CIT v. Orissa Corporation Pvt. Ltd.

159 ITR 78Supreme Court of India1986#49 most cited

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

When an assessee provides the identity and address of a creditor or investor for a cash credit or share capital under Section 68, the burden shifts to the Department to establish lack of genuineness or creditworthiness, requiring it to conduct further inquiries; mere non-compliance by third parties to summons cannot be the sole basis for an adverse inference against the assessee.

897

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2007 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Orissa Corporation · 159 ITR 78 · Section 68 · unexplained cash credit · burden of proof · creditworthiness of creditor · genuineness of transaction · non-compliance of summons · share capital · Section 131 · Section 133(6) · adverse inference

Sections most often in play

Section 68Section 143(3)Section 133(6)Section 147Section 131Section 148Section 142(1)Section 143(2)

Issues it is cited on

source of sourcecreditworthiness of the creditorshare capital and share premiumpaper companyshare application moneyaddition u/s 68addition under section 68genuineness of the transactionsection 131section 133(6)entry operatorunexplained cash credit

Judgments citing CIT v. Orissa Corporation Pvt. Ltd.

ITO (E) WARD 1 AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. ACHARYA SHRI VIJAY SURENDRA SURISHWARJI JAIN TATWA GYAN SHALA, AHMEDABAD

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

ITA 2334/AHD/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad21 Apr 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

For Appellant: Respondent by: Shri C Dharnidas V. S., Sr. DRFor Respondent: Shri C Dharnidas V. S., Sr. DR
Section 12ASection 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 69A

…ce thereof. Once the assessee furnishes evidences explaining the source of deposits, the burden shifts to the Assessing Officer to rebut the same with credible material. 18. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Orissa Corporation Pvt. Ltd. [1986] 159 ITR 78 (SC) / [1986] 25 Taxman 80 (SC) has held that where the assessee has furnished basic evidences, the onus shifts to the Department and no addition can be sustained merely on suspicion. Similarly, in CIT vs. Daulat Ram Rawatmull [1973] 87 ITR 349 (SC), the Hon’ble Apex Court held that the onus to prove that a particular receipt is income lies on the…

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-9(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. VIGHNAHARTA VINCOM PRIVATE LIMITED, KARNATAKA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2278/KOL/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Apr 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm Vighnharta Vincom Private Income Tax Officer, Ward 9(1) Limited 5Th Floor, Room No. 5/12/2B, 94-G, Apartments No.1, 9 Th Cross Aaykar Bhawan Poorva, P-7, Road, Rajamahalvilas Extension Vs. Chowringhee Square, Sadashiva Nagar, Bangalore, Kolkata-700069, West Bengal Karnataka-560080, (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aadcv6413E Assessee By : Shri S.K. Pransukha, Ar Revenue By : Shri Pradeep Dung Dung, Dr Date Of Hearing: 16.03.2026 Date Of Pronouncement: 15.04.2026

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Pransukha, ARFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Dung Dung, DR
Section 131Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 68

…led by the assessee and merely harped on non- compliance of the summons issued under Section 131 of the Act, which is factually incorrect. Learned Tribunal placed reliance on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in CIT -Vs- Orissa Corporation Ltd. (1986) 159 ITR 78 (SC) as well as the decision of this Court in Crystal Networks Pvt. Ltd. -Vs- CIT, (353) ITR 171 (Cal). The Tribunal also noted the decision of the Co-ordinate Bench in the case of ITO -Vs- M/S Cygnus Developers India Pvt. Ltd. (ITA/282/Kol/2012) wherein the factual position was also similar to that of the case of the assessee. Thus, we find that…

ITO, DELHI vs. APACE DEVELOPERS PVT LTD, DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 856/DEL/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Apr 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2016-17] Apace Developers Pvt.Ltd. Vs Ito Flat No.1034, Ground Floor, C.R.Building Kondli Gharol, Mayur Vihar, I.P.Estate Phase-Iii, Delhi-110096 Delhi-110002. Pan-Aahca5732D Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year : 2016-17] Ito Vs Apace Developers Pvt.Ltd. C.R.Building Flat No.1034, Ground Floor, I.P.Estate Kondli Gharol, Mayur Vihar, Delhi-110002. Phase-Iii, Delhi-110096 Pan-Aahca5732D Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Akhilesh Kumar, Adv. & Shri Govind Agarwal, Ca Respondent By Shri Jitender Singh, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 03.02.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 01.04.2026

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250

…there is any doubt with respect to genuineness of the transactions, the AO should have made the inquiries directly by issue summons u/s 133(6) of the Act, as has been held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Orrisa Corporation Pvt. Limited reported in 159 ITR 78 (SC) but the AO has failed to make any such inquiry and made the addition. The assessee also placed reliance on the judgment of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of PCIT Vs. Wel Intertrade Pvt. Ltd reported 152 taxman.com 663 (Delhi) wherein the Hon’ble High Court has held that “when it is also a matter of fact that the mobilization advances re…

APACE DEVELOPERS PVT LTD,GHAZIABAD vs. ITO WARD-3(1), DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 204/DEL/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Apr 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2016-17] Apace Developers Pvt.Ltd. Vs Ito Flat No.1034, Ground Floor, C.R.Building Kondli Gharol, Mayur Vihar, I.P.Estate Phase-Iii, Delhi-110096 Delhi-110002. Pan-Aahca5732D Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year : 2016-17] Ito Vs Apace Developers Pvt.Ltd. C.R.Building Flat No.1034, Ground Floor, I.P.Estate Kondli Gharol, Mayur Vihar, Delhi-110002. Phase-Iii, Delhi-110096 Pan-Aahca5732D Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Akhilesh Kumar, Adv. & Shri Govind Agarwal, Ca Respondent By Shri Jitender Singh, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 03.02.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 01.04.2026

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250

…there is any doubt with respect to genuineness of the transactions, the AO should have made the inquiries directly by issue summons u/s 133(6) of the Act, as has been held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Orrisa Corporation Pvt. Limited reported in 159 ITR 78 (SC) but the AO has failed to make any such inquiry and made the addition. The assessee also placed reliance on the judgment of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of PCIT Vs. Wel Intertrade Pvt. Ltd reported 152 taxman.com 663 (Delhi) wherein the Hon’ble High Court has held that “when it is also a matter of fact that the mobilization advances re…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI vs. M/S VESTIGE MARKETING PRIVATE LIMITED, DELHI

ITA 7842/DEL/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Mar 2026AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Before Shri Satbeer Singh Godarabefore Shri Before Shri Satbeer Singh Godarasatbeer Singh Godara & Satbeer Singh Godara & And & Shri Naveen Chandra Shri Naveen Chandra, , , Shri Naveen Chandra Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Amit Goel and Shri Pranav Yadav, Advocate
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 147Section 37Section 37(1)Section 69A

…3 others period under consideration, non-compliance of summons issued u/s 131 of the Act by such parties cannot be made a basis to make addition in the hands of assessee. In this regard assessee places reliance on below mentioned judicial pronouncements: i) 159 ITR 78 (SC) CIT vs. Orissa Corp. (P) Ltd. 159 ITR 78 (SC) CIT vs. Orissa Corp. (P) Ltd. 159 ITR 78 (SC) CIT vs. Orissa Corp. (P) Ltd. 159 ITR 78 (SC) CIT vs. Orissa Corp. (P) Ltd. “In this case, the assessee had given the In this case, the assessee had given the In this case, the assessee had given the names and In this case, the assessee had given the…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI vs. M/S VESTIGE MARKETING PRIVATE LIMITED, DELHI

ITA 7841/DEL/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Mar 2026AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Naveen Chandra

Section 132Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 37Section 37(1)Section 69A

…during the period under consideration, non-compliance of summons issued u/s 131 of the Act by such parties cannot be made a basis to make addition in the hands of assessee. In this regard assessee places reliance on below mentioned judicial pronouncements: i) 159 ITR 78 (SC) CIT vs. Orissa Corp. (P) Ltd. "In this case, the assessee had given the names and addresses of the alleged creditors. It was in the knowledge of the Revenue that the said creditors were income-tax assessees. Their index numbers were in the file of the Revenue. The Revenue, apart from issuing notices under section 131 at the instance of the as…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI vs. M/S VESTIGE MARKETING PRIVATE LIMITED, DELHI

ITA 7840/DEL/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Mar 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Before Shri Satbeer Singh Godarabefore Shri Before Shri Satbeer Singh Godarasatbeer Singh Godara & Satbeer Singh Godara & And & Shri Naveen Chandra Shri Naveen Chandra, , , Shri Naveen Chandra Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Amit Goel and Shri Pranav Yadav, Advocate
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 147Section 37Section 37(1)Section 69A

…3 others period under consideration, non-compliance of summons issued u/s 131 of the Act by such parties cannot be made a basis to make addition in the hands of assessee. In this regard assessee places reliance on below mentioned judicial pronouncements: i) 159 ITR 78 (SC) CIT vs. Orissa Corp. (P) Ltd. 159 ITR 78 (SC) CIT vs. Orissa Corp. (P) Ltd. 159 ITR 78 (SC) CIT vs. Orissa Corp. (P) Ltd. 159 ITR 78 (SC) CIT vs. Orissa Corp. (P) Ltd. “In this case, the assessee had given the In this case, the assessee had given the In this case, the assessee had given the names and In this case, the assessee had given the…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI vs. M/S VESTIGE MARKETING PRIVATE LIMITED, DELHI

ITA 7838/DEL/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Mar 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Amit Goel andFor Respondent: Ms. Monika Singh, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 37Section 37(1)Section 69A

…during the period under consideration, non-compliance of summons issued u/s 131 of the Act by such parties cannot be made a basis to make addition in the hands of assessee. In this regard assessee places reliance on below mentioned judicial pronouncements: i) 159 ITR 78 (SC) CIT vs. Orissa Corp. (P) Ltd. "In this case, the assessee had given the names and addresses of the alleged creditors. It was in the knowledge of the Revenue that the said creditors were income-tax assessees. Their index numbers were in the file of the Revenue. The Revenue, apart from issuing notices under section 131 at the instance of the as…

VESTIGE MARKETING PVT LTD,DELHI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE -05 , DELHI

ITA 5521/DEL/2025[2024-25]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Mar 2026AY 2024-25

Bench: Shri Before Shri Satbeer Singh Godarabefore Shri Before Shri Satbeer Singh Godarasatbeer Singh Godara & Satbeer Singh Godara & And & Shri Naveen Chandra Shri Naveen Chandra, , , Shri Naveen Chandra Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Amit Goel and Shri Pranav Yadav, Advocate
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 147Section 37Section 37(1)Section 69A

…3 others period under consideration, non-compliance of summons issued u/s 131 of the Act by such parties cannot be made a basis to make addition in the hands of assessee. In this regard assessee places reliance on below mentioned judicial pronouncements: i) 159 ITR 78 (SC) CIT vs. Orissa Corp. (P) Ltd. 159 ITR 78 (SC) CIT vs. Orissa Corp. (P) Ltd. 159 ITR 78 (SC) CIT vs. Orissa Corp. (P) Ltd. 159 ITR 78 (SC) CIT vs. Orissa Corp. (P) Ltd. “In this case, the assessee had given the In this case, the assessee had given the In this case, the assessee had given the names and In this case, the assessee had given the…

VESTIGE MARKETING PVT LTD,DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-05, DELHI

ITA 5520/DEL/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Mar 2026AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Naveen Chandra

Section 132Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 37Section 37(1)Section 69A

…during the period under consideration, non-compliance of summons issued u/s 131 of the Act by such parties cannot be made a basis to make addition in the hands of assessee. In this regard assessee places reliance on below mentioned judicial pronouncements: i) 159 ITR 78 (SC) CIT vs. Orissa Corp. (P) Ltd. "In this case, the assessee had given the names and addresses of the alleged creditors. It was in the knowledge of the Revenue that the said creditors were income-tax assessees. Their index numbers were in the file of the Revenue. The Revenue, apart from issuing notices under section 131 at the instance of the as…

VESTIGE MARKETING PVT LTD,DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-05, DELHI

ITA 5517/DEL/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Mar 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Naveen Chandra

Section 132Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 37Section 37(1)Section 69A

…during the period under consideration, non-compliance of summons issued u/s 131 of the Act by such parties cannot be made a basis to make addition in the hands of assessee. In this regard assessee places reliance on below mentioned judicial pronouncements: i) 159 ITR 78 (SC) CIT vs. Orissa Corp. (P) Ltd. "In this case, the assessee had given the names and addresses of the alleged creditors. It was in the knowledge of the Revenue that the said creditors were income-tax assessees. Their index numbers were in the file of the Revenue. The Revenue, apart from issuing notices under section 131 at the instance of the as…

VESTIGE MARKETING PVT. LTD.,DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 05, DELHI

ITA 5515/DEL/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Mar 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Amit Goel andFor Respondent: Ms. Monika Singh, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 37Section 37(1)Section 69A

…during the period under consideration, non-compliance of summons issued u/s 131 of the Act by such parties cannot be made a basis to make addition in the hands of assessee. In this regard assessee places reliance on below mentioned judicial pronouncements: i) 159 ITR 78 (SC) CIT vs. Orissa Corp. (P) Ltd. "In this case, the assessee had given the names and addresses of the alleged creditors. It was in the knowledge of the Revenue that the said creditors were income-tax assessees. Their index numbers were in the file of the Revenue. The Revenue, apart from issuing notices under section 131 at the instance of the as…

PARTH BUILDCON,GANDHINAGAR vs. NFAC, DELHI, JURIS. AO-THE ACIT, CIRCLE-GANDHINAGAR, GANDHINAGAR

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

ITA 1062/AHD/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad17 Mar 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Shri Tr Senthil Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Karan Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rignesh Das, CIT. DR
Section 133(6)

…served cannot be a ground to treat the transactions entered by the appellant as non-genuine without bringing any cogent material evidence in support of allegations made in view of decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Orissa Corporation (1986) 159 ITR 78. 4. The Ld. CIT(A) has grossly erred in not considering that the appellant firm is engaged in developing and construction of housing and commercial projects known as "Parmeshwar 8", "Tulip Parmeshwar" and "Mepal Parmeshwar". The material supplied by the aforesaid parties are utilized in the residential housing and commercial scheme built and devel…

SHILPA SHETTY KUNDRA,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, CC-5(2), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

In the result, Assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes, in the above terms

ITA 996/MUM/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Mar 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Prabhash Shankarassessment Year: 2020-21

For Appellant: Ms. Simran Dhawan, Adv. & RaviFor Respondent: Shri Leyaqat Ali Aafaqui, (SR. D.R.)
Section 133(6)Section 194CSection 250

…se, the creditors existence is recognized as the company is in the records of the IT Department, since the appellant has submitted their PAN and also copies of IT. Return. d. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Orissa Vs Orissa Corp. Pvt. Ltd. [1986] 159 ITR 78, held that: "In this case, the assessee had given the names and addresses of the alleged creditors. It was in the knowledge of the Revenue that the said creditors were income tax assessee. Their index numbers were in the file of the Revenue. The Revenue, apart from issuing notices under section 131 at the instance of the assessee, did not pursue t…

JCIT, (OSD), CIRCLE 1(1), RAIPUR, RAIPUR vs. PLATINUM WORLD HOSPITALITY PRIVATE LIMITED, RAIPUR, RAIPUR

In the result appeal filed by the appellant is allowed

ITA 130/RPR/2026[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur10 Mar 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.130/Rpr/2026 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2014-15 The Joint Commissioner Of Income Tax (Osd), Circle-1(1), Raipur (C.G.)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR
Section 68

…to summon the directors of both the appellant company and the investor company for verification. Nonetheless, no summons under section 131 na4gtiquiries under section 133(6) were issued by the Assessing Officer. The Supreme Court in CIT v. Orissa Corporation (159 ITR 78) held that where the appellant provides complete details and the Assessing Officer fails to pursue further enquiry, the addition under section 68 cannot be justified. In the present case, the Assessing Officer's failure to conduct proper enquiry amounts to a violation of principles of natural justice. 6. Considering the evidences furnished and the…

DCIT, CC-1(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. AMBICA DHATU PRIVATE LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2389/KOL/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata05 Mar 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: SHRI RAJESH KUMAR (Accountant Member)

Section 131Section 133(6)Section 250

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, KOLKATA SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER PRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No. 2389/Kol/2025 (Assessment Year 2012-2013) DCIT, Central Circle-1(4), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, 110, Shantipally, Kolkata - 700107 …..…...…………….... Appellant vs. Ambica Dhatu Private Limited, 234/3A, 5th Floor, AJC Bose Road, Kolkata – 700020, Kolkata [PAN: AACCA6054D] ……..…...…………….... Respondent Appearances by: Assessee represented by : Amit Agarwal, Advocate Department represented by : Aditya Bikram, Sr. DR Date of concluding the hearing : 04.02.2026 Date of…

RAMZAN MULLA,VIJAYAPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, VIJAYAPURA

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

ITA 1103/BANG/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore03 Mar 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Vice – & Shri Soundararajan K.Assessment Year : 2017-18

For Appellant: Ms. Jamuna, Advocate
Section 44ASection 69A

…to a violation of principles of natural justice, where an opportunity to explain or substantiate the claim was not afforded properly to the appellant.  The appellant relied on the Hon'ble Supreme Court's ruling in CIT vs. Orissa Corporation Pvt. Ltd. [1986] 159 ITR 78 (SC), where it was held that if the assessee has provided the identity and the source, the burden shifts to the department to disprove the claim. 2.4 Misapplication of Section 69A under Presumptive Taxation: The Assessing Officer's addition under Section 69A is legally unsustainable as the appellant had opted for presumptive taxation under Section…

M/S BHAGIRATH DAIRY PRIVATE LIMITED,NAGAUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,, NAGAUR

The appeal is allowed

ITA 755/JODH/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur26 Feb 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Mitha Lal Meena, Hon’Ble & Shri Sudhir Pareek, Hon’Ble

