How many judgments cite DCIT v. Rohini Builders?

489 judgments on BharatTax cite DCIT v. Rohini Builders (256 ITR 360), spanning 2011 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does DCIT v. Rohini Builders come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 68, Section 143(3), Section 133(6), Section 147, Section 132, Section 69A.

DCIT v. Rohini Builders

256 ITR 360High Court2002#142 most cited

What is DCIT v. Rohini Builders authority for?

An assessee discharges the initial onus under Section 68 for cash credits by providing creditor details like PAN and addresses, proving creditworthiness via banking transactions, and demonstrating genuineness, especially when loans are repaid through cheques.

489

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2011 to 2026.

Also referred to as

DCIT v. Rohini Builders · Rohini Builders · Section 68 · cash credit · initial onus · identity creditworthiness genuineness · repayment of loan · cheque payments · PAN · unexplained cash credit

Also reported as

182 CTR 373127 Taxmann.com 523

Sections most often in play

Section 68 Section 143(3)Section 133(6)Section 147 Section 132 Section 69A Section 148 Section 131

Issues it is cited on

creditworthiness of the creditor source of source statement under section 132(4)permanent account number addition under section 68 retracted statement paper company share application money genuineness of the transaction addition u/s 68 section 131 section 133(6)

Judgments citing DCIT v. Rohini Builders

Autumn Builders Limited., Kolkata vs. ITO, WD-1(1), Kolkata.

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 883/KOL/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata11 Dec 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar&Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 131Section 142(1)

…uld not justify the addition when all the evidences are before the AO as well as Ld. CIT(A). In defense of arguments the Ld. A.R relied on the following decisions: 1.CIT vs. Orissa Corporation Ltd. in [1986] 159 ITR 78 (SC) 2. DCIT vs. Rohini Builders [2002] 256 ITR 360(Guj) 3.Crystal Networks (P)Ltd vs CIT reported in 353 ITR 171 (C 4. ITO Vs M/s Cygnus Developers India Pvt. Ltd. (ITA No. 282/Kol/2012) 5. CIT Vs Orchid Industries (P) Ltd 397 ITR 136 (Bom) 4 I.T.A. No.883/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Autumn Builders Ltd. Finally the ld AR prayed before the bench that the order of ld CIT(A) may be set as…

DCIT, Cir-43, Kol, Kolkata vs. S.K.Agarwala & Co, Kolkata

In the result both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 486/KOL/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata05 Dec 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma

Section 131Section 131oSection 133(6)Section 133ASection 143(1)Section 250Section 68

…ITA No. 485/KOL/2023 (A.Y. 2016-2017) & S.K. Agarwala & Co. IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘B’ BENCH, KOLKATA Before Shri Rajesh Kumar,Accountant Member & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Judicial Member I.T.A. No. 485/KOL/2023 Assessment Year: 2016-2017 & I.T.A. No. 486/KOL/2023 Assessment Year: 2017-2018 Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax,.......Appellant Circle-43, Kolkata, 3, Government Place (West), Kolkata-700001 -Vs.- S.K. Agarwala & Co.,..............................Respondent P-200, Shop No. A3 & A4, Jagannath Ghat Cross Road, Posta Bazaar, Kolkata-700007 [PAN:AAKFS4139E] Appearances by: Shri P.P. Barman, Ad…

DCIT, Cir-43, Kol, Kolkata vs. S.K.Agarwala & Co, Kolkata

In the result both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 485/KOL/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata05 Dec 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma

Section 131Section 131oSection 133(6)Section 133ASection 143(1)Section 250Section 68

Divyamala Prakash, Guwahati vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Tezpur

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

ITA 70/GTY/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati29 Nov 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Ble & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Hon’Bleassessment Year: 2016-17 Divyamala Prakash Ito, Ward-1, Tezpur Flat No. 6A, Syndicate Marble, Six Vs. Mile Radhanagar, Guwahati-784036. Pan: Bpmpp 6934 E (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Appellant By : None Respondent By : Shri Arun Bhowmick, Jcit Date Of Hearing : 02.11.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 29.11.2023 O R D E R Per Sonjoy Sarma, Jm: This Appeal Of The Assessee For The Assessment Year 2016-17 Is Directed Against The Order Dated 14.01.2020 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals) -1, Guwahati [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The ‘Ld. Cit(A)’].

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Arun Bhowmick, JCIT

Section 131Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 69A

…was because the Loan Givers did not turn up before him. In such a case the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Orissa Corpn. (F) Ltd. (1986) 159 ITR 78 (SC) : 1986 TaxPub(DT) 1425 (SC) and the Gujarat High Court, in the case of Dy. CIT v. Rohini Builders (2002) 256 ITR 360 (Guj/ ; (2003) 127 Taxman 523 (Guj) : 2002 TaxPub(DT) 0305 (Guj-HC), has held that onus of the assessee (In whose books of account credit appears) stands fully discharged if the identity of the creditor is f established and actual receipt of money from such creditor is proved. In case, the assessing officer is dissatisfied about the source of cas…

D V Properties Pvt. Ltd, Surat vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, CC-1(1)(1), Surat

ITA 519/SRT/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Surat20 Nov 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr Arjun Lal Sainiआ.अ.सं./Ita No.519/Srt/2023 (Ay 2015-16) (Hearing In Physical Court) D.V. Properties Pvt, Ltd. Deputy Commissioner Of 748-749 Golden Plaza Market, Income Tax, Circle-1(1)(1) Vs Ring Road, Surat-395002 Surat, Aaykar Bhavan, Nr. Pan No. Aaacd 8392 B Majura Gate, Opp. New Civil Hospital, Surat-395001 अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""थ" /Respondent

Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 254(1)Section 69C

…surmise. The transaction of assessee is genuine and received such loan through banking transaction. To support such contention, the assessee relied on decision of Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of DCIT vs. Rohini Builders (2003) 127 Taxman 523/256 ITR 360/182 CTR 373 (Guj); CIT vs. Orissa Corporation Pvt. Ltd. (1986) 25 Taxman 80F/159 ITR 78/52 CTR 138 (SC); CIT Vs. Ayachi Chandrashekhar Narsangji (2014) 42 taxmann.com 251 (Guj). For proposed interest disallowance, the assessee submitted that loan is genuine, therefore interest expenses incurred by it also genuine. On proposed addition of commissi…

D.C.I.T., Central Circle - 1(4), Kolkata vs. M/S. Wise Investment Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 163/KOL/2023[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata09 Nov 2023AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg, Hon’Ble & Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 163/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2012-13 D.C.I.T. Central Circle – 1(4), Kolkata M/S. Wise Investment Pvt. Ltd. Vs 3Rd Floor 5, Govind Chand Dhar Lane Kolkata - 700001 [Pan: Aaacw3141R] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Manish Tiwari, Fca Revenue By : Shri Abhijit Kundu, Cit D/R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 26/09/2023 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 09/11/2023 आदेश/O R D E R Per Dr. Manish Borad: The Above Captioned Appeal Is Directed At The Instance Of The Revenue Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax, Appeals -21, Kolkata, (Hereinafter The “Ld. Cit(A)”) Dt. 26/12/2022, Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act”) For The Assessment Year 2012-13. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:- “1. Whether On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case Ld. Cit (A) Is Justified In Deleting Addition Made U/S. 68 Of Rs.32,50,00,000/- Ignoring The Remand Report Dated 20.07.2022 Wherein The Report Categorically Stated That The Share Applicant Company Has No Creditworthiness To Invest In The Assesses Company. 2. Whether On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case Ld. Cit (A) Was Erroneous As It Had Not Taken Cognizance Of The Fact That The 2

For Appellant: Shri Manish Tiwari, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Abhijit Kundu, CIT D/R

Section 131Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 250Section 68

…Gagandeep Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. [2017] 80 taxmann.com 272 (Bombay); the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Lovely Exports P. Ltd., 216 CTR 195(SC), judgment of the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of DCIT vs Rohini Builders 256 ITR 360 (Gujarat) and other case-laws. 4.1. The ld. CIT(A) based on the facts stated by the assessee with sufficient documentary evidence in support of the claim of the nature and source being explained for the alleged transactions and also taking support from the various judicial decisions again sent all these documents filed by the assessee to ld. Asse…

Chetan Bipinbhai Bha vs. Ar, Suratvs.Income Tax Officer Ward-2, Bardoli

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 620/SRT/2023[2017-18]Status: HeardITAT Surat27 Oct 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Dr. A. L. Sainiआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.620/Srt/2023 Assessment Year: (2017-18) (Physical Hearing) Chetan Bipinbhai Bhavsar Income Tax Officer, 304, Monalisha Complex, Vs. Ward-2, Bardoli, Income Tax Shastri Road, Bardoli– Office Aaykar Bhavan, Station 394601 Road, Bardoli-394601 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Anjpb 0949 B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent)

Section 131Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 68

…n be placed on following decisions:  Associated Transrail Structure Ltd. vs. ACIT (2017) 397 ITR 573 (Guj) ITA.620/SRT/2023/AY.2017-18 Chetan B Bhavsar  CIT vs. Ranchhodbhai Jivabhai Nakhava (2012) 208 taxmann.com. 35(Guj)  DCIT vs. Rohibi Builders (2002) 256 ITR 360 (Guj)  CIT vs. Orisa Corporation (P.) Ltd. 159 ITR 78 (SC)  CIT vs. Sayachi Chandrasekhar 992 of 2013(Guj)  PCIT vs. M/s Skylark Build 616 of 2016 (Bom)  Rajhans Construction (P) Ltd. vs. ACIT (ITANo.1450/AHD/2016) 11. I note that assessee has explained the source of cash deposits, in respect of remaining lenders, which was collection of cas…

DCIT, Circle-1(1)(2), Surat vs. J B Syntex Pvt. Ltd, Surat

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 140/SRT/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Surat18 Oct 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.140/Srt/2020 Assessment Year: (2011-12) (Physical Hearing) The Dcit, Vs. J. B. Syntex Pvt. Ltd., Circle – 1(1)(2), B-25, Guj. Eco. Textile Park, Surat N. H. No.8, Palsana, Surat – 394315. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aabcj9389D (Appellant) (Respondent) Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr. Dr Appellant By Shri Rasesh Shah, Ca Respondent By Date Of Hearing 17/08/2023 Date Of Pronouncement 18/10/2023

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

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, SURAT BENCH, SURAT BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JM & DR. A. L. SAINI, AM आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.140/SRT/2020 Assessment Year: (2011-12) (Physical Hearing) The DCIT, Vs. J. B. Syntex Pvt. Ltd., Circle – 1(1)(2), B-25, Guj. Eco. Textile Park, Surat N. H. No.8, Palsana, Surat – 394315. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: AABCJ9389D (Appellant) (Respondent) Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr. DR Appellant by Shri Rasesh Shah, CA Respondent by Date of Hearing 17/08/2023 Date of Pronouncement 18/10/2023 आदेश / O R D E R PER DR. A. L. SAINI, AM: Captioned appeal filed by the Revenue, pertaining to…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-4, Surat vs. Hasmukhbhai Ravjibhai Ahir, Surat

In the result, the ground Nos

ITA 298/SRT/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Surat16 Oct 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.298/Srt/2023 Assessment Year: (2017-18) (Virtual Hearing) The Acit, Vs. Hasmukhbhai Ravjibhai Ahir, Central Circle-3, U/3, Amrutdhara Apartment, Ghod Dod Surat. Road, Opp. St. Xeviers School, Surat – 395007 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Abkpa5575D (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr. Dr Shri Ankur Shah, Ca Respondent By 08/08/2023 Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement 16/10/2023

Section 131Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 68

…erprises [2016] 72 taxmann.com 91 (Gujarat) (c) CIT v. Dharamdev Finance (P.) Ltd. [2014] 43 taxmaan.com 395 (Gujarat) (d) CIT v. Orchid Industries (P.) Ltd. [2020] 116 taxmann.com 113 (SC) (e) Gujarat High Court in the case of DCIT vs. Rohini Builders (2002) 256 ITR 360 (Guj). ITA No.298/SRT/2023/AY.2017-18 Hasmukhbhai Ravjibhai Ahir 11. The ld CIT(A) noted that assessee had produced the confirmation before the AO which was signed by the son of the assessee and the bank statement evidencing the debit in the account of the giver of the loan Mr. Ishwarbhai D Patel. The Ishwarbhai D Patel (PAN AWFPP2743L) had ex…

ITO, Ward, Phalodi vs. M/S Rama Allure LLP, Jodhpur

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 135/JODH/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur09 Oct 2023AY 2020-21

Bench: The Date, The Appeal Is Finally Heard.”

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…It is also well settled Law assessee need not to prove the source of the source. We rely upon the Judgment of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of (1) Dwarakadhish Investment (P) Ltd. (supra) (2) Dy. CIT v. Rohini Builders [2003] 127 Taxman 523/[2002] 256 ITR 360 (Guj) and Zafa Ahmed & Co. v. CIT [2013] 30 taxmann.com 267/214 Taxman 440 (All). 8.6 It is seen that Shri Arpit Khandelwal and Shri Suresh Chander Koolwal had made transactions through bank accounts. It is also seen that another partner of the firm Smt. Manorama Koolwal has also taken loan from Shri Arpit Khandelwal and advanced the unsecured lo…

Manohar Singh, Jodhpur vs. ITO, Ward-1(3), Jodhpur

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

ITA 159/JODH/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur04 Oct 2023AY 2013-14

Section 143(2)Section 144Section 234ASection 234BSection 271(1)(b)

…ated as the income from the undisclosed sources of the assessee himself, when there was neither direct nor circumstantial evidence on record that the said loan amounts actually belonged to, or were owned by, the assessee.  Dy. CIT vs. Rohini Builders (2002) 256 ITR 360 (Guj) The Tribunal found that the assessee had discharged the initial onus which lay on it in terms of s. 68 by proving the identity of the creditors by giving their complete addresses, GIR numbers / permanent account numbers and the copies of assessment orders wherever readily available, that it had also proved the capacity of the creditors by…

Khazana Bazar Pvt. Ltd., Surat vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1(1)(3), Surat

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 335/SRT/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Surat27 Sept 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.335/Srt/2022 Assessment Year: (2015-16) (Physical Court Hearing) Khazana Bazar Pvt. Ltd., Income Tax Officer, Ward- C-104, Radha Raman Textile 1(1)(3), Surat, Room No.113, Market, Saroli,Surat-395010 Vs. Aayakar Bhawan, Majura Gate, Surat-395001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aafck 0726 P (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent)

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

…de the addition was because the directors/investors did not turn up before him. 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 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 the identity of the creditor is established and actual receipt of money from such creditor is proved. In case, the Assessing Officer is dissatisfied about the source of cash deposited in the bank accounts of the credito…

M/S. White Willow, Surat vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(3)(5), Surat

In the result, the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee is allowed

ITA 370/SRT/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Surat14 Aug 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr Arjun Lal Sainiआ.अ.सं./Ita No.370/Srt/2022 (Ay 2014-15) (Hearing In Virtual Court) M/S White Willow Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(3)(5), Surat, Vishram Apartment, Opp. Vs Anavil Business Centre, Sawlani Estate Bungalows, Pal Hazