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 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.

Sri.S.Baskar Sait, Trichur vs. The DCIT, Trichur

In the result, both the appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 226/COCH/2018[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin02 Jan 2023AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Ms. Padmavathy S.

For Appellant: Shri Kittu Nair, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. J M Jamuna Devi, Sr. AR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148

…d the persons and having produced confirmation letters from them, initial burden was discharged by the appellant and that Revenue had to take matter forward. The appellant had also relied on the ratio of the Judgment of the Honorable Supreme Court reported in 159 ITR 78, to canvass the said proposition. C. The Learned Commissioner ought to have noted that, length of time after which assesses called upon to explain cash credit is also relevant factor in considering whether the evidence produced is satisfactory. D. The documents substantiating their ownership of the property were produced along with confirmation le…

Sri.S.Baskar Sait, Trichur vs. The DCIT, Trichur

In the result, both the appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 225/COCH/2018[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin02 Jan 2023AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Ms. Padmavathy S.

For Appellant: Shri Kittu Nair, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. J M Jamuna Devi, Sr. AR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148

…d the persons and having produced confirmation letters from them, initial burden was discharged by the appellant and that Revenue had to take matter forward. The appellant had also relied on the ratio of the Judgment of the Honorable Supreme Court reported in 159 ITR 78, to canvass the said proposition. C. The Learned Commissioner ought to have noted that, length of time after which assesses called upon to explain cash credit is also relevant factor in considering whether the evidence produced is satisfactory. D. The documents substantiating their ownership of the property were produced along with confirmation le…

ITO, WD.-9(1), Kolkata vs. M/S Mainak Suppliers Pvt. Ltd, Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 38/KOL/2021[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Dec 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Sonjoysarma & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri HukumaSema, CITFor Respondent: Shri Miraj D. Shah, AR
Section 131Section 131(1)Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263Section 68

…e non-appearance of directors is no basis for invoking provisions of section 68 of the Act for which he placed reliance on the decision of 12 Mainak Suppliers Pvt. Ltd. AY 2009-10 Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. 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 a…

ACIT -1(1)(1), Mumbai vs. M/S Adhiraj Construction Private Limited, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the revenue and the cross objection filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 1410/MUM/2022[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Dec 2022AY 2012-2013
Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 68

…THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” Bench, Mumbai Shri B.R. Baskaran (AM) & Shri Rahul Chaudhary (JM) I.T.A. No. 1410/Mum/2022 (A.Y. 2012-13) Vs. M/s. Adhiraj ACIT-1(1)(1) Room No. 533 Constructions Pvt. Ltd. Aayakar Bhavan 303, Sharda Chambers M.K. Road Sir V.T. Marg, New Marine Mumbai-400 020. Lines, Mumbai-400 020. (Appellant) (Respondent) C.O. No. 100/Mum/2022 (A.Y. 2012-13) Vs. ACIT-1(1)(1) M/s. Adhiraj Constructions Pvt. Ltd. Room No. 533 303, Sharda Chambers Aayakar Bhavan Sir V.T. Marg, New Marine M.K. Road Lines, Mumbai-400 020. Mumbai-400 020. (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN : AACCA3372Q Assessee b…

ITO, New Delhi vs. Sahasra Electronics (P) Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 534/DEL/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Dec 2022AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year: 2006-07

Section 10ASection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 40

…livery of notice under section 133(6) of the Act by the postal authorities for which it would be unjust to penalize the assessee. In taking this view, we are supported by the ratio of decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in CIT vs. Orissa Corporation (P) Ltd.159 ITR 78 (SC) wherein Their Lordships held that where the assessee could not produce the parties and summons issued are returned un-served, it did not follow automatically that an adverse inference should be drawn that the amounts represented undisclosed income of the assessee. Confirmation of the parties in their copy of ledger accounts appearing in the b…

Sahasra Electronics Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 161/DEL/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Dec 2022AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year: 2006-07

