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

897 judgments on BharatTax cite CIT v. Orissa Corporation Pvt. Ltd. (159 ITR 78), spanning 2007 to 2026.

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

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 68, Section 143(3), Section 133(6), Section 147, Section 131, Section 148.

CIT v. Orissa Corporation Pvt. Ltd.

159 ITR 78Supreme Court of India1986#53 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 367,181 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 68 Section 143(3)Section 133(6)Section 147 Section 131 Section 148 Section 142(1)Section 143(2)

Issues it is cited on

source of source creditworthiness of the creditor share capital and share premium paper company share application money addition u/s 68 addition under section 68 genuineness of the transaction section 131 section 133(6)entry operator unexplained cash credit

Judgments citing CIT v. Orissa Corporation Pvt. Ltd.

Leading Age Developers Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Central Circle 2(2), Central Building

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 1113/MUM/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Oct 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Shri Vimal Punmiya, CAFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar Sinha, Sr. DR

Section 143Section 143(3)Section 148Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.1113 and 1114/MUM/2024 Assessment Year: 2011-12 Leading Age Developers Pvt. Ltd., Assistant Commissioner of Mohammedi No.1, Commercial Income Tax, Peru Chawal, Dr. B A Road, Central Circle 2(2), Vs. Shree Ganesh Nagar, Lalbaug, Mumbai Parel, Mumbai – 400012 (PAN : AABCL5948G) (Appellant) (Respondent) Present for: Assessee : Shri Vimal Punmiya, CA Revenue : Shri Manoj Kumar Sinha, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 08.08.2024 Date of Pronouncement : 17.10.2024 O R D E…

Goodview Marketing Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward - 6(2), Kolkata

ITA 986/KOL/2024[2008-2009]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 Oct 2024AY 2008-2009

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A. No.986/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2008-09 Goodview Marketing Pvt. Ltd. ………. Appellant 255, Canal Street, Shree Bhumi, Brijdham Housing Complex, Kolkata-700048. (Pan: Aadcg0582H) Vs. Income Tax Officer ………… Respondent Ward-6(2), Kolkata. Appearances By: Shri S. K. Tulsiyan, Advocate & Ms. Puja Somani, Ar Appeared For Appellant Shri Subhendu Datta, Cit, Dr Appeared For Respondent Date Of Concluding The Hearing : 23.09.2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : 16.10.2024 Order Per Dr. Manish Borad: The Appeal Filed At The Instance Of The Assessee Pertaining To The Assessment Year (In Short “Ay”) 2008-09 Is Directed Against The Order Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 In Short The “Act”) By Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax, (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [In Short Ld. “Cit(A)”] Dated 15.03.2024 Arising Out Of The Assessment Order Framed U/S. 144/263 Of The Act By Ito, Ward-6(2), Kolkata Dated 19.03.2014. 2. Grounds Of Appeal Raised By The Assessee Are Reproduced As Under:

Section 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 263Section 68

…the issue of notice cannot be fatal for the assessee considering the ratio laid down by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Page 5 of 31 I.T.A. No. 986/Kol/2024 Goodview Marketing Pvt. Ltd., AY : 2008-09 Vs. Orissa Corporation Pvt. Ltd. (1986) 159 ITR 78 (Del). He further submitted that all the share applicants are duly assessed to tax, regularly filing the income tax returns, have also passed through the scrutiny proceedings, duly filing annual returns with the…

DCIT Circle -2(1), Hyderabad vs. Gireesh Infrastructure Pvt Ltd, Hyderabad

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 499/HYD/2022[2013-14]Status: HeardITAT Hyderabad15 Oct 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Manjunatha, G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No. 499/Hyd/2022 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2013-14) Dy. Cit Vs. Gireesh Infrastructure Circle 2(1) Private Limited Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan: Aadcg3003H (Appellant) (Respondent) राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: Shri Ashish Kumar Shukla, Dr िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri P Murali Mohan Rao, Ca सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 15/10/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 15/10/2024 आदेश/Order

For Appellant: Shri P Murali Mohan Rao, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ashish Kumar Shukla, DR

Section 68

…actions as unexplained cash credit u/s 68 of the I.T. Act, 1961. This legal principle is supported by the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Lovely Exports Ltd vs. CIT (Supra) and also in the case of CIT vs. Orissa Corporation Pvt Ltd (1986) 159 ITR 78 (S.C). We further note that the appellant has also explained the source of source in respect of loans received from 3 parties and as Page 5 of 7 ITA 499 of 2022 Gireesh Infrastructure P Ltd per the details filed by the assessee, there is enough source of income for the creditors to explain the amounts given to the appellant company which is evid…

Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Exemptions, Circle-2, Chandigarh vs. M.R.S. Shri Prannath Parnami Education Society, Haryana

In the result, the appeal is dismissed

ITA 253/CHANDI/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh14 Oct 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri A.D. Jain & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.253/Chd/2024 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18 Asstt. Commissioner Of बनाम M.R.S. Shri Prannath Income Tax, Exemptions, Parnami Education Society, Circle-2, 20Km Stone, Chandigarh Rajgarh Road, Vpo Choudhariwas Hisar 125001 "थायीलेखासं./Pan No: Aabam1046N अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent ( Hybrid Hearing ) "नधा"रतीक"ओरसे/Assessee By :Sh. Kapil Goyal, Advocate राज"वक"ओरसे/ Revenue By : Smt. Kusum Bansal, Cit, Dr सुनवाईक"तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 19.09.2024 उदघोषणाक"तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 14.10.2024 आदेश/Order Per A.D. Jain: This Is Assessee’S Appeal Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, Dated 14.01.2024, For The Assessment Year 2017-18, Taking The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

For Appellant: Sh. Kapil Goyal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal, CIT, DR

Section 11(1)(d)Section 133(6)

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, च"डीगढ़ "यायपीठ, च"डीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DIVISION BENCH, ‘B’, CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI A.D. JAIN, VICE PRESIDENT & SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.253/CHD/2024 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18 Asstt. Commissioner of बनाम M.R.S. Shri Prannath Income Tax, Exemptions, Parnami Education Society, Circle-2, 20KM Stone, Chandigarh Rajgarh Road, VPO Choudhariwas Hisar 125001 "थायीलेखासं./PAN NO: AABAM1046N अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent ( Hybrid Hearing ) "नधा"रतीक"ओरसे/Assessee by :Sh. Kapil Goyal, Advocate राज"वक"ओरसे/ Revenue by : Smt. Kusum…

Golden Moment Pvt Ltd, New Delhi vs. ACIT Circle, Karnal

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 8021/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Oct 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Hon’Ble & Shri M. Balaganeshgolden Moment Pvt. Ltd, Vs. Acit, C/O. R. C. Rai & Associates, Karnal 203, 2Nd Floor, Akash Deep Building, 26A, Barakhamba Road, (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Aadcg4401D Assessee By : Shri R. C. Rai, Ca Ms. Nagma, Adv Revenue By: Shri Shyam Manohar Singh, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 13/08/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 10/10/2024

For Appellant: Shri R. C. Rai, CAFor Respondent: Shri Shyam Manohar Singh, Sr. DR

Section 131Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 41(1)

…ly because the summons has not been responded by the said lender, no adverse inference could be drawn on the assessee. Reliance in this regard is placed on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Orissa Corporation Limited reported in 159 ITR 78 (SC). 13. In view of the above observations and respectfully following the judicial precedent, we find that there is no case made out by the revenue for making an addition u/s 68 of the Act. Accordingly, the Ground Nos. 6 raised by the assessee is allowed. 14. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed. Order pronounced in the open co…

Navnita Dealcomm Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward - 6(3), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1369/KOL/2024[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata09 Oct 2024AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar&Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey]

Section 131Section 143(1)Section 68

…s, we are not in a position to sustain the order of Ld. CIT(A). The case of the assessee finds support from numerous decisions some of which are discussed below .We find support from the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Orissa Corporation Ltd. 159 ITR 78 (SC) wherein the Hon’ble Apex Court has held as under: “That in this case the respondent 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 13…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Kolkata vs. L B Saree Emporium, Burra Bazar, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 433/KOL/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata30 Sept 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad, Am & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm L B Saree Emporium, Asst. Commissioner Of Burra Bazar, 58, Income Tax, Sir Hariram Goenka 3 No. Government Place, Street, Burra Bazar, Vs. Kolkata-700 001, Kolkata-700 007, West Bengal West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aacfl4670K Assessee By : Shri Sunil Surana, Ar Revenue By : Shri Pradip Kumar Biswas, Dr Date Of Hearing: 28.08.2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 30.09.2024

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Surana, ARFor Respondent: Shri Pradip Kumar Biswas, DR

Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 68

…h the PAN no. and the address of the alleged parties, the Ld. AO ought to have carried out the exercise u/s 133(6) of the Act or to contact the concerned AO of the alleged parties. 010. The Hon'ble Apex Court in case of CIT vs. Orissa Corpn. (P.) Ltd. [1986] 159 ITR 78 (SC) dated 19th Mach, 1986, has held as follow:- “13. 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 the income-tax assessees. Their index number was in the file of the revenue. The revenue, apart from issuing notices under section 131 at th…

DCIT, Patiala vs. Prime Steel Industries Private Limited, Dirba

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is allowed whereas, the appeal filed by the Revenue stands dismissed

ITA 500/CHANDI/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh20 Sept 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri A.D. Jain & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 275/Chd/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2021-22 Prime Steel Industries Private Vs. The Dcit, बनाम Circle, Limited, Semi Industry, Patiala Plot No. 27, Anaj Mandi Dibra, Sangrur "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aagca3988E अपीलाथ"/ Appellant ""यथ"/ Repsondent & आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 500/Chd/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2021-22 The Dcit, Vs. Prime Steel Industries Private बनाम Circle, Limited, Semi Industry, Patiala Plot No. 27, Anaj Mandi Dibra, Sangrur "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aagca3988E अपीलाथ"/ Appellant ""यथ"/ Repsondent ( Physical Hearing ) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri Sudhir Sehgal, Advocate & Shri Viboore Garg, Ca राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue By : Smt. Kusum Bansal, Cit Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 24.07.2024 उदघोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 20.09.2024

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, Advocate and Shri Viboore Garg, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal, CIT DR

Section 69C

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण,च"डीगढ़ "यायपीठ, च"डीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CHANDIGARH BENCH, ‘B’, CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI A.D. JAIN, VICE PRESIDENT & SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No. 275/CHD/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2021-22 Prime Steel Industries Private Vs. The DCIT, बनाम Circle, Limited, Semi Industry, Patiala Plot No. 27, Anaj Mandi Dibra, Sangrur "थायी लेखा सं./PAN No: AAGCA3988E अपीलाथ"/ APPELLANT ""यथ"/ REPSONDENT & आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No. 500/CHD/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2021-22 The DCIT, Vs. Prime Steel Industries Private बनाम Circle, Limited, Sem…

Prime Steel Industries Private Limited, Semi Industry Plot No.-27, Anaj Mandi Dirba, Sangrur, Punjab vs. The Assessing Officer NFAC, the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer, DCIT Circle Patiala, Patiala, Punjab

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is allowed whereas, the appeal filed by the Revenue stands dismissed

ITA 275/CHANDI/2024[2021-2022]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh20 Sept 2024AY 2021-2022

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, Advocate and Shri Viboore Garg, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal, CIT DR

Section 69C

M/S Toplink Commerce Limited, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward 10(2), Kolkata

ITA 1413/KOL/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata09 Sept 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Rakesh Mishraassessment Year: 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Ankit Jalan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Subhendu Datta, CIT, DR

Section 131Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 250Section 68

…ted does not automate the addition u/s 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. It is stated that in the absence of the reasons, the addition made is bad in law and is liable to be deleted. Reliance has been placed on the following decisions: i. Orissa Corpn. (P) ltd. 159 ITR 78 (SC) and Dy. CIT Vs. Rohini Builders [2002] 256 ITR 360 (Guj) for identity of the creditor. ii. CIT Vs. Lovely Exports (P) Ltd. 216 ITR 195 (SC) iii. CIT Vs. M/s. Gagandeep Infrastructure (P) Ltd. (I.T.A. No. 1613 of 2014 dated 20.03.2047) wherein it was held that the proviso to section 68 is effective from A.Υ. 2013-2014 and it does not have retr…

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

…s settled principle of law that if a cash creditor or depositor fails to make compliance of summons u/s 131/133(6), the assessee cannot be held responsible for it. The following case-laws are quoted in support :- (1) CIT Vs. Orissa Corporation (P) Ltd (1986) 159 ITR 78 (Hon'ble Supreme Court) Held that in case the creditor does not appear in response to summons issued u/s 131, no adverse inference can be drawn in the case of the assessee. (2) CIT Vs. Chandela Trading Co P. Ltd (2015)372 ITR 232 (Cal) Held that the Revenue failed to bring material on record that the amount of credits in fact belonged to the as…

Ebro India Pvt.Ltd., Delhi vs. ACIT Circle-7(1), Delhi

In the result, the ground no 4 raised by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1291/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: HeardITAT Delhi09 Sept 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar, CIT DR

Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144CSection 68

…ua share capital is not sustainable whether the assessee has duly filed Form PAS 3, confirmation, statement of back of subscriber, copy of PPAN card, copy of IT return etc.  To the similar effect are the following decisions:  Orissa Corporation (P) Limited: 159 ITR 78 (SC)  CIT v. Dolphin Canpack Ltd.: 283 ITR 190 (Del.)  CIT v. Illac Investment (P) Ltd.: 287 ITR 135 (Del.)  CIT v. Oasis Hospitalities P. Ltd: 333 ITR 119 (Del.)  CIT v. Kamdhenu Steel and Alloys Ltd: 361 ITR 220 (Del.)  CIT v. Victor Electodes Ltd.: 329 ITR 271 (Del.)  CIT v. Nipuan Auto (P.) Ltd. 361 ITR 155 (Delhi)  CIT v. Sophia Financ…

Padmavati Agrico (India) Pvt Ltd, Ajmer vs. ACIT Circle - 1, Ajmer

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 702/JPR/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur05 Sept 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Tarun Mittal (CA)For Respondent: Sh. Anoop Singh (Addl. CIT)

Section 143Section 147

…Share application money – Issuance of shares – Genuineness and creditworthiness of persons allotted shares proved by assessee – Non-appearance of such parties before Assessing Officer irrelevant – Deletion of addition proper – Income Tax Act, 1961, s. 68. 7. 159 ITR 78 (SC) Orissa Corpn. (P) Ltd When the assessee furnishes names and addresses of the alleged creditors, the burden shifts to the department to establish the Revenue’s case and in order to sustain the addition the Revenue has to pursue the inquiry and to establish the lack of creditworthiness and the mere issue of notice u/s 131 is not sufficient. Thu…

ITO, Ward- 1)1), Nagpur vs. Axykno Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., Nagpur

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 47/NAG/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur02 Sept 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Kapil Hirani a/wFor Respondent: Shri Kailash C. Kanojiya

Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 68

…cer then M/s. Axykno Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. ITA no.47/Nag./2019 the department can always proceed against them and if necessary, reopen their individual assessments. iii) The Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of CIT vs. Orissa Corporation reported in 159 ITR 78 (SC) has held as under: "That in this case the respondent 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's. Their index numbers were in the file of the Revenue. The Revenue, apart from issuing notice under section 131 at the instance of the respond…

Sha Thanmal Sukhraj Jain & Co, Ranebenuur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Haveri

In the result, we partly allow the appeal of the assessee

ITA 961/BANG/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Aug 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Sudheendra B.R., AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sreenivasa Karthik Devara

Section 234BSection 250

…O did not doubt on the same. In support of his arguments, the ld. AR relied on the following judgments:- Mere issue of notices u/s. 133(6) with no additional efforts is not a valid ground for addition of sundry creditors 1 CIT v Orissa Corpn, (P.) Ltd (1986) 159 ITR 78 (SC) 2 CIT v Jagdish Prasad Tewari [2013] 40 taxmann.com 265 (Allahabad) 3 PCIT v Rajesh Kumar [2018] 100 taxmann.com 267 (Delhi) 4 Rameshwar Shaw v ITO (2024) TaxCorp (A.T.) 110274 (ITAT-KOLKATA) 5 ACIT v Uppal Jitendra Shah (2022) TaxCorp (A.T.) 98093 (ITAT-PUNE) 6 ACIT v Samtex Fashions Ltd (2021) TaxCorp (A.T.) 89543 (ITAT-DELHI) Where trading…

Magestic Vyapaar Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward11(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 902/KOL/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 Aug 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar&Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey]

Section 131Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 68

…nfirmed the transactions during the course of recording the statement itself by the AO which was reproduced by the AO in the assessment order. The decisions referred to by the counsel of the assessee are as under: i) CIT vs. Orissa Corporation Ltd. in [1986] 159 ITR 78 (SC) ii) Crystal Networks (P)Ltd vs CIT reported in 353 ITR 171 (SC) 5 I.T.A. No.902/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2014-15 MagesticVyapaar Pvt. Ltd. iii) ITO Vs M/s Cygnus Developers India Pvt. Ltd. (ITA No. 282/Kol/2012) iv) CIT Vs Orchid Industries (P) Ltd 397 ITR 136 (Bom) 6. The Ld. D.R on the other hand submitted that though the money was rec…

Champion Builder Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-1(3), Gurgaon

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are partly

ITA 462/DEL/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Aug 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasadआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A Nos.462 & 463/Del/2024 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years: 2015-16 & 2016-17

Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 68

…I.T.A.Nos.462 & 463/Del/2024 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “SMC” NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER आ.अ.सं/.I.T.A Nos.462 & 463/Del/2024 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years: 2015-16 & 2016-17 बनाम CHAMPION BUILDER PVT. LTD. ITO, 5, J.B.S., Halden Avenue, Vs. Ward-1(3), Silver Arcade, 2nd Floor, Room No.52, Gurgaon, Kolkata, West Bengal, 700105 Haryana. PAN No.AAACC0281G अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Shri Manoj Kataruka, Adv. िनधा"रतीक"ओरसे /Assessee by Shri Om Parkash, Sr. DR राज"वक"ओरसे /Revenue by सुनवाईक"तारीख/ Date of hearing: 01.07.2024 21.08.2024 उ"ोषणाक"तारीख/P…

Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(3), Ludhiana vs. Shree Balaji Processors, Ludhiana

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed whereas, the 29

ITA 499/CHANDI/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh20 Aug 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri A.D. Jain & Dr Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 499/Chd/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18 The Ito, Vs. Shree Balaji Processors, बनाम Ward-1(3), Tajpur Road, Ludhiana Opp. Central Jail, Ludhiana 141010 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Actfs8428B अपीलाथ"/ Appellant ""यथ"/ Repsondent & C.O. No. 09/Chd/2024 ( In आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 499/Chd/2023) "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18 Shree Balaji Processors, Vs. The Ito, बनाम Tajpur Road, Ward-1(3), Opp. Central Jail, Ludhiana Ludhiana 141010 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Actfs8428B अपीलाथ"/ Appellant ""यथ"/ Repsondent ( Physical Hearing ) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri Sudhir Sehgal, Advocate राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue By : Smt. Kusum Bansal, Cit Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 26.06.2024 उदघोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 20.08.2024

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal, CIT DR

Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 69A

…eld liable for their omission in filing of the replies. Thus, the rejection of the books of accounts on the basis of this allegation is incorrect. Reliance is placed on Hon'ble Supreme Court's judgment in the case of CIT Vs. Orissa Corporation (P) Ltd. (1986) 159 ITR 78 (SC) for the proposition that if the AO has issued summons u/s 133(6) it is his duty to bring the process to a logical conclusion and non-response by such person cannot be held against the assessee. On similar lines reliance is also p aced on the following judgments: - 499-Chd-2023 & C.O.09-Chd-2024 Shree Balaji Processors, Ludhiana 44 (a) YFC P…

Decent Industries P. Ltd., Bhopal vs. ITO-1(2), Bhopal

Appeal is partly allowed

ITA 356/IND/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Indore20 Aug 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani(Virtual Hearing) Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/S Decent Industries Ito-1(2), Private Ltd, Bhopal 5Th Floor, Corporate Park, बनाम/ Db City Area Hills, Vs. Opp. M.P. Nagar Zone I, Bhopal (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent) Pan: Aaeca6271G Assessee By Ms. Shilpa Gupta & Shri N.K. Gupta Revenue By Shri V.K. Singh, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 04.06.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 20.08.2024

Section 133ASection 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 14ASection 68

…lso in the returns filed, the AO is grossly wrong in doubting the same. (vi) Once the assessee has discharged primary onus by adducing ample evidence as noted above, the burden shifts upon AO. Reliance in this regard is placed on Orissa Corporation (P) Ltd. 159 ITR 78 (SC), Rohini Builders 127 Taxman 523 (Gujrat), Lovely Exports (P) Ltd. 216 ITR 195, Oasis Hospitalities (P) Ltd. 333 ITR 119 (Delhi) and Fair Finvest Ltd. 357 ITR 146 (Delhi). (vii) The assessee-company has issued identical shares at identical premium in preceding AY 2011-12. This point was categorically submitted to AO in Point No. (ii) of t…

Mundhra Construction P Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-10(2), Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 807/KOL/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata13 Aug 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Manish Borad, Accountant Member Shri Sonjoy Sarma (Judicial Member)

Section 124(3)(a)Section 131Section 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 68

…ce of director is no bass of invoking the provision of Section 68 of the Act for which he placed I.T.A. No. 807/Kol/2024 Mundhra Construction Pvt. Ltd. reliance on the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT V. Orissa Corporation (P) Ltd. (1986) 159 ITR 78 (SC) wherein it was held as under: "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 the income-tax assessees. Their index number was in the file of the revenue. The revenue, apart from issuing notices under section 131 at the instance of the…