How many judgments cite CIT v. Precision Finance Pvt. Ltd.?

427 judgments on BharatTax cite CIT v. Precision Finance Pvt. Ltd. (208 ITR 465), spanning 2009 to 2026.

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

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 68, Section 143(3), Section 133(6), Section 142(1), Section 147, Section 148.

CIT v. Precision Finance Pvt. Ltd.

208 ITR 465High Court1994#168 most cited

What is CIT v. Precision Finance Pvt. Ltd. authority for?

When an assessee seeks to explain a cash credit under Section 68, they must prove the identity of the creditors, their creditworthiness or capacity to advance money, and the genuineness of the transactions. The burden of proof is not discharged merely by filing confirmatory letters or demonstrating banking channel transactions.

427

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,181 Indian tax judgments — from 2009 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Precision Finance Pvt. Ltd. · Section 68 · cash credit · burden of proof · identity of creditor · creditworthiness of creditor · genuineness of transaction · unexplained money · confirmatory letters · banking channel transactions

Sections most often in play

Section 68 Section 143(3)Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 147 Section 148 Section 1961 Section 131

Issues it is cited on

creditworthiness of the creditor paper company source of source share capital and share premium live link share application money entry operator section 251(1)(a)addition u/s 68 genuineness of the transaction addition under section 68 borrowed satisfaction

Judgments citing CIT v. Precision Finance Pvt. Ltd.

ITO, WD-5(2), Kolkata vs. M/S Purbasa Commercial Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

ITA 1179/KOL/2015[2008-2009]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata25 Jan 2019AY 2008-2009

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Sainiassessment Year :2008-09 Income Tax Officer, V/S. M/S Purbasa Commercial Pvt. Ltd. 5/5 Clive Row, 4Th Ward-5(2), P-7, Chowringhee Square, Floor, Room No.26, 8Th Floor, Room No.6, Kolkata-700001 Kolkata-700 069 [Pan No.Aaecp 1267B] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Shri Saurabh Kumar, Addl. Cit-Dr अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri Subash Agarwal, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 15-01-2019 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 25-01-2019 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S.Godara:- This Revenue’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2008-09 Arises Against The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Kolkata’S Order Dated 29.06.2015, Passed In Case No.1575/Cit(A)-2/2015-16, In Proceedings U/S. 144 R.W.S 263 R.W.S. 143(3) R.W.S 147 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961; In Short ‘The Act’. Case File Perused. 2. The Revenue’S Sole Substantive Ground Raised In The Instant Appeal Seeks To Revere The Cit(A)’S Action Deleting Unexplained Cash Credits Addition Of ₹3.14 Lac Made In The Course Of Assessment Framed On 19.03.2015. The Assessee’S Case Before Assessing Officer Was That This Sum Represented Its Share Application / Premium Raised During The Course Of Relevant Previous Year. The Assessing Officer Held In The Course Of Assessment That Assessee Had Failed To Prove Identity, Genuineness & Creditworthiness Of The Investors

Section 144Section 68

…al matrix we find no merit in these Appeals which we accordingly dismiss." 14. I further find that, Hon'ble Delhi High Court in case of CIT Vs Lovely Export has observed as under: The Calcutta High Court has held in CIT vs. Precision Finance Pvt. Ltd., [1994] 208 ITR 465 that it is not sufficient for an assessee to disclose that credits in their Books had been received through Banking channels; the identity as well as the creditworthiness of the creditor must nevertheless be proved. In Sajan Das and Sons vs. Commissioner of Income- Tax, [2003] 264 ITR 435 (Del) the Division Bench was not convinced that merely bec…

Mahesh Enterprises, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward - 35(4), Kolkata