Section 10ASection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 40

…livery of notice under section 133(6) of the Act by the postal authorities for which it would be unjust to penalize the assessee. In taking this view, we are supported by the ratio of decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in CIT vs. Orissa Corporation (P) Ltd.159 ITR 78 (SC) wherein Their Lordships held that where the assessee could not produce the parties and summons issued are returned un-served, it did not follow automatically that an adverse inference should be drawn that the amounts represented undisclosed income of the assessee. Confirmation of the parties in their copy of ledger accounts appearing in the b…

DCIT, Central Circle-2, Surat vs. Dhanpriya Prints Pvt. Ltd., Surat

In the result, Ground No. 4 to 6 raised by the Revenue in ITA

ITA 52/SRT/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Surat23 Dec 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Hon'Ble & Dr. A. L. Saini, Hon'Ble Accountnat Member (Physical Court Hearing) Sl.

For Appellant: Shri Rasesh Shah, CAFor Respondent: Sr. DR
Section 143(3)

…documents sought from the applicants to examine the transaction were not available before the AO. As regards the issue of non-appearance of the share applicants, we note that 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 ITA Nos.52/SRT/2022 & 171, 174/SRT/2021/IT(SS)A 69, 70, 75 & 76/SRT/2021 Betex India Ltd. & Dhanpriya Prints Pvt. Ltd. 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…

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Surat vs. Betex India Limited, Surat

In the result, Ground No. 4 to 6 raised by the Revenue in ITA

ITA 174/SRT/2021[2008-9]Status: DisposedITAT Surat23 Dec 2022

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Hon'Ble & Dr. A. L. Saini, Hon'Ble Accountnat Member (Physical Court Hearing) Sl.

For Appellant: Shri Rasesh Shah, CAFor Respondent: Sr. DR
Section 143(3)

…documents sought from the applicants to examine the transaction were not available before the AO. As regards the issue of non-appearance of the share applicants, we note that 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 ITA Nos.52/SRT/2022 & 171, 174/SRT/2021/IT(SS)A 69, 70, 75 & 76/SRT/2021 Betex India Ltd. & Dhanpriya Prints Pvt. Ltd. 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…

Betex India Limited, Surat vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Surat

In the result, Ground No. 4 to 6 raised by the Revenue in ITA

ITA 171/SRT/2021[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Surat23 Dec 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Hon'Ble & Dr. A. L. Saini, Hon'Ble Accountnat Member (Physical Court Hearing) Sl.

For Appellant: Shri Rasesh Shah, CAFor Respondent: Sr. DR
Section 143(3)

…documents sought from the applicants to examine the transaction were not available before the AO. As regards the issue of non-appearance of the share applicants, we note that 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 ITA Nos.52/SRT/2022 & 171, 174/SRT/2021/IT(SS)A 69, 70, 75 & 76/SRT/2021 Betex India Ltd. & Dhanpriya Prints Pvt. Ltd. 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…

Toplink Developers Consultancy Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward-3(3), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 710/KOL/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 Dec 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Sonjoy Sarma

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 68

…ot be served with notice u/s 131 or they failed to appear before Assessing Officer the loans could not be treated as non-genuine and therefore upheld the order of the Tribunal deleting the addition u/s 68 of the I.T. Act 1961. v) 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…

ITO 25 (3)(3), Mumbai vs. Rahul Kantilal Shah, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 6806/MUM/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Dec 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri M Balaganesh & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaleito – 25(3)(3) Vs. Rahul Kantilal Shah Room No. 606, 6Th Floor 701, Saroj Bldg, C-10, Pratyaksh Kar Sardar Vallabhbhai Bhavan, Bkc Complex Patel Road, Opp Pawan Bandra (E), Mumbia – Hans, Vile Parle (W) 400 051. Mumbai – 400 056. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaips0543C Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Ms. Samruddhi Hande.Dr Respondent By : Mr. Anuj Kisnadwala.Ar Date Of Hearing 23.09.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 19.12.2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Pavan Kumar Gadale Jm: The Revenue Has Filed The Appeal Against The Order Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Cit(A)) - 37, Mumbai Passed U/S 143(3) & 250 U/Sec Of The Act. The Revenue Has Raised The Fallowing Grounds Of Appeal:

For Appellant: Ms. Samruddhi Hande.DRFor Respondent: Mr. Anuj Kisnadwala.AR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 57Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI M BALAGANESH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITO – 25(3)(3) Vs. Rahul Kantilal Shah Room No. 606, 6th Floor 701, Saroj Bldg, C-10, Pratyaksh Kar Sardar Vallabhbhai Bhavan, BKC Complex Patel Road, Opp Pawan Bandra (E), Mumbia – Hans, Vile Parle (W) 400 051. Mumbai – 400 056. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. : AAIPS0543C Appellant .. Respondent Appellant by : Ms. Samruddhi Hande.DR Respondent by : Mr. Anuj Kisnadwala.AR Date of Hearing 23.09.2022 Date of Pronouncement 19.12.2022 आदेश / O R D E R PER PAVAN KUMAR…

The ACIT, Central-1, Indore vs. M/S Surya Infra Venture Pvt. Ltd., Indore

In the result ground no.2 raised by the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 233/IND/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Indore01 Dec 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri B.M. Biyani(Conducted Through Virtual Court) Assessment Year: 2013-14 Acit(Central)-1 Surya Infraventures Pvt. Indore Ltd. Nanda Nagar, Indore बनाम/ Vs. (Appellant / Revenue) (Respondent / Appellant) Pan: Aadca 4235 D Assessee By Shri S.N. Agrawal & Shri Bhavesh Agrawal, Ars Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 15.09.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 01.12.2022

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 41(1)

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, इंदौर "यायपीठ, इंदौर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE MS. MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI B.M. BIYANI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (Conducted through Virtual Court) Assessment Year: 2013-14 ACIT(Central)-1 Surya Infraventures Pvt. Indore Ltd. Nanda Nagar, Indore बनाम/ Vs. (Appellant / Revenue) (Respondent / Appellant) PAN: AADCA 4235 D Assessee by Shri S.N. Agrawal & Shri Bhavesh Agrawal, ARs Revenue by Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 15.09.2022 Date of Pronouncement 01.12.2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per B.M. Biyani, A.M.: Feeling aggrieved by appeal-order…

Shri Popatbhai Bhudarbhai Patel, Ahmedabad vs. ITO, Ward-6(1)(3), Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 493/AHD/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 Nov 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year: 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri D.K. Parikh, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Mukesh Sharma, Sr. DR
Section 68

…was dismissed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court. The Ld. AR also relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT vs. Ranchhod Jivabhai Nakhava, 208 Taxman 35 and decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Orissa Corporation, 159 ITR 78. 7. As regards Ground no.4, the Ld. AR submitted that the CIT(A) erred in not appreciating submission of the assessee that in respect of loan from Bharatbhai Thakkar there was debit balance as on 01.04.2013 of Rs.13,44,992/- filed on 09.10.2019 as per confirmation sent by him directly to the Assessing Officer. The said debit balance amount receiva…

M/S Silvertoss Realtors Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward-9(4), Kolkata

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

ITA 2282/KOL/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Nov 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Sri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Borad

Section 131Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 68

…orts 216 CTR 195 5. CIT vs. Down Town Hospitals Pvt. Ltd. 267 ITR 439 (Gauhati) 6. CIT vs. Gagandeep Infrastructure (P) Ltd. 80 taxmann.com 272 (Bombay) 7. Crystal Networks (P.) Ltd. vs. CIT [2013] 353 ITR 171 (Calcutta) 8. CIT vs. Orissa Corporation (P) Ltd. 159 ITR 78” 8. On the other hand, ld. D/R vehemently argued supporting the order of ld. CIT(A). 9. We have heard rival contentions and perused the records placed before us. In the three grounds raised by the assessee, the common grievance is that ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition made by ld. AO u/s 68 of the Act alleging that the assessee failed to…

M/S. Rajasthan Patrika Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur vs. ACIT, Circle-6, Jaipur

In the results ground no

ITA 232/JPR/2020[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur22 Nov 2022AY 2008-09
For Appellant: Sh. Manish Agarwal, C.AFor Respondent: Sh. A. S. Nehara, Addl. CIT
Section 143(3)

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”A” 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, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA Nos. 230 to 232/JP/2020 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year : 2005-06, 2006-07 & 2008-09 cuke M/s Rajasthan Patrika Private The Asstt. Commissioner of Vs. Limited Income Tax, Circle-06, Jaipur JLN Marg, Jaipur LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AAACR 7856 G vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 510/JP/2019 fu/kZ…

M/S. Rajasthan Patrika Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur vs. ACIT, Circle-6, Jaipur

In the results ground no

ITA 231/JPR/2020[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur22 Nov 2022AY 2006-07
For Appellant: Sh. Manish Agarwal, C.AFor Respondent: Sh. A. S. Nehara, Addl. CIT
Section 143(3)

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”A” 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, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA Nos. 230 to 232/JP/2020 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year : 2005-06, 2006-07 & 2008-09 cuke M/s Rajasthan Patrika Private The Asstt. Commissioner of Vs. Limited Income Tax, Circle-06, Jaipur JLN Marg, Jaipur LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AAACR 7856 G vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 510/JP/2019 fu/kZ…

M/S. Rajasthan Patrika Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur vs. ACIT, Circle-6, Jaipur

In the results ground no

ITA 230/JPR/2020[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur22 Nov 2022AY 2005-06
For Appellant: Sh. Manish Agarwal, C.AFor Respondent: Sh. A. S. Nehara, Addl. CIT
Section 143(3)

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”A” 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, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA Nos. 230 to 232/JP/2020 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year : 2005-06, 2006-07 & 2008-09 cuke M/s Rajasthan Patrika Private The Asstt. Commissioner of Vs. Limited Income Tax, Circle-06, Jaipur JLN Marg, Jaipur LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AAACR 7856 G vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 510/JP/2019 fu/kZ…

Rajasthan Patrika (P) Ltd., Jaipur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-6, Jaipur

In the results ground no

ITA 510/JPR/2019[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur22 Nov 2022AY 2007-08
For Appellant: Sh. Manish Agarwal, C.AFor Respondent: Sh. A. S. Nehara, Addl. CIT
Section 143(3)

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”A” 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, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA Nos. 230 to 232/JP/2020 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year : 2005-06, 2006-07 & 2008-09 cuke M/s Rajasthan Patrika Private The Asstt. Commissioner of Vs. Limited Income Tax, Circle-06, Jaipur JLN Marg, Jaipur LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AAACR 7856 G vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 510/JP/2019 fu/kZ…

Rivet Electrical Pvt Ltd, Faridabad vs. Pr. CIT, Faridabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 6225/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Nov 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia[Assessment Year : 2014-15] Rivet Electrical Pvt.Ltd., Vs Pr.Cit, Ff-9, Vishnu Place, Faridabad, Near Neelam Flyover, Sec-20B, Haryana. Faridabad, Haryana-121002. Pan-Aafcr8803C Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Rajeev Saxena, Adv., Ms. Sumangl Saxena, Adv. & Shri Sahyamsunder, Adv. Respondent By Shri Anuj Garg, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 12.10.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 15.11.2022

Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263

…genuine, the amount could not be regarded as undisclosed income of the company. The Tribunal answered the question raised in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue. V. It was held by 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 , 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, Assessing Officer i…

ACIT, Central Circle-1(1), Ahmedabad vs. M/S. Ashrita Construction Pvt. Ltd., Ahmedabad

In the result, the Cross Objection filed by the Assessee is allowed

ITA 2023/AHD/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad09 Nov 2022AY 2015-16
For Appellant: Shri James Kurian, CIT-DRFor Respondent: Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr. Adv. &
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153C

…Judgment in the case of DCIT vs. Rohini Builders 256 ITR 360 (Guj.), in the case of Murlidhar Lahorimal vs. CIT 280 ITR 512 (Guj.), in the case of CIT vs. Pragati Cooperative Bank Ltd. 278 ITR 170 (Guj.) and in the case of CIT vs. Orissa Corporation Pvt. Ltd. 159 ITR 78 (SC). 6.2. The Ld. Senior Counsel also further submitted that the assessee received Rs. 35 Crores from the lender during the year. However the Assessing Officer doubted only Rs. 5 Crores received from the lender and not doubted 30 Crores received from the lender. The A.O. has not appreciated the repayment of Rs. 5.34 I.T(SS.A No. 248/Ahd/2018 &…