CIT v. United Commercial and Industrial Co (P.) Ltd.

187 ITR 596High Court1991#761 most cited

What is CIT v. United Commercial and Industrial Co (P.) Ltd. authority for?

Under Section 68 of the Income-tax Act, the assessee must prima facie prove the identity of creditors, their creditworthiness or capacity, and the genuineness of the transactions to explain any cash credit, including share application money.

135

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2009 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. United Commercial and Industrial Co (P.) Ltd · Section 68 · cash credit · onus of proof · identity of creditors · creditworthiness of creditor · genuineness of transaction · share application money · assessee's burden · unexplained cash credit

Also reported as

56 Taxmann 304

Sections most often in play

Section 68Section 143(3)Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 115BBESection 142(1)Section 250Section 69A

Issues it is cited on

source of sourcecreditworthiness of the creditorpaper companysection 31share capital and share premiumsection 251(2)section 251(1)(a)live linkonus of proofshare application moneyaddition u/s 68entry operator

Judgments citing CIT v. United Commercial and Industrial Co (P.) Ltd.

DCIT, CIRCLE- 19(1), DELHI vs. PASHUPATI ROAD CARRIER PVT. LTD., DELHI

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

ITA 2490/DEL/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Mar 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sudhir Kumardcit, Circle 19(1), Vs. Pashupati Road Carrier Delhi Pvt. Ltd., Room No. 221, 2Nd Floor, Plot No. 70A/47, Ground C.R. Building, Floor, Moti Nagar, I.P. Estate, New Delhi – 110 002 Rama Road Indl. Area, New Delhi – 110 045 (Pan: Aadcp8319H) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Sh. Baldev Raj, Ca & Sh. Manish Upneja, Ca Revenue By : Sh. Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, Sr. Dr. Date Of Hearing : 24.02.2026 Date Of Order : 20.03.2026 O R D E R Per Sudhir Kumar, Jm :

For Appellant: Sh. Baldev Raj, CA & Sh. Manish UpnejaFor Respondent: Sh. Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, Sr. DR
Section 115JSection 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 40A(3)Section 68

…ree applicants, their creditworthiness to 4 purchase the shares and the genuineness of the transaction as a whole". 7.5 That is the approach adopted by Hon'ble Courts above all along. In the case of CIT V. United Commercial and Industrial Co (P.) Ltd [1991] 187 ITR 596 (Cal)], Hon'ble Calcutta High Court has held that under the scheme of Section 68 it was necessary for the assessee to prove prima facie the identity of creditors, the capacity of such creditors and lastly the genuineness of transactions". 7.6 Similarly, in the case of CIT V. Precision Finance (P.) Ltd [1994] 208 ITR 465 (Cal)], it was observed t…

PRODIGY INFOMATICS PRIVATE LIMITED ,MUMBAI vs. ITO, 15(2)(4), MUMBAI

Accordingly, these grounds are dismissed

ITA 2124/MUM/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Mar 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain & Hon’Ble Shri Jagadishprodigy Infomatics Private Vs. Ito, 15(2)(4), Mumbai Limited Director Ito, 15(2)(4), Mumbai Plot No. D- 388, Midc, Ttc Aayakar Bhavan Industrial Area, Kukshet Mumbai- 400020 Village, Navi Mumbai - 400705 Pan/Gir No. Aadcp3211A (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By None Revenue By Shri Virabhadra Mahajan, (Sr. Dr) Date Of Hearing 04.03.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 10.03.2026 आदेश / Order Per Sandeep Gosain, Jm: The Present Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Challenging The Impugned Order 18.02.2025 Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act’), By The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (Nfac) For The Assessment Year 2012-13. The Following Grounds Are Reproduced Below: “1. On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Learned C.I.T. (A) Erred In Dismissing The Appeal.

Section 250Section 68

…. CIT (1978) 114 ITR 689 (Cal), C.Kant & Co. vs. CIT (1980) 126 ITR 63(Cal), Prakash Textile Agency v. CIT (1980) 121 ITR 890 (CAL) Oriental Wire Industries P. Ltd., vs. CIT (1981) 131 ITR 688 (CAL), CIT vs. United Commercial & Industrial Co. (P) Ltd., (1991) 187 ITR 596, 599 (Cal), M.A. Unneeri Kutty vs. CIT, (1992) 198 ITR 147, 150 (Ker.). 5.6 It has also been held in Bharati P.Ltd. vs. CIT. (1978) 111 ITR 951 (Cal.), CIT vs WJ Walker & Co. (1979) 117 ITR 690, 694 (Cal), CIT vs. United Commercial Industries Co. (P) Ltd., (1991) 187 ITR 596, 599 (Cal.) that mere filing of confirmatory letters does not discharge…

HOLLIS VITRIFIED PRIVATE LIMITED,MORBI, GUJARAT, INDIA vs. THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - 1, RAJKOT, RAJKOT, GUJARAT, INDIA

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

ITA 363/RJT/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot12 Feb 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Dr. Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No. 363/Rjt/2024 (Assessment Year: 2018-19) (Hybrid Hearing) Hollis Vitrified Pvt. Ltd. Vs. The Pr. Commissioner Of Income Revenue Survey No. 756/P1/P1/P1, Opp. Tax-1, Rajkot Antique Granito, Ghuntu,-Lakhdhirpur Road, Morbi (Gujarat)-363642 "ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aacch5628Q (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Fenil H. Mehta, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Punglia, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 68

…lied on the following decisions: (1)Though the Assessing Officers, often, acts on confirmatory letters as evidence, the onus does not get discharged merely by such confirmatory letters as found in CIT v. United Commercial and industrial Co. (Pvt.) Ltd. [1991] 187 ITR 596 (Cal). (2)In the case of Kamal Motors v. CIT [2003] 131 Taxman 155 (Raj.), it was held that the responsibility is on the assessee to discharge the onus that the cash creditor is a man of means to allow the cash credit. (3) Hon'ble Rajkot bench of ITAT in the case of Lado Ceramic (P.) Ltd. v. PCIT [2023] 157 taxmann.com 194 (Rajkot - Trib.) held t…

VIRAJ SOFTWARE PVT. LTD.,DELHI vs. ITO,WARD-26(4), DELHI

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 1084/DEL/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Dec 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwalassessment Year: 2012-13 M/S. Viraj Software Pvt. Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ltd., Ward-26(4), 28, Raja Garden, New Delhi New Delhi Pan: Aaccv5229M (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By None Department By Ms. Ankush Kalra, Sr. Dr

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 68Section 69C

…f three applicants, their creditworthiness to purchase the shares and the genuineness of the transaction as a whole". 9.3 That is the approach adopted by Hon'ble Courts above all along. In the case of CIT v. United Commercial and Industrial Co (P.) Ltd [1991] 187 ITR 596 (Cal)], Hon'ble Calcutta High Court has held that under the scheme of Section 68" it was necessary for the assessee to prove prima facie the identity of creditors, the capacity of such creditors and lastly the genuineness of transactions". 9.4 Similarly, in the case of CIT v. Precision Finance (P.) Ltd [1994] 208 ITR 465 (Cal)), it was observed t…

ANSHUMAN AUTO IMPEX PRIVATE LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 2(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal is dismissed

ITA 4152/DEL/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Oct 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Naveen Chandraassessment Year: 2016-17 Vs. Income Tax Officer, Anshuman Auto Impex Pvt. Ltd., Ward-2(1), 2126/59, Laxmi Bhawan, New Delhi Naiwala, Karol Bagh, New Delhi Pan: Aaaca0872H (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By None Department By Sh. Manish Gupta, Sr. Dr

Section 147Section 148

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI BENCH: ‘G’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI NAVEEN CHANDRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2016-17 Vs. Income Tax Officer, Anshuman Auto Impex Pvt. Ltd., Ward-2(1), 2126/59, Laxmi Bhawan, New Delhi Naiwala, Karol Bagh, New Delhi PAN: AAACA0872H (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by None Department by Sh. Manish Gupta, Sr. DR Date of hearing 28.10.2025 Date of pronouncement 28.10.2025 ORDER PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JM This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2016-17, arises against the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/Natio…

BIRENDRA SINGH NIRBHAY,SIRSI ROAD JAIPUR RAJASTHAN vs. ITO WARD 3(1) JAIPUR, NCRB INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT STATUE CIRCLE JAIPUR RAJASTHAN

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 704/JPR/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur09 Oct 2025AY 2015-16
For Appellant: Shri Deepak Sharma, CAFor Respondent: Shri Shri Gautam Singh Choudhary, JCIT-DR
Section 10(38)Section 132(4)Section 69C

…creditor or that transaction was by cheque, is\nnot sufficient. Addition u/s 68 was justified. Similar views have been taken in the\nfollowing cases:\nK.C.N. Chandrasekhar Vs ACIT (ITAT, Bang) 66 TTJ 355 CIT Vs United\nCommercial & Industrial Co.(P) Ld. (Cal) 187 ITR 596\n4.5 In view of detailed analysis, in foregoing Paras, of the evidences and the\njudicial pronouncements, it has been established beyond doubt and is therefore\nheld that unaccounted income of Rs.27,87,561/-routed back to the assessee,\nduring the year under consideration, camouflaged as Long Term Capital Gains of\nRs.27,87,561/-, has been proved…

INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-3(3)(2), AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. MANTHAN SHYAM GANATRA, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2032/AHD/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad03 Sept 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: SMT. ANNAPURNA GUPTA (Accountant Member), SHRI T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Yogesh Mishra, Sr.DRFor Respondent: Shri Sunil Maloo, AR
Section 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 148Section 148ASection 250Section 68

…68. Mere absence of confirmating letter does not mean that the assessee could not prove the ITA No. 2032/Ahd/2024 [ ITO vs. Manthan Shyam Ganatra] A.Y. 2018-19 - 9 – creditworthiness of the lender. In CIT vs United commercial and Industrial Company Pvt. Ltd. 187 ITR 596 (CAL.) it was decided by Hon’ble High court that confirmatory letter by themselves are not discharge of the onus cast on the appellant u/s 68. In other words the onus of proving the genuineness of the loan transaction and the creditworthiness of the lender can be proven with help of a number of documents which does not mandatorily include confirm…

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER-19(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. KDM IMPEX, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed, in terms of our\naforesaid observations

ITA 3040/MUM/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Aug 2025AY 2012-13
Section 37Section 68

…ischarged merely by filing confirmatory\nletters, or demonstrating that the transactions are done through the banking\nchannels or even by filing the income tax assessment particulars. In the case of\nCIT v. United Commercial and Industrial Co (P.) Ltd [1991] 187 ITR 596/56\nTaxman 304 (Cal) Hon'ble Calcutta High Court has held that "it was necessary\nfor the assessee to prove prima facie the identity of creditors, the capacity of\nsuch creditors and lastly the genuineness of transactions". Similarly, in the case\nof CIT v. Precision Finance (P.) Ltd [1994] 208 ITR 465/1995] 82 Taxman 31\n(Cal), it was observed t…

RAJENDRA KUMAR AGRAWAL,JAIPUR vs. ACIT CEN CIR 1 , C-SCHEME, JAIPUR

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

ITA 538/JPR/2025[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur12 Aug 2025AY 2017-2018

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Rajesh Tetuka, Adv., ARFor Respondent: Sh. Gaurav Awasthi, JCIT, Sr. DR
Section 115BSection 143(3)Section 250Section 68

…s through cheques" and in support of that he relied upon the following decisions: - 1. CIT Vs. precision Finance P. Ltd. (Cal) 208 ITR 465; 2. K.C.N. Chandrashekhar Vs. ACIT (ITAT, Bang) 66 TTJ 355; 3. CIT Vs. United Commercial & Industrial Co. (P) Ld. (Cal) 187 ITR 596; Based on that finding ld. AO addition of unsecured loans amounting to Rs. 2,01,92,401/- was added. 9 Rajendra Kumar Agrawal vs. ACIT He also noted that some of the contribution of Provident fund and ESI were deposited after due date of the payment of the PF and ESI, which are not allowable as per provisions of section 36(1) (va) of the Act.…

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 2 KOLKATA vs. MINTO PARK ESTATES PVT LTD

In the result, the appeal is allowed and the order passed by the learned

ITAT/4/2025HC Calcutta01 Aug 2025

Bench: THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE T.S SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE CHAITALI CHATTERJEE (DAS)

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 260ASection 68

…f Income Tax Versus Precision Finance Private Limited 8. Therefore, it was held that the onus is on the assessee to explain the nature and source of credit and it 6 [2013] 357 ITR (Del) 7 [1991] 187 ITR 596 (Cal) 8 [1994] 208 ITR 465 (Cal) ITAT NO. 4 OF 2025 REPORTABLE Page 9 of 22 does not get discharged merely by filing confirmative details or demonstrating that the transactions are done through banking channels or even by filing income tax assessment particulars. That the genuineness of the transaction as a whole is a very import…

INCOME TAX OFFICER-1, MORENA vs. SHRI AGRASEN LOGISTICS, JOTAI ROAD, PORSA,

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 108/AGR/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Agra24 Jun 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Singh & Shri Manish Agarwal

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

…82] 9 Taxman 252 (All.) has held that mere confirmation letter from alleged creditor could not be treated as sufficient evidence to prove genuineness of cash credit. 15.2 Hon'ble Calcutta High Court in CIT v. United Commercial & Industrial Co. (P) Ltd. [1991] 187 ITR 596 held that mere production of the confirmation letters before the AO would not by itself prove that the loans have been obtained from those loan creditors or that they have credit-worthiness. 15.3 Hon'ble Calcutta High Court in the case of Bharati (P.) Ltd. v. CIT [1978] 111 ITR 951 upheld the Appellate Tribunal's decision that mere filing of conf…

NAVANSH VINIMAY PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD - 8(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 724/KOL/2022[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata30 May 2025AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 142(1)Section 143Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 250

…f the share applicants, their creditworthiness to purchase the shares and the genuineness of the transaction as a whole". That is the approach adopted by Hon'ble Courts above all along. In the case of CIT v. United Commercial and Industrial Co (P.) Ltd [1991] 187 ITR 596 (Cal)], Hon'ble Calcutta High Court has held that under the scheme of Section 68 "it was necessary for the assessee to prove prima facie the identity of creditors, the capacity of such creditors and lastly the genuineness of transactions". Similarly, in the case of CIT v. Precision Finance (P.) Ltd [1994] 208 ITR 465 (Cal)], it was observed that…

SRINIVAS CHEMMALA,WARANGAL vs. ITO., WARD-1, WARANGAL

ITA 164/HYD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad14 May 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Us:

For Appellant: Ms.S.Sandhya, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rakesh Chintagumpula
Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 69A

…three applicants, their creditworthiness to purchase the shares and the genuineness of the transaction as a whole". 7.3 That is the approach adopted by Hon’ble Courts above all along. In the case of CIT v. United Commercial and Industrial Co (P.) Ltd [1991] 187 ITR 596 (Cal)], Hon'ble Calcutta High Court has held that under the scheme of Section 69A "it was necessary for the assessee to prove prima facie the identity of creditors, the capacity of such creditors and lastly the genuineness of transactions". 7.4 Similarly, in the case of CIT v. Precision Finance (P.) Ltd [1994] 208 ITR 465 (Cal)], it was observed…

RANJEET SINGH,PATNA vs. ITO, WARD- 5 (5), PATNA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 304/PAT/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Patna17 Mar 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 250(2)Section 69A

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण पटना पीठ, कोलकाता में IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PATNA BENCH AT KOLKATA [वर्चुअल कोटु] [Virtual Court] श्री संजय शमाु, न्याधयक सदस्य एवं श्री राकेश धमश्रा, लेखा सदस्य के समक्ष Before SHRI SONJOY SARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI RAKESH MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No.: 304/PAT/2024 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Ranjeet Singh ITO, Ward-5(5), Patna Vs. (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN: BXUPS0267H Appearances: Assessee represented by : A. K. Rastogi, Adv. Department represented by : Ashwani Kr. Singal, JCIT. Date of concluding the hearing : December 17th, 2024 Date of pronouncing the order : Marc…

VIJETA TRADING PVT. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. CIT(A), NFAC, DELHI

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

ITA 206/MUM/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Feb 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankarvs. Cit, (Appeals), Vijeta Trading Pvt. Ltd. Nfac, Office No.64,3Rd Floor Poddar Chambers, 23 Parsi Bazar Street, Fort Mumbai – 4000001. Pan/Gir No. Aabcv1137H (Applicant) (Respondent)

Section 143Section 143(3)Section 250Section 254Section 55A

…t discharged merely by filing confirmatory letters, or demonstrating that the transactions are done through the banking channels or even by filing the income tax assessment particulars. In the case of CIT v. United Commercial and Industrial Co (P.) Ltd [1991] 187 ITR 596/56 1 Taxman 304 (Cal), Hon'ble Calcutta High Court has held that "it was necessary for the assessee to prove prima facie the identity of creditors, the capacity of such creditors and lastly the genuineness of transactions". Similarly, in the case of CIT v. Precision Finance (P.) Ltd [1994] 208 ITR 465/[1995} 82 Taxman 31 (Cal), it was observed th…