ITA 1406/KOL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 Jan 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S.S, Godaraassessment Year:2014-15 Mahesh Enterprises Income Tax Officer, बनाम / 33/1 Netaji Subhash Road, Ward-35(4), Aayakar V/S. Marshall House, Room Bhwan, Poorba, 110, No.847, Kolkata-001 Shantipally, Kolkata- [Pan No.Aaofm 9684 N] 107 .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent Shri N.P. Jain, Advocate अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri Arindam Bhattacharya, Addl. Cit-Dr ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent Assessment Year:2014-15 Imperial Overseas Income Tax Officer, बनाम / C/O Subash Agarwal & Ward-35(2), Aayakar V/S. Associates, Siddha Bhwan, Poorba, 110, Gibson,1, Gibson Lane, Shantipally, Kolkata- Suite-213, 2Nd Floor, 107 Kolkata-69 [Pan No.Aacfi 3068 A] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent Shri Brijesh Kumar Singh, Advocate अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri Arindam Bhattacharya, Addl. Cit-Dr ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 03-01-2019 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 23-01-2019 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement आदेश /O R D E R These Two Assessee’S Appeal(S) For Assessment Year 2014-15, Arise Against The Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)-10, Kolkata’S Separate Order Dated 11.06.2018 & 01.05.2018 Passed In Case Nos.415/Cit(A)-10/W-35(2)/14-15/ 2016-

Section 143(3)

…d to the assessee, has been disclosed to the Income-tax Department. Payments were admittedly made by cheque after deduction of tax. The tax deducted as source has duly been deposited. The judgment in the case of CIT vs. Precision Finance Pvt. Ltd. reported in 208 ITR 465 relied upon by Mr. Bhowmick does not really assist him. The aforesaid judgment is an authority for the proposition that mere payment by account payee cheque cannot establish that the transaction was genuine, but in the case before us, besides the fact that payment was made by cheque, there are other pieces of evidence available which are as follo…

M/S Holy Faith International Pvt. Ltd, Jalandhar vs. The Dy Commissioner of Income Tax, Jalandhar

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 181/ASR/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar15 Jan 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Hon’Ble & Sh. Ravish Soodita No.181/Asr./2017 : Asstt. Year : 2008-09 M/S Holy Faith International Vs Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Pvt. Ltd., Mbd House, Central Circle-Ii, Railway Road, Jalandhar Jalandhar (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaach6111J Assessee By : Sh. Sudhir Sehgal, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. Bhawani Shankar, Dr Date Of Hearing : 07.01.2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 15.01.2019 Order Per N. K. Saini: This Is An Appeal By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 20.03.2017 Of Ld. Cit(A)-I, Jalandhar. 2. Following Grounds Have Been Raised In This Appeal: “1. That The Worthy Commissioner Of Income Tax (A)-1, Jalandhar Has Erred In Dismissing The Appeal Filed By The Assessee. 2. That The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Confirming The Contention Of The Assessing Officer In Reopening The Case U/S 148 Of The Income Tax Act And, Thus, Framing Of Assessment U/S 147 R.W.S.143(3)/153C At An Income Of Rs. 4,95,13,441/- Against The Returned Income Of Rs. 4,63,33,441/-. 3. That The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Not Considering That There Was No Reason To Believe That The Income Of The

For Appellant: Sh. Sudhir Sehgal, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Bhawani Shankar, DR

Section 131Section 132Section 147Section 148Section 153C

…ment proceedings proved the identity and creditworthiness of the creditor alongwith genuineness of the transaction. Therefore, the addition made was not justified. The reliance was placed on the following case laws: " CIT Vs Precision Finance Pvt. Ltd. (1994) 208 ITR 465 (Cal.) " ITO Vs Suresh Kalmadi (1988) 32 TTJ (Pune) TM 300 " Paul Mathews and Sons Vs CIT 263 ITR 101 (Ker.) " CIT Vs Khader Khan Son 300 ITR 157 (Madras) " Kishinchand Chellaram Vs CIT 125 ITR 0713 (SC) " Andaman Timber Industries Vs Commissioner of Central Excise 127 DTR 241 " Sh. Ashok Kumar Bhailal Vs ITO in ITA Nos. 562 & 591/Ahd.2015 ITA N…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Montage Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