Section 131Section 143(3)Section 44Section 68Section 69Section 69A

…assessee would not lead to the conclusion that the money was deposited by the assessee. As regards, failure of the creditor to appear u/s 131, the assessee had quoted the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Orissa Corporation P. Ltd (159 ITR 78), wherein it has been held that when the Learned Assessing Officer failed to pursue the matter further on failure of non-compliance of summons u/s 131, no adverse inference could be drawn. Keeping all these facts in view, the deposit of Rs. 25,50,000/- deserves to be accepted. Copies of relevant documents, such as IT return, copy of bank account,…

SHRI NAVEEN GOYAL,BIKANER vs. ITO, WARD-1(1), BIKANER

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 551/JODH/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur26 Feb 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. Mitha Lal Meena, Hon’Ble & Shri Sudhir Pareek, Hon’Blenaveen Goyal Prop. Vs. Ito Ward 1(1) Naveen Trading Company S-4, Bikaner Anaz Mandi, Bikaner - 334001 Pan No. Babpg 8637 D Assessee By Shri Virendra Jain, Advocate (Virtual) Revenue By Shri Lalit Kumar Bishnoi, Addl. Cit-Dr (Virtual) Date Of Hearing 28.01.2026. Date Of Pronouncement 26.02.2026. Order Dr. Mitha Lal Meena, A.M.: This Appeal Is Filed By Assessee Against The Order Of National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As Nfac] Delhi Dated 21.06.2024 With Respect To Assessment Year 2018-19. 2. Grounds Of Appeal Are As Under: 1. The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Sustaining The Order Passed By Ld. Assessing Officer Which Is Bad In Law & Bad On Facts & Is Contrary To The Principles Of Natural Justice. The Proceedings U/S 144 Are Bad In Law & Bad On Facts. 2. The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Sustaining The Addition Made By Assessing Officer By Assuming Deemed Income Of Commission @ 4% On The Loan Taken Amount 17,50,00,000/- Taxed It At As An Income From Other Source. Both The Authorities Have Totally Ignored Whole Relevant Facts & Documents Submitted By The Appellant. So The Addition So Made Is Arbitrary & Unwarranted. The Unsecured Asst. Year: 2018-19 2 Loan Taken Rs. 17,50,00,000/- During The Year Is Genuine & Fare So The Addition May Kindly Be Quashed. 3. The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Sustaining Interest Charged U/S 234A, 234B & 234C Of The Act. 4. The Appellant Prays For Justice & Relief. 3. The Sole & Common Issue Challenged In The Grounds Of Appeal Pertains To An Addition Rs. 70 Lakh By Treating 4% Deemed Commission On Allegedly Routing Money Of A Director Of The Company By Way Of Treating Shares Of 17.50 Cr As Against Unsecured Loan Of Rs. 17.00 Crore Taken From M/S Vikas Granaries Ltd.

Section 144Section 234A

…s of transaction. In our view, when the lender is assessed to tax, and in such a case, the assessee is required to file a confirmation with particulars of PAN only. Our view gets support from the judgements in the cases of CIT Vs. Orissa Corporation (P) Ltd. (159 ITR 78) (SC); CIT Vs. Rohini Builders (256 ITR 360) (Gujrat HC.); CIT VS Metachem Industries 2245 2360 Gauhati HC);Real Time Marketing 221 CTR 716 and Diamond Products 177 Taxman 331 Raj HC. 9. Without prejudice to the above facts and merits of the case, it is pertinent to mention here that on parity of facts in the case of appellants AUNTY Munni Devi G…

ACIT CC 7(3), MUMBAI vs. TRISHUL REALTY INFRA LLP, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue and the COs filed by the Assessee stand dismissed

ITA 7649/MUM/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Feb 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankar

Section 250Section 68

…on. This issue is dealt by the Gauhati High Court in the case of CIT v. Smt. Sanghamitra Bharal (2014) 361 ITR 481 (Gau). The aforesaid points were also affirmed in the past by the Appex Court in the case of CIT v. Orissa Corporation P. Ltd reported in (1986) 159 ITR 78 (SC). In the case of CIT v. Varinder Rawley (2014) 366 ITR 232 (P&H) the court held that where the assessee shows that the entries regarding credit in a third party's account were in fact received from the third party and are genuine, he discharges the onus. In that case, the sum cannot be charged as the assessee's income in the absence of any mat…

Showing 1–20 of 897 · Page 1 of 45

...