RAJ KUMARI AGARWAL,JAIPUR vs. ACIT CEN CIR 2, , JAIPUR

ITA 1024/JPR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur26 Dec 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Sh. S. L. Poddar, AdvFor Respondent: Smt Hitiesha Ruhela, Addl.CIT
Section 115BSection 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 68

…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, vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 1024/JP/2024 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year : 2017-18 cuke Raj Kumari Agarwal, ACIT, Vs. A36 Govindi, Takteshahi Road Central Circle-02, JLN Marg, Jaipur Jaipur LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: ACMPA 7544 D vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Sh. S. L. Poddar, Adv. jktLo dh vksj ls@ Reve…

MILI MARKETING PVT LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ITO,WARD-16(4), NEW DELHI

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

ITA 2319/DEL/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Dec 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Yogesh Kumar Us[Assessment Year : 2016-17] M/S. Mili Marketing Pvt.Ltd., Vs Ito, H-108, Connaught Circus, Ward-16(4), New Delhi-110001. New Delhi. Pan-Aabcm7097H Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Ved Jain, Adv & Shri Aman Garg, Ca Respondent By Ms. Smita Singh, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 12.09.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 12.12.2024

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

…ITA No.2319/Del/2023 Mili Marketing Pvt.Ltd. vs ITO IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI “E” BENCH: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI YOGESH KUMAR US, JUDICIAL MEMBER [Assessment Year : 2016-17] M/s. Mili Marketing Pvt.Ltd., vs ITO, H-108, Connaught Circus, Ward-16(4), New Delhi-110001. New Delhi. PAN-AABCM7097H APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by Shri Ved Jain, Adv & Shri Aman Garg, CA Respondent by Ms. Smita Singh, Sr.DR Date of Hearing 12.09.2024 Date of Pronouncement 12.12.2024 ORDER PER PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA-A.M.: The captioned appeal has been filed at the instance of the a…

NITIN VIJAY,JAIPUR vs. ITO WARD 1(4), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

ITA 12/JPR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur10 Oct 2024AY 2017-18
For Appellant: \nSh. Rohan Sogani, CAFor Respondent: \nSh. Anup Singh, Addl. CIT
Section 115BSection 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 44ASection 68

…icer. Everything thus hinges on the\nexplanation given by the appellant and on how acceptable is the explanation so\ngiven by the appellant.\n3.4.3 As held by Hon'ble Kolkata High Court in the case of CIT v. United\nCommercial and Industrial Co (P) Ltd (1991) 187 ITR 596 (Cal)], that under the\nscheme of Section 68 \"t was necessary for the appellant to prove prima facie the\nidentity of creditors, the capacity of such creditors and lastly the genuineness of\ntransactions. Similarly, in the case of CIT v. Precision Finance (P.) Ltd [1994] 208\nITR 465 (Cal)] it was observed that it is for the appellant to prove t…

BALHANUMAN COMMODEAL PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD-5(4), KOLKATA

ITA 116/KOL/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 Oct 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rakesh Mishraassessment Year: 2012-13

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Vineet Kumar, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR
Section 131Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250Section 68

…t discharged merely by filing confirmatory letters, or demonstrating that the transactions are done through the banking channels or even by filing the income tax assessment particulars. In the case of CIT v. United Commercial and Industrial Co (P.) Ltd [1991] 187 ITR 596/56 Taxman 304 (Cal), 8 Balhanuman Commodeal Pvt. Ltd. : AY: 2012-13 Hon'ble Calcutta High Court has held that "it was necessary for the assessee to prove prima facie the identity of creditors, the capacity of such creditors and lastly the genuineness of transactions". Similarly, in the case of CIT v. Precision Finance (P.) Ltd [1994] 208 ITR 465…

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

…t discharged merely by filing confirmatory letters, or demonstrating that the transactions are done through the banking channels or even by filing the income tax assessment particulars. In the case of CIT v. United Commercial and Industrial Co (P.) Ltd [1991] 187 ITR 596/56 Taxman 304 (Cal), Hon'ble Calcutta High Court has held that "it was necessary for the assessee to prove prima facie the identity of creditors, the capacity of such creditors and lastly the genuineness of transactions". Similarly, in the case of CIT v. Precision Finance (P.) Ltd [1994] 208 ITR 465/[1995] 82 Taxman 31 (Cal), it was observed that…

Showing 1–20 of 135 · Page 1 of 7