Commissioner of Income-tax v. Paranjothi Salt Co.

211 ITR 141High Court1995#23738 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2007 to 2025.

Judgments citing Commissioner of Income-tax v. Paranjothi Salt Co.

DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 1, AURANGBAD, AURANGBAD vs. SANJAY SUGANCHAND KASLIWAL, AURANGABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed\nand the Cross Objection filed by the assessee is partly allowed as\nper terms indicated above

ITA 1339/PUN/2024[2015]Status: DisposedITAT Pune24 Mar 2025

Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 148Section 271DSection 69D

…pacity and that the\nalleged document terms as Hundi is basically not a Hundi within\nthe meaning of section 69D but merely a collateral security. In\nthis regard, assessee placed reliance on the following\njudgements:\n1. CIT v. Paranjothi Salt Co. - [(1995) 211 ITR 141 (Madras)]\n2. CIT v. Grahalakshmi & Co. [1999] 240 ITR 952 (Madras)]\nApproving [1982] 2 ITD 420 (Madras)]\n3. CIT v. Dexan Pharmaceuticals (P.) Ltd. -[(1995) 214 ITR 576 (AP)]\n4. CIT v. Intraven Pharmaceuticals (P.) Ltd.- [(1995) 219 ITR 225\n(AP)]\n5. CIT v. Prithivi Fire Works Industries [(1999) 239 ITR 230\n(Madras)]\n6. CIT v. Madura Devako…

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. RAM NIWAS

The appeal is dismissed

ITA - 756 / 2007HC Delhi11 Jan 2008

Bench: The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) ['Cit(A)'], Who Conducted A Rather Detailed Examination Relating To The Law Explaining What Is A Hundi. The Cit(A) Relied Upon A Decision Of The Andhra Pradesh High Court In Commissioner Of Income Tax V. Dexan Pharmaceuticals (P) Ltd., (1995) 214 Itr 576 (Ap). The Andhra Pradesh High Court In Turn Relied Upon A Decision Of The Calcutta High Court In Harsuk Das V. Dhirendranath, Air 1941 Cal 498. Reference Was Also Made To A

Section 69D

…om the drawer and present the same to the drawee for claiming payment. - 6. A hundi is normally in the oriental language as per the mercantile custom." - 5. Reference in this regard may also be made to Commissioner of Income Tax v. Paranjothi Salt Co., (1995) 211 ITR 141 (Madras). - 6. Needless to say, apart from the above requirements, the 0 3 ![](_page_3_Picture_1.jpeg) document should be executed on *hundi* paper and not on any other paper. - 7. On the basis of the case law, the CIT(A) came to the conclusion that the document was not executed on a *hundi* paper but on the letter-head of the Assessee and t…

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX DEL vs. M/S CAPITAL FLOUR MILLS P.LTD.

The appeal is dismissed

ITA/112/2006HC Delhi25 Jul 2007

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MADAN B. LOKUR,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.B. GUPTA

Section 148Section 2(2)Section 260ASection 69D

…en in English and not in any oriental ITA No.112/2006 Page 5 of 8 language. It is difficult, under these circumstances, to even hold the document to be a hundi. 10. A similar issue had arisen in Commissioner of Income-tax v. Paranjothi Salt Co., [1995] 211 ITR 141. In that decision, the Madras High Court mentioned some other characteristics of a hundi, namely that it should be an unconditional order signed by the maker directing a certain person to pay a certain sum of money only to or to the order of a certain person or to the bearer of the instrument. Such a document should be executed on a hundi…