How many judgments cite Crystal Networks Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT?

130 judgments on BharatTax cite Crystal Networks Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT (353 ITR 171), spanning 2017 to 2026.

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

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 68, Section 131, Section 133(6), Section 143(3), Section 142(1), Section 143(2).

Crystal Networks Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT

353 ITR 171High Court2013#789 most cited

What is Crystal Networks Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT authority for?

When an assessee furnishes sufficient evidence proving the identity, genuineness, and creditworthiness of loan or share application transactions under Section 68, the Assessing Officer cannot make an addition solely because summons issued to the creditors or subscribers were unserved or went uncomplied with. The inability of the tax authorities to secure the attendance or response of third parties does not automatically negate the evidence provided by the assessee.

130

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Crystal Networks Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT · 353 ITR 171 · Section 68 · Section 131 · Section 133(6) · cash credit addition · share application money · identity creditworthiness genuineness · third party non-compliance · summons unserved · assessee's burden of proof

Sections most often in play

Section 68 Section 131 Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 147 Section 148

Issues it is cited on

section 106 creditworthiness of the creditor share capital and share premium bogus share capital source of source principal officer share application money mere change of opinion section 131 genuineness of the transaction section 133(6)addition u/s 68

Judgments citing Crystal Networks Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT

Sri Vinamra Daga, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Circle - 6(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2320/KOL/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 Nov 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: "ी जे. सुधाकर रे"डी, लेखा सद"य एवं/And "ी ऐ. ट". वक", "यायीक सद"य) [Before Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

Section 133(6)Section 37(1)

…nd genuineness of the loan creditor. For taking such a view we rely on the order of the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in S. K. Bothra & Sons HUF Vs. ITO 347 ITR 347 (Cal). Further, we note that the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in Crystal Network (P) Ltd. Vs. CIT 353 ITR 171 (Cal) has observed that the creditors cannot be disbelieved merely because they did not respond to summons when all other documents to substantiate the loan transaction has been filed before the assessing authority. The Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in CIT Vs. Dataware (P) Ltd. ITA No. 263 of 2011 dated 21.09.2011 has held that in case if the AO ha…

DCIT, Cir.-11(1), Kolkata vs. M/S Jagannath Banwarilal Texofabs Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

ITA 1762/KOL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Oct 2018AY 2012-13

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

Section 131Section 68

…and those materials disclosed by the assessee prompted the Assessing Officer to enquire through the Inspector to verify the statements.” 17. Further, the Hon'ble High Court at Calcutta in the case of Crystal Networks (P.) Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income-tax (353 ITR 171), on the issue of unexplained cash credits, held that when the basic evidences are on record the mere failure of the creditor to appear cannot be basis to make addition. The court held as follows: 10 I.T.A No 1762/Kol/2016 M/s. Jagannath Banwarilal Texofabs Pvt.Ltd. 8. Assailing the said judgment of the learned Tribunal learned counsel for the a…

Karsandas Lalkhman Jhaveri, Mumbai vs. ACIT 18(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed with no order as to cost

ITA 342/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Oct 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain & Hon’Ble Shri N.K. Pradhanm/S. Karsandas Lakhman Acit, Circle 18(2) Jhaveri Room No. 302, 3Rd Floor 219, Shaikh Memon Street Vs. Earnest House, Zaveri Bazar Narimanpoint Mumbai 400002 Mumbai 400021 Pan – Aaafk3837B Appellant Respondent Appellant By: Shri Jitendra Sanghavi & Shri Khatiwala Respondent By: Shri Sachchidanand Dube Date Of Hearing: 12.10.2018 Date Of Pronouncement: 12.10.2018 O R D E R Per Sandeep Gosain, Jm This Appeal Filed By Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A)-29, Mumbai Dated 21.11.2016 & It Relates To A.Y. 2012-13. 1. The Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Is A Partnership Firm Carrying On The Business Of Dealers & Exporters In Precious Metals, Diamonds, Stones, Gold & Silver Jewellery. Return Of Income For The Year Under Consideration Was Filed On 27.09.2012 Declaring Total Income At `1,48,23,960/-. The Case Was Selected For Scrutiny Under Cass For Reason “Large Amount Of Sundry Creditors”. During The Course Of Assessment Proceedings The Ao Found That Advances Received From One Shri Quasim Mohd Yousuf A Bastak & Smt. Samira Abbas Was Shown In The Books. Assessee Had Shown An Advance Of `1.50 Crores From Shri Quasim Mohd Yousuf A Bastak & `75 Lakhs From Smt. Samira Abbas. It Was Explained

For Appellant: Shri Jitendra Sanghavi &For Respondent: Shri Sachchidanand Dube

Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL "H" Bench, Mumbai Before Hon’ble Shri Sandeep Gosain, Judicial Member and Hon’ble Shri N.K. Pradhan, Accountant Member M/s. Karsandas Lakhman ACIT, Circle 18(2) Jhaveri Room No. 302, 3rd Floor 219, Shaikh Memon Street Vs. Earnest House, Zaveri Bazar Narimanpoint Mumbai 400002 Mumbai 400021 PAN – AAAFK3837B Appellant Respondent Appellant by: Shri Jitendra Sanghavi & Shri Khatiwala Respondent by: Shri Sachchidanand Dube Date of Hearing: 12.10.2018 Date of Pronouncement: 12.10.2018 O R D E R Per Sandeep Gosain, JM This appeal filed by assessee is directed against the order of the…

ITO, WD-1(1), Kolkata vs. M/S Artlink Vintrade Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

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

ITA 1121/KOL/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata14 Sept 2018AY 2006-07

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

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

…ty, creditworthiness and genuineness of the loan creditor. For taking such a view we rely on the order of the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in S. K. Bothra & Sons HUF Vs. ITO 347 ITR 347 (Cal). The Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in Crystal Network (P) Ltd. Vs. CIT 353 ITR 171 (Cal) has observed that the creditors cannot be disbelieved merely because they did not respond to summons when all other documents to substantiate the loan transaction has been filed before the assessing authority. The Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in CIT Vs. Dataware (P) Ltd. ITA No. 263 of 2011 dated 21.09.2011 has held that in case if the AO ha…

ITO, Ward-12(3), Kolkata vs. M/S Splendour Villa Makers Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1768/KOL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata05 Sept 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S.S. Godara, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A No. 1768/Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2012-13 Ito, Ward-12(3), Kolkata -Vs- M/S Splendour Villa Makers Pvt. Ltd. [Pan: Aahcs 9726 M] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri P.K. Mondal, Addl. CIT Sr. DRFor Respondent: Shri M.D. Shah, AR

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

…nd those materials disclosed by the assessee prompted the Assessing Officer to enquire through the Inspector to verify the statements.” 5.8. We find that the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in yet another case of Crystal Networks (P) Ltd vs CIT reported in 353 ITR 171 (Cal) had held that when the basic evidences are on record, the mere failure of the creditor to appear before the Assessing Officer cannot be the basis to make addition. The relevant observations of the Hon’ble Court are as under:- 8. Assailing the said judgment of the learned Tribunal learned counsel for the appellant submits that Income-tax Off…

Moti Adhesives P.Ltd, Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-17(2), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3133/DEL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Jun 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhuassessment Year: 2009-10

For Appellant: Sh. Kapil Goel, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Ashima Neb, Sr. DR

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 292CSection 68

…ned by Ld. CIT(A). However, the Tribunal reversed the decision of the Ld. CIT(A) and upheld the AO’s decision, which action of Tribunal was challenged by the Hon'ble High Court, Calcutta in the case of Crystal Networks (P.) Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income-tax 353 ITR 171 wherein the Tribunal’s decision was overturned and decision of Ld. CIT(A) upheld and the Hon’ble High Court has held that when the basic evidences are on record the mere failure of the creditor to appear cannot be basis to make addition. The court held as follows: “8. Assailing the said judgment of the learned Tribunal learned counsel for the app…

ITO, WD-6(4), Kolkata vs. M/S Wiz Tech Solutions Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

ITA 1162/KOL/2015[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata14 Jun 2018AY 2012-2013

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

Section 131Section 68

…rned by Ld. CIT(A). However, the Tribunal reversed the decision of the Ld. CIT(A) and upheld the AO’s decision, which action of Tribunal was challenged by the Hon'ble High Court, Calcutta in the case of Crystal Networks (P.) Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income-tax 353 ITR 171 wherein the Tribunal’s decision was overturned and decision of Ld. CIT(A) upheld and the Hon’ble High Court has held that when the basic evidences are on record the mere failure of the creditor to appear cannot be basis to make addition. The court held as follows: 8. Assailing the said judgment of the learned Tribunal learned counsel for the app…

ACIT, Meerut vs. M/S. Anand Tissues Ltd., Meerut

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 3897/DEL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Jul 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri I. C. Sudhir & Shri L. P. Sahui. T. Appeal No. 3897/Del/2013 Assessment Year : 2009-10. Asstt. Commissioner M/S. Anand Tissues Ltd., Of Income Tax, Vs. 16 Km., Meerut Mawana Road, Circle : 1, Meerut. Vill. Fitkari, Meerut. M E E R U T. Pan : Aabca 1790 R (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Sanjiv Sapra, F.C.A.; &For Respondent: Shri S. K. Jain, Sr. D. R

Section 133(6)Section 41

…Year : 2009-10. (i) Nathu Ram Chand Vs. CIT 49 ITR 561 (All.); (ii) CIT Vs. Makhni & Tyagi (P.) Ltd. 267 ITR 433 (Del.); (iii) EMC Works Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ITO 49 ITR 650 (All.); (iv) JCIT Vs. Mathura Das Ashok Kumar 101 TTJ (All.) 810; (v) Crystal Network Vs. CIT 353 ITR 171 (Cal.). 3.3 Having gone through the orders of the authorities below, we find that the Assessing Officer had noted total sundry creditors were of Rs.9.14 crores. Enquiry letters were addressed to 50 parties, who had credit balances outstanding at the end of the financial year. In respect of 6 such parties the Assessing Officer stated that either…

Col Amarjit D Nagi, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Cir 20

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are dismissed whereas appeals of the assessee are allowed in part in terms indicated hereinabove

ITA 1050/MUM/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Mar 2017AY 2005-06

For Appellant: Shri. Rajiv KhandelwalFor Respondent: Shri. Vikram Batra

Section 143(3)Section 254Section 271(1)(c)

…not appear before the AO, the Nutech Corporate Services Ltd., vs ITO 8(2)(1) transactions could not be held to be non-genuine. Reliance can be placed on the following judicial pronouncements. D & H Enterprises 72 taxmann.com 91 (Guj) Crystal Networks (P) Ltd 353 ITR 171 (Cal) Creative World Telefilms Ltd 333 ITR 100 (Bom) 27. In respect of transactions with these parties regarding sale of lease back of assets, we found that complete details in respect of each lease transaction which includes photo copy of lease agreement, invoices of the assets purchased which have been leased, details of payment, installation c…

The DCIT 8(2), Mumbai vs. M/S. Nutech Coporate Services Ltd (Formerly Known As Iit Capital Services Ltd), Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are dismissed whereas appeals of the assessee are allowed in part in terms indicated hereinabove

ITA 2204/MUM/2008[1993-1994]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Mar 2017AY 1993-1994

For Appellant: Shri. Rajiv KhandelwalFor Respondent: Shri. Vikram Batra

Section 143(3)Section 254Section 271(1)(c)