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

ITA 4014/DEL/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Jan 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Before Shri G.D. Agrawal, Before Shri Before Shri G.D. Agrawal, G.D. Agrawal, Vice G.D. Agrawal, Vice & And & Shri K. Narasimha Chary Shri K. Narasimha Charyshri K. Narasimha Chary Shri K. Narasimha Chary

For Appellant: Ms. Paramita M. Biswas, CIT-DRFor Respondent: Shri M.P. Rastogi, Advocate

…P) Ltd. Vs. CIT – (2010) 324 ITR 338 (Delhi). (v) Sanraj Engineering Pvt.Ltd. Vs. CIT – ITA No.79/2016 (Delhi). (vi) Naresh Chandra Jain Vs. CIT – ITA No.335 of 2009 (Allahabad). (vii) CIT Vs. Precision Finance (P) Ltd. – (1995) 82 Taxman 31 (Calcutta)/(1994) 208 ITR 465 (Calcutta)/(1994) 121 CTR 20 (Calcutta). 18. The learned counsel for the assessee, on the other hand, relied upon the order of learned CIT(A). He stated that before the learned CIT(A), the assessee has explained each and every allegation levelled against the assessee by the Assessing Officer. He stated that the shares of `10/- each were issued f…

ITO, Ward-10(4), Kolkata vs. M/S Positive Properties Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, appeal of revenue is dismissed

ITA 2274/KOL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata09 Jan 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am]

Section 68

…d be creditworthiness. The Ld. DR further submitted that in K.M. Sadhukhan and Sons Pvt. Ltd. Vs CIT (1999) 239 ITR 77 (Cal) it has been held that burden lies upon the assessee to prove the noted three conditions. In CIT vs. Precision Finance Pvt. Ltd. (1994) 208 ITR 465 (Cal) 3 Positive Properties Pvt. Ltd., AY 2012-13 the Hon'ble High Court held that "it is for the assessee to prove the identity of the creditors, their creditworthiness and the genuineness of the transactions. Mere furnishing of the particulars is not enough". The Ld. CIT, DR also submitted that in CIT vs. Nipun Builders and Developers Pvt. Lt…

M/S. South Shourne Corporation (India), Baroda vs. The Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circel-2(2), Baroda

ITA 269/AHD/2017[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad01 Jan 2019AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.269/Ahd/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2004-2005 M/S South Shourne Corporation(India) Acit, 931, Gidc Estate, Circle-2(2), V Makarpura, Baroda. S. Baroda.

For Appellant: Shri Parimal Parmar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Apoorva Bhardwaj, Sr.DR

Section 234ASection 271Section 36Section 68

…the transactions and creditworthiness of the parties. These liabilities on the assessee were imposed to justify the cash credit entries under section 68 of the Act by the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Precision finance (p) Ltd reported in 208 ITR 465 wherein it was held as under: “It was for the assessee to prove the identity of the creditors, their creditworthiness and the genuineness of the transactions. On the facts of this case, the Tribunal did not take into account all these ingredients which had to be satisfied by the assessee. Asstt. Year 2004-05 8 Mere furnishing of the particulars…

ITO, Ward - 36(1), Kolkata vs. Shri Rakesh Agarwal, Kolkata

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

ITA 2008/KOL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata19 Dec 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.2008/Kol/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14)

For Appellant: Shri K. Mondal, Sr. DRFor Respondent: None

Section 143(3)Section 57Section 68

…iving complete name and address of the bankers and confirmation letters, it was for the Income-tax Officer to show that the explanation rendered by the assessee was not true 190 ITR 396 (Bom). 11.The Hon'ble Jurisdictional Calcutta High Court has laid down in 208 ITR 465 that the assessee is expected to establish:- a. Proof of identity of his creditors; b. Capacity of creditors to advance money; c. Genuineness of transaction As for the genuineness, it is for the assessee to prove that the entry found is genuine. In 208 ITR 465 (Cal) it was held that the transaction is not genuine, simply because some, out of many…

M/S. Sangyon Automotive Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Meerut

In the result, ITA Nos.2991 & 2992/Del/2015 are partly allowed and ITA

ITA 2993/DEL/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Dec 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Shri G.C. Srivastava &For Respondent: Shri S.S. Rana, CIT, DR

