Section 68

…under section 68 of the Act. 21. It is submitted that it is settled position of law that an assessee cannot be punish on account of inaction of the revenue authorities. A reference can be made to the following decisions: a. 203 CTR 601(P&H) b. Orrisa Cement 159 ITR 79( SC) 22. Assessee further seeks to rely on the following judgments: 23. CIT Vs Gangeshwari Metals 361 ITR 0010- Delhi 24. The other decisions which the assessee seeks to rely are as under:- a) ACIT Vs Divine Infracon 42 CCH 22(Del) 10 Surya Manufacturing Pvt. Ltd. b) CIT Vs Kamdhenu Steels 361 ITR 220(Del):- SLP against this decision has bee…

JEEVAN POLYMERS (P) LIMITED ,HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-2(1), HYDERABAD

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 93/HYD/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad25 Jun 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: Sri A. V. Raghuram, ARFor Respondent: Sri R. Mujumdar, DR

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 68

…port; confirmation letter and bank statement(s) from M/s Twinkle Commonsales Pvt. Ltd. dated 12.8.2016, letters, returns, annual accounts and confirmation of source of investments, hon’ble apex court’s decision in M/s Orissa Corporation (P) Ltd. Dt. 19.3.1986 159 ITR 76 (SC) and CIT vs M/s Five Vision Promoters Pvt Ltd. and others dt 27.11.2015 380 ITR 289 (Del.) that it is deemed to have specified all the three ingredients of identity, genuineness and creditworthiness of impugned share application money. ITA No. 93/Hyd/2020 AY : 2014-15 Jeevan Polymers (P) Ltd., Hyd. 2.2. Ld.DR has strongly supported the impu…

NAVYUG IRON TRADERS,GHAZIABAD vs. DCIT, GHAZIABAD

In the result, appeal of Assessee allowed

ITA 553/DEL/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Sept 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kant

For Appellant: Shri Akhilesh KumarFor Respondent: Shri Atiq Ahmad, Sr. D.R

Section 68

…hands of depositor or has to conduct enquiry to bring material to reject loan CIT V Shalimar Buildwell Pvt. Ltd. [2013] 40 taxmann.com 285 (All) CIT V SURENDRA CHAND BANSAL [2014) 42 TAXMANN.COM 201 (ALL) CIT VS ORISSA CORPORATION (P) LTD. (1986) 159 ITR 78: 52 CTR 138 (SC) ACIT V Shyam Indus Power solutions P Ltd. (2018) 90 taxmann.com 424(DEL-B) C. Where assessee shows his inability and request AO to conduct enquiry but fails to do so, Onus on assessee discharged. He cant make addition for non-production etc. OM Prakash Singh V ACIT—ITA NO.331/agra/2016 - order dt.22.03.2019 (Agra Bench) 21-27 MUNNA LAL MURI…

INCOME TAX OFFICER, LUDHIANA vs. SH SURENDER KUMAR PROP, LUDHIANA

The appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 747/CHANDI/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh08 Feb 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Itat Shall Not Be Filed In Cases Where The Tax Effect Does Not Exceed The Monetary Limit Of Rs. 20 Lacs. The Tax Will Not Include Any Interest Thereon. It Is Further Clarified That If In The Case Of An Assessee, Disputed Issues Arise In More Than One Assessment Year, Appeal Can Be Filed In Respect Of Such Assessment Year Or Years In Which The Tax Effect In Respect Of Disputed Issues Exceeds The Monetary Limit So Specified.

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Manjit Singh

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण,च"डीगढ़ "यायपीठ “बी”, च"डीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH BENCH ”B”, CHANDIGARH "ी संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य एवं डा. बी.आर.आर, कुमार, लेखा सद"य BEFORE: Sh.SANJAY GARG, JM & DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, AM आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No. 747/Chd/2016 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12 The ITO Sh. Surender Kumar, बनाम Ward 3(3), Prop. M/s BBS Exports, 1175/1-A, Ludhiana Kalyan Nagar, Circular Road Ludhiana "थायी लेखा सं./PAN No: ACCPK4304K अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Cross Objection No. 2/Chd/2017 (आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No. 747/Chd/2016) "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12 Sh. Surend…

SURINDER KUMAR,LUDHIANA vs. DCIT, LUDHIANA

The appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 475/CHANDI/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh08 Feb 2019AY 2011-12

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Manjit Singh

THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3,, SURAT vs. M/S. HAPPY HOME CORPORATION,, SURAT

ITA 715/AHD/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Surat15 Jan 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Shri Rasesh Shah, CAFor Respondent: Smt.Smita Nair, Sr.DR

Section 131Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 68Section 80I

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SURAT–BENCH, SURAT BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA.No.1991/AHD/2016 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2012-13 AND आयकर अपील सं./ITA.No.715/AHD/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2013-14 DCIT, Cent.Cir.3 Vs. M/s.Happy Home Corporation Surat. T.P.., F.P.No.39, Shantikunj Nr.SD Jain School U.M. Road, Vesu Char Rasta Surat. अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Revenue by : Smt.Smita Nair, Sr.DR Assessee by : Shri Rasesh Shah, CA सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date of Hearing : 15/11/2018 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date of P…

THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3,, SURAT vs. M/S. HAPPY HOME CORPORATION,, SURAT

ITA 1991/AHD/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Surat15 Jan 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Shri Rasesh Shah, CAFor Respondent: Smt.Smita Nair, Sr.DR

Section 131Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 68Section 80I

SHRI PRAMOD KUMAR SETHI,INDORE vs. THE ACIT 3(1), INDORE

In the result appeal filed by the revenue being I

ITA 392/IND/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Indore06 Nov 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Borad

Section 133ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 24Section 68

…resentative that the Ld. CIT(A) has rightly deleted the addition by relying on various decisions gi yen in his order in addition to that reliance was also placed on the following decision :- (a) CIT v. Orissa Corporation P. Ltd., (1986) 159ITR 78 (SC) (1986) 52 CTR 138 in the instant case, the Hon'ble Apex Court held as under : "In this case, the assessee had given the names and address of the alleged creditors. It was in the knowledge of the Revenue that the said creditors were income tax assessees. Their index numbers were income tax assessees. Their index numbers were in the file of the Revenue. The Revenue d…

THE ACIT, 3(1), INDORE vs. SHRI PRAMOD KUMAR SETHI, INDORE

In the result appeal filed by the revenue being I

ITA 383/IND/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Indore06 Nov 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Borad

Section 133ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 24Section 68

THE ACIT, 3(1), INDORE vs. SHRI PRAMOD KUMAR SETHI, INDORE

In the result appeal filed by the revenue being I

ITA 382/IND/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Indore06 Nov 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Borad

Section 133ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 24Section 68

DCIT, JAIPUR vs. SHRI PRATEEK KOTHARI, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 552/JPR/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur10 Nov 2017AY 2013-14

Bench: The Hon’Ble High Court.”

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Goyal (CA)For Respondent: Prithviraj Meena (Addl. CIT) fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@

Section 132(4)Section 68

…ys Investment Pvt. Ltd. Vs DCIT 24 Tax World 146 (JP ITAT) (ii) CIT Vs. Daulat Ram Rawatmal 87 ITR 349 (SC) (iii) Saraogi Credit Corp. Vs. CIT 103 ITR 344 (PAT) (g) The assessee relies on the following decisions:- (i) CIT Vs Orissa Corporation (P) Ltd (1986) 159 ITR 79 (SC) The assessee had given named and addresses of the cash creditors, who were income tax assessees. Revenue apart from issuing summon u/s 131 notices to creditors, did not pursue the matter further- it did not examine creditworthiness of the creditors- assessee could not, under the circumstances do anything further. Held that the additions were…

DCIT, JAIPUR vs. GODAWARI ESTATES PVT. LTD.,

ITA 493/JPR/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur07 Nov 2017AY 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Goyal, CA and Shri Gulshan Agarwal, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Rolee Agarwal, CIT - DR

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 56(1)

…held that merely because the depositors’ explanation about the sources of money was not acceptable to the AO, it cannot be presumed that the deposit made by the creditors is money belonging to the assessee itself. (ii) CIT Vs Orissa Corporation (P) Ltd (1986) 159 ITR 79 (SC) The assessee had given named and addresses of the cash creditors, who were income tax assessees. Revenue apart from issuing summon u/s 131 notices to creditors, did not pursue the matter further- it did not examine creditworthiness of the creditors- assessee could not, under the circumstances do anything further. Held that the additions were…