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.

Ivy Buildreal (P) Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-6(2), Kolkata.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 857/KOL/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata06 Nov 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Sri Rajpal Yadav & Sri Rajesh Kumar

Section 131Section 143(3)Section 68

…not in a position to sustain the order of Ld. CIT(A). We find support from the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Page 3 of 8 I.T.A. No.: 857/KOL/2023 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Ivy Build Real Pvt. Ltd. Orissa Corporation Ltd. in [1986] 159 ITR 78 (SC) in which the Hon’ble 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 131 at…

Orthy Impex (P) Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-14(3), Kolkata.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 855/KOL/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata06 Nov 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Sri Rajpal Yadav & Sri Rajesh Kumar

Section 131Section 133(6)Section 68

…assessee by ignoring all the evidences placed before him. Under the circumstances, we are not in a position to sustain the order of Ld. CIT(A). We find support from the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Orissa Corporation Ltd. in [1986] 159 ITR 78 (SC) in which the Hon’ble Court has held as under: Page 5 of 10 I.T.A. No.: 855/KOL/2023 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Orthy Impex Pvt. Ltd. “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 i…

Sng Dealers Pvt.Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-6(1), Kol, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 656/KOL/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata06 Nov 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Sri Rajesh Kumar & Sonjoy Sarma

Section 131Section 147Section 68

…king Page 3 of 8 I.T.A. No.: 656/KOL/2023 Assessment Year: 2011-12 SNG Dealers Pvt. Ltd. the addition when the assessee has filed all the evidences and the case of the assessee finds support from following decisions CIT vs. Orissa Corporation Ltd. in [1986] 159 ITR 78 (SC), Crystal Networks (P) Ltd. vs. CIT reported in 353 ITR 171 (Cal), ITO vs. M/s Cygnus Developers India Pvt. Ltd. (ITA No. 282/Kol/2012) and CIT Vs Orchid Industries (P) Ltd. 397 ITR 136 (Bom). The decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Orissa Corporation Ltd. (supra) has held as under: “That in this case the respondent had given th…

T.G. Ranganath, Bangalore vs. DCIT, Bangalore

ITA 173/BANG/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Oct 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2008-09

For Appellant: Shri Satyanarayana Rao, A.R. &For Respondent: Shri Sathyasai Rath, D.R

Section 147Section 68

…for non-compliance with section 131(1) by other parties, no 'negative inference could be drawn and the assessee could not be penalized. The assessee also placed reliance on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Orissa Corporation Pvt. Ltd., 159 ITR 78 (SC). Further, without prejudice, the assessee has contended that the amount received as an advance was subsequently repaid on 24-02-2010. The authorities below without verifying the details of the transaction has impulsively made additions which otherwise is a genuine transaction. The ld. A.R. drawn support from the decision of ITAT Bangalore in…

T.G. Ranganath, Bangalore vs. ACIT, Bangalore

ITA 1467/BANG/2012[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Oct 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2008-09

For Appellant: Shri Satyanarayana Rao, A.R. &For Respondent: Shri Sathyasai Rath, D.R

Section 147Section 68

ACIT, Bangalore vs. Sri. T.G. Ranganath, Bangalore

ITA 1457/BANG/2012[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Oct 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2008-09

For Appellant: Shri Satyanarayana Rao, A.R. &For Respondent: Shri Sathyasai Rath, D.R

Section 147Section 68

Chetan Bipinbhai Bha vs. Ar, Suratvs.Income Tax Officer Ward-2, Bardoli

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 620/SRT/2023[2017-18]Status: HeardITAT Surat27 Oct 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Dr. A. L. Sainiआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.620/Srt/2023 Assessment Year: (2017-18) (Physical Hearing) Chetan Bipinbhai Bhavsar Income Tax Officer, 304, Monalisha Complex, Vs. Ward-2, Bardoli, Income Tax Shastri Road, Bardoli– Office Aaykar Bhavan, Station 394601 Road, Bardoli-394601 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Anjpb 0949 B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent)

Section 131Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 68

…ugh the relevant material on record. I find that the main plank on which the Assessing Officer made the addition was because the depositors/lenders did not turn up before him. In such a case the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Orissa Corpn. (P) Ltd. (supra) 159 ITR 78 and the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court, in the case of Dy. CIT v. Rohini Builders [2002] 256 ITR 360 / [2003] 127 Taxman 523, has held that onus of the assessee (in whose books of account credit appears) stands fully discharged if the identity of the creditor is established and actual receipt of money from such creditor is proved. In case, the Assessi…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Cir - 1(3), Surat vs. Rajgreen Infralink LLP, Surat

In the result, the ground No

ITA 375/SRT/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Surat26 Oct 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr Arjun Lal Sainiआ.अ.सं./Ita No.257 & 375/Srt/2023 (Ay 2018-19) (Hearing In Physical Court) Rajgreen Infralink Llp Deputy Commissioner Of 29-30, Sai Baba Shraddha Nagar, Income Tax, Circle-1(3) Nr. Choksi Wadi, New Rander Road, Surat, Aaykar Bhavan, Adajan, Surat-395009 Majura Gate, Surat-395001 Pan No. Aavfr 8064 N Assistant Commissioner Of Income- Rajgreen Infralink Llp Vs Tax, Circle-1(3), Surat, Room No. 29-30, Sai Baba Shraddha 301, 3Rd Floor, Anavil Business Nagar, Nr. Choksi Wadi, Centre, Hazira Road, Adajan, New Rander Road, Adajan, Surat-395009 Surat-395009 Pan No. Aavfr 8064 N अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""थ" /Respondent

Section 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.257 & 375/SRT/2023 (AY 2018-19) (Hearing in Physical Court) Rajgreen Infralink LLP Deputy Commissioner of 29-30, Sai Baba Shraddha Nagar, Income Tax, Circle-1(3) Nr. Choksi Wadi, New Rander Road, Surat, Aaykar Bhavan, Adajan, Surat-395009 Majura Gate, Surat-395001 PAN No. AAVFR 8064 N Assistant Commissioner of Income- Rajgreen Infralink LLP Vs tax, Circle-1(3), Surat, Room No. 29-30, Sai Baba Shraddha 301, 3rd Floor, Anavi…

Rajgreen Infralink LLP, Surat vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle - 1(3), Surat

In the result, the ground No

ITA 257/SRT/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Surat26 Oct 2023AY 2018-19

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

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle -3, Surat vs. M/S V Square Project, Surat

ITA 75/SRT/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Surat23 Oct 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr Arjun Lal Sainiआ.अ.सं./Ita No.75/Srt/2023 (Ay 2017-18) (Hearing In Virtual Court) Asstt. Commissioner Of Income- M/S V Square Project Tax, Central Circle-3, Surat, 206, 2Nd Floor, Shanti Vs Room No. 507, 5Th Floor, Aaykar Arcade, 132Ft Ring Road, Bhavan, Majura Gate, Surat- Ahmedabad-380013 395001 Pan No. Aaifv 1955 B अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""थ" /Respondent

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

…audited accounts furnished by assessee, which were otherwise not proved to be fabricated as baldly alleged. 6. To support such view, the assessee relied upon the various case law of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of CIT vs. Orissa Corporation (P.) Ltd. [1986] 159 ITR 78/25 Taxman 80F(SC) and judgment of Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. Ranchhod Jivabhai Nakhava 208 Taxman 35 (Guj); judgment of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Bhaichand N Gandhi 141 ITR 67 (Bom). 7. The assessee further stated that once the amount of receipts was credited as “income”, there is no justificati…

DCIT, CC-1(2), Kolkata vs. M/S. Chaman Metalics Ltd., Maharashtra

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue stands dismissed

ITA 610/KOL/2023[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Oct 2023AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garganddr. Manish Borad

Section 133(6)Section 250Section 68

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, कोलकाता पीठ ‘सी’, कोलकाता IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C”BENCH KOLKATA "ी संजय गग", "या"यक सद"यएवं "ी मनीष बोरड, लेखा सद"य के सम" Before Shri Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member andDr. Manish Borad, Accountant Member I.T.A No.610/Kol/2023 Assessment year: 2007-08 DCIT, CC-1(2), Kolkata.........................................................……Appellant vs. M/s ChamanMetallics Ltd....................…............,..…...…..…..Respondent A-26, MIDC, Tadali Growth Centre, Chandrapur-442406, Maharashtra. [PAN: AACCC3756E] Appearances by: Shri Sanjay Paul, Addl. CIT(DR), appeared on behalf of the…

DCIT, Circle-1(1)(2), Surat vs. J B Syntex Pvt. Ltd, Surat

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 140/SRT/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Surat18 Oct 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.140/Srt/2020 Assessment Year: (2011-12) (Physical Hearing) The Dcit, Vs. J. B. Syntex Pvt. Ltd., Circle – 1(1)(2), B-25, Guj. Eco. Textile Park, Surat N. H. No.8, Palsana, Surat – 394315. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aabcj9389D (Appellant) (Respondent) Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr. Dr Appellant By Shri Rasesh Shah, Ca Respondent By Date Of Hearing 17/08/2023 Date Of Pronouncement 18/10/2023

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 68

…irst verifying such fact from income-tax returns of lenders.” 28. During the appellate proceedings, the assessee also relied on the following decisions of Hon'ble Supreme Court and High Court of Gujarat in favour of the assessee: (i) CIT v Orissa Corporation 159 ITR 78(SC) (ii) Daulatram Rawatmall 87 ITR 349(SC) (iii) Dhirajlal Giridharilal v CIT 26 ITR 736(SC) (iv) Murlidhar Lahorimal v CIT 280 ITR 170 (Guj) (v) CIT v Pragati Co-Op. Bank Ltd. 278 ITR 170(Guj) We note that Coordinate Bench of ITAT, Ahmedabad, in the case of B. S. Corporation vs. ACIT (2001) 161 Taxman 29 wherein the Tribunal held that “if link i…

M/S Saket Developers Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-2(4), Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed as per terms indicated above

ITA 683/KOL/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 Oct 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg, Hon’Ble & Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri S. Jhajharia, A/RFor Respondent: Shri Abhijit Kundu, CIT, D/R

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 234BSection 250Section 68

…)  CIT vs. Gagandeep Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. (2017) 394 ITR 680 (Bom.)  Pr. CIT vs. Chain House International Pvt. Ltd. (2018) 408 ITR 561 (MP)  CIT vs. Kamdhenu Steel and Alloys Ltd. (2014) 361 ITR 220 (Del.)  CIT vs. Orissa Corporation Pvt. Ltd. (1986) 159 ITR 78 (SC)  CIT vs. Creative World Telefilms P. Ltd. (2011) 333 ITR 100 (Mad.)  Pranav foundations Ltd. (2015) 229 Taxman 58 (Mad.) 8. The ld. D/R, on the other hand, stated that the assessee did not avail the opportunity given by the Assessing Officer and no such details were filed to explain the nature and source of the alleged sum. Further he subm…

M/S. Inter Securities Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward - 7(3), Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 609/KOL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 Oct 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Ble & Shri Sanjay Garg, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 609/Kol/2018 Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/S. Inter Securities Pvt. Ltd. Income Tax Officer, Ward – 7(3), 8, Camac Street Vs Kolkata 8Th Floor Suite No. 807 Kolkata - 700017 [Pan : Aacci 3971M] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri V. N. Dubey, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Vijay Kumar, Addl. Cit, Sr. D/R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 14/09/2023 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 16/10/2023 आदेश/O R D E R Per Dr. Manish Borad: The Above Captioned Appeal Is Directed At The Instance Of The Assessee Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) - 3, (Hereinafter The “Ld. Cit(A)”) Dt. 15/02/2018, Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act”) For The Assessment Year 2012-13. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:- “1. That The Order Passed By The Ld. Cit(A) Is Bad In Law As Well As In Facts Of The Case. 2. That The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Law As Well As In Facts Of The Case By Confirming The Addiitons Made By Ld. A.O. Who Treated The Share Application Money Including Premium Of Rs.3,59,00,000/- As Bogus & Added Back The Same To The Total Income Of The Appellant U/S 68 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961. 2

For Appellant: Shri V. N. Dubey, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Vijay Kumar, Addl. CIT, Sr. D/R

Section 131Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 250Section 68

…al. However, in the assessments made the A.Os had not brought on record any material or evidence to substantiate such finding. Accordingly, on appeal the appellate authorities had deleted the additions made u/s 68 of the Act. iv) CIT vs. Orissa Corpn (P) Ltd. 159 ITR 78 where the Court 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 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 assessee, did…

M/S. Prompt Barter Private Limited., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-8(3), Kolkata.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 806/KOL/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata11 Oct 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

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

…ed u/s. 131 of the Act. The Ld. AR stated that even the information sought by the AO in the summons issued u/s. 131 of the Act were duly complied. In defense of his argument he relied on the following decisions: (i) CIT Vs. Orissa Corporation Pvt. Ltd. (1986) 159 ITR 78 (SC); (ii) CIT Vs. Orchid Industries Ltd. 397 ITR 136 (Bom); (iii) Crystal Networks Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT 353 ITR 171 (Kol); (iv) ITO Vs. M/s. Cygnus Developers India Pvt. Ltd.(ITA No. 282/Kol/2012) and 3 Prompt Barter Pvt. Ltd., AY 2012-13 (v) Joy Consolidated Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ITO (ITA No. 547/Kol/2020. 5. The Ld. D.R strongly controverted and opposed t…

Manohar Singh, Jodhpur vs. ITO, Ward-1(3), Jodhpur

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

ITA 159/JODH/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur04 Oct 2023AY 2013-14

Section 143(2)Section 144Section 234ASection 234BSection 271(1)(b)

…ecord. The Tribunal correctly took the view that the assessee was not bound to prove the source of the loans. Suspicion, howsoever strong, could not take the place of evidence or proof.” Shri Manohar Singh vs. ITO  CIT vs. Orissa Corporation P. Ltd. (1986) 159 ITR 78 (SC) “In the accounts of the respondent, a private company, for the accounting year ending December 31, 1961, relevant to the assessment year 1962-63, there were three cash credits aggregating to Rs.1,50,000. The three amounts were shown to have been received by way of explanation, the respondent produced before the Income-tax Officer the letter o…

Khazana Bazar Pvt. Ltd., Surat vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1(1)(3), Surat

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 335/SRT/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Surat27 Sept 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.335/Srt/2022 Assessment Year: (2015-16) (Physical Court Hearing) Khazana Bazar Pvt. Ltd., Income Tax Officer, Ward- C-104, Radha Raman Textile 1(1)(3), Surat, Room No.113, Market, Saroli,Surat-395010 Vs. Aayakar Bhawan, Majura Gate, Surat-395001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aafck 0726 P (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent)

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 68

…ication before the assessing officer. Therefore the main plank on which the assessing officer made the addition was because the directors/investors did not turn up before him. In such a case the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Orissa Corpn. (P) Ltd. (supra) 159 ITR 78 and the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court, in the case of Dy. CIT v. Rohini Builders [2002] 256 ITR 360/[2003] 127 Taxman 523 , has held that onus of the assessee (in whose books of account credit appears) stands fully discharged if the identity of the creditor is established and actual receipt of money from such creditor is proved. In case, the Assessin…

M/S. Delighted Holdings (P) Ltd., Kolkata vs. Dcir, Cir-8(2), Kolkata

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

ITA 626/KOL/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 Sept 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 131Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 68

…the evidences and the authorities have not pointed out any defect or deficiency or have not carried out any investigation on these evidences. In defense of his argument, Ld. AR relied on the following decisions: (i) CIT Vs. Orissa Corporation Pvt. Ltd. (1986) 159 ITR 78 (SC); (ii) CIT Vs. Orchid Industries Ltd. 397 ITR 136 (Bom); (iii) Crystal Networks Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT 353 ITR 171 (Kol); (iv) ITO Vs. M/s. Cygnus Developers India Pvt. Ltd.(ITA No. 282/Kol/2012) and (v) Joy Consolidated Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ITO (ITA No. 547/Kol/2020. M/s. Delighted Holdings Pvt. Ltd., AYs 2012-13 & 2013-14 6. The Ld. DR, on the other h…

M/S. Delighted Holdings (P) Ltd., Kolkata vs. Dcir, Cir-8(2), Kolkata

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

ITA 625/KOL/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 Sept 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 131Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 68

The ACIT Central-2, Indore vs. M/S Shubham Fininvest India P Ltd, Indore

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue for A

ITA 170/IND/2022[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Indore13 Sept 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 68

…CIT(A) has rightly deleted the addition. He has relied upon the judgment of Jurisdictional High Court in case of Pr. CIT vs. M/s Chain House International Pvt. Ltd. 408 ITR 561 as well as judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of CIT vs. Orissa Corporation 159 ITR 78 (SC). He has supported the impugned order of the Ld. CIT(A). 5. We have considered the rival submissions as well as relevant material on record. The AO has extracted the information received from Investigation Wing Mumbai in para 2 of the assessment order as under: “2. The information extracted by the Investigation wing Mumbai in respect of Asse…