Section 132Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 68

…e onus shifts to the AO. In this case, it is clear that the primary onus itself has not been discharged by the assessee. This is required to be done even when the loan transactions have been made through cheques. In the case of CIT V PRECISION FINANCE PVT LTD 208 ITR 465 (Cal), it has been held that mere payment by account payee cheque is not sacrosanct nor can it make a non- genuine transaction genuine. It is also a fact that the copy of bank account through which the loan was advanced was not made available during the assessment proceedings. Considering the totality of facts, the genuineness of transactions and…

M/S. Sangyon Automotive Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Meerut

In the result, ITA Nos.2991 & 2992/Del/2015 are partly allowed and ITA

ITA 2992/DEL/2015[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Dec 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Shri G.C. Srivastava &For Respondent: Shri S.S. Rana, CIT, DR

Section 132Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 68

M/S. Sangyon Automotive Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Meerut

In the result, ITA Nos.2991 & 2992/Del/2015 are partly allowed and ITA

ITA 2991/DEL/2015[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Dec 2018AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Shri G.C. Srivastava &For Respondent: Shri S.S. Rana, CIT, DR

Section 132Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 68

M/S Sashi Cables Ltd., Kolkata vs. CIT, Kolkata-1, Kolkata

Appeal is partly allowed in above terms

ITA 793/KOL/2014[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata30 Nov 2018AY 2009-2010

Bench: Shri P.M.Jagtap, Vice- & Shri S.S.Godaraassessment Year:2009-10

Section 143(3)Section 263

…ited Commercial & Industries Co. (P) Ltd., (1991) 187 ITR 596, 599 (Cal); M.A. UnneeriKutti Vs. CIT, (1992) 198 ITR 147, 150 (Ker), Special Leave petition dismissed by the Supreme Court (1993) 201 ITR (St.) 23 (SC); CIT Vs. Precision Finance Pvt. Ltd., (1994) 208 ITR 465, 470 (Cal). The manner of payment by the account payee cheque is also not sacrosanct and this cannot make a bogus transaction as genuine one [(CIT Vs. Precision Finance Pvt. Ltd., ($) 208 ITR 465,470,471 (Cal). Cf. Nizam Wool Agency Vs. CIT, (1992) 1931TR 318,320 (All)]. 17. It may be reiterated that the genuineness of the share capital in this c…

ITO 8(2)(2), Mumbai vs. Lotus Grih Nirman P.Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is dismissed

ITA 3998/MUM/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Oct 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2010-11 Income Tax Officer 8(2)(2), M/S Lotus Grih Nirman Room No. 212/216A, 2Nd Vs. Pvt. Ltd. 419, Laxmi Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Plaza, Laxmi Industrial Road, Mumbai-400020. Estate, Link Road, Andheri (W), Mumbai- 400059. Pan No. Aabcl0864D Appellant Respondent Revenue By : Mr. Rajesh Kumar Yadav, Dr Assessee By : Mr. Rushabh Mehta, Ar Date Of Hearing : 25/07/2018 Date Of Pronouncement : 18/10/2018

For Appellant: Mr. Rushabh Mehta, ARFor Respondent: Mr. Rajesh Kumar Yadav, DR

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

…the order of the AO submits that in the instant case the share premium of the company has not been used for the purposes specified in section 78(2) of the Companies Act. Also reliance is placed by him on the decision in CIT v. Precision Finance P. Ltd. (Cal) 208 ITR 465 for the proposition that cash credit can be assessed even if transaction is through cheques. It is stated by him that the genuineness of transaction is in doubt in the instant case as brought M/s Lotus Grih Nirman 6 out by the AO. Thus the Ld. DR submits that the AO has rightly made the addition of Rs.2,44,50,000/- u/s 68 and the same be restore…

Gumpro Drilling Fluids Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax - 15, Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 2868/MUM/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Oct 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharassessment Year: 2013-14 Gumpro Drilling Fluids Vs Pr. Cit-15, Private Limited, Room No.517, 5Th Floor, Opp. Karma Stambha, Aayakar Bhavan, Hazarat Compound, Lbs M. K. Road, Marg, Vikhroli (West), Mumbai-400020 Mumbai-400083 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) Pan. No.Aadcg2319N "नधा"रती क" ओर से / Assessee By Shri Ashok J. Patil राज"व क" ओर से / Revenue By Shri L.K.S. Dahiya Cit-Dr

Section 120Section 144ASection 263Section 35

…801/80 Taxman 89 (SC) (para 4), iii. CIT v. Nova Promoters & Finlease (P.) Ltd. [2012] 342 ITR 169/206 Taxman 207/18 taxmann.com 217 (Delhi) (para 4), iv. CIT v. Durga Prasad More [19711] 82 ITR 540 (SC) (para 6), v. CIT v. Precision Finance (P.) Ltd. [1994] 208 ITR 465/[1995] 82 Taxman 31 (Cal.) (para 6), vi. ITO v. DG Housing Projects Ltd. [2012] 343 ITR 329/212 Taxman 132 (Mag.)/[2012] 20 taxmann.com 587 (Delhi) (para 7), vii. DIT v. Jyoti Foundation [2013] 35 ITR 388/219 Taxman 105/38 taxmann.com 180 (Delhi) (para 7), viii. CIT v. Steller Investment Ltd. [1991] 192 ITR 287/59 Taxman 568 (Delhi) (para 8), 17…

DCIT CC 7(2), Mumbai vs. Manba Finance Ltd, Mumbai

ITA 1448/MUM/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Oct 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am & Shri Ram Lal Negi, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Chaudhary Arunkumar SinghFor Respondent: Dr. P. Daniel

Section 133ASection 68

…the decisions of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Navodaya Castle (P.) Ltd. vs. CIT [2015] 230 Taxman 268 (SC), Sumati Dayal vs. CIT [1995] 214 ITR 801 (SC) and the decision of the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of Precision Finance Pvt. Ltd. 208 ITR 465 (Cal). 12. In this background, the A.O. held that the unsecured loans were nothing but accommodation entries liable to be added as unexplained cash credit u/s. 68 of the Act. He further disallowed interest paid on these grounds amounting to Rs.22,11,631/-. 13. He further noted that the assessee has shown investments of Rs.5,00,000/- but no exp…

M/S Safari Fine Clothing Pvt. Ltd., Gandhidham vs. Asstt. Commr. of Income Tax, Gandhidham Circle, Gandhidham.

ITA 30/RJT/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot03 Oct 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmedिनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" M/S. Safari Fine Clothing Pvt. Acit, Ltd., Vs. Gandhidham Circle Shed No.280/281, A Type, Gandhidham. Sector No.3, Ka Sez, Gandhinagar- Kutch वष" Ito, M/S. Safari Fine Clothing Pvt. Ward-2, Vs. Ltd., Gandhidham "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aajcs 0565 Q अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ" (""यथ" / Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Chetan L. Agarwal, Ar. Revenue By : S Shri Praveen Verma, Sr. D.R. सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 01/08/2018 घोषणा क" तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 03/10/2018

For Appellant: Shri Chetan L. Agarwal, ARFor Respondent: S Shri Praveen Verma, Sr. D.R

Section 133(6)Section 41(1)Section 68

…d to the assessee, has been disclosed to the Income-tax Department. Payments were admittedly made by cheque after deduction of tax. The tax deducted as source has duly been deposited. The judgment in the case of CIT vs. Precision Finance Pvt. Ltd. reported in 208 ITR 465 relied upon b Mr. Bhowmick does not really assist him. The aforesaid judgment is an authority for the proposition that mere payment by account payee cheque cannot establish that the transactions was genuine, but in the case before us, besides the fact that payment was made by cheque, there are other pieces of evidence available which are as follo…

M/S. Bhupati Vinimay Pvt Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward 8(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 508/KOL/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Sept 2018AY 2009-10

Section 131Section 143(1)Section 144Section 147Section 263Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA BENCH (A), KOLKATA [Before Shri P.M. Jagtap, AM & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, JM] I.T.A. No. 508/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/s. Bhupati Vinimay Pvt. Ltd................................………………………….................Appellant 891, Jassore Road, 2nd Floor, Kolkata – 700 055 [PAN: AADCB 6359 H] ITO, Ward 8(1), Kolkata...................………………………………………………………..Respondent Kolkata. Appearances by: Shri Manish Rastogi, Advocate appearing on behalf of the assessee. Shri P.K. Srihari, CIT(DR) appearing on behalf of the Revenue. Date of concluding the hearing : July 31, 201…

DCIT Cent. Cir. - 1(3), Mumbai vs. Jainam Investments, Mumbai

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

ITA 6099/MUM/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Aug 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Ramlal Negi (Jm)

Section 68

…ccordingly he submitted that the Ld CIT(A) should not have brushed aside the findings of search officials. In this regard, the Ld D.R placed reliance on the decision rendered by Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of CIT vs. Precision Finance P Ltd (1994)(208 ITR 465). He submitted that the tax authorities are entitled to look into the surrounding circumstances and human probabilities in order to ascertain the genuineness of transactions. He further submitted that they are also entitled to look into the substance by overlooking the form. For these propositions, the Ld CIT-DR relied upon the decisions rendered…

DCIT, Circle-10(2), Kolkata vs. M/S Sree Automotive Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

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

ITA 1392/KOL/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata27 Jul 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: : Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi

For Respondent: Shri Saurabh Kumar, Addl. CIT, Sr.DR

…d to the assessee, has been disclosed to the Incometax Department. Payments were admittedly made by cheque after deduction of tax. The tax deducted as source has duly been deposited. The judgment in the case of CIT vs. Precision Finance Pvt. Ltd. reported in 208 ITR 465 relied upon by Mr. 3 M/s.Sree Automotive Pvt. Ltd Bhowmick does not really assist him. The aforesaid judgment is an authority for the proposition that mere payment by account payee cheque cannot establish that the transaction was genuine, but in the case before us, besides the fact that payment was made by cheque, there are other pieces of evide…

M/S. Dalmia Consolidated Pvt. Ltd., Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 2753/DEL/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Jul 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri T.S. Kapoorassessment Year: 2008-09

For Appellant: Sh. Hiren Mehta, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Rachna Singh, CIT(DR)

Section 132(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 153CSection 68

…f her contention, she filed a Paper Book containing pages 1 to 89 in which she has attached the copy of various following decisions wherein it has been held that merely establishing identity of creditors is not enough:- - CIT vs. Precision Finance (P) Ltd. 208 ITR 465 (Cal.) - CIT vs. United Commercial & Industries Co. (P) Ltd. 187 ITR 596 (Cal.) - CIT vs. Nipun Builders & Developers (P) Ltd. 350 ITR 407 (Delhi) - CIT vs. Nova Promoters & Finlease (P) Ltd. 342 ITR 169 (Delhi) - Mukesh Shaw vs. ITO 204 taxman 615 (Jharkhand). - NR Portfolio (P) Ltd. vs. CIT 29 Taxmann.com 291 (Delhi). - CIT vs. Empire Buildtech…

ITO Ward 11(3), Kolkata vs. M/S Hitesh Distributors Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

ITA 1512/KOL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata13 Jul 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy& Sri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi] I.T.A. No. 1512/Kol/2016 Assessment Year: 2012-13

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

…ued u/s 131 of the Act to the Directors of the assessee company as well as to the 23 shareholders. On the ground that there was no response, he relied on the judgment of the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. Precision Finance Pvt. Ltd. [208 ITR 463], CIT v. Nipun Builders & Developers Pvt. Ltd. 30 Taxmann.Com 292 (Delhi) (2013), and made an addition u/s. 68 of the Act of the entire amount of Rs.4,09,10,000/- 2 I.T.A. No. 1512/Kol/2016 Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/s. Hitesh Distributors Pvt. Ltd 3. Aggrieved the assessee carried the matter in appeal. The ld. First Appellate Authority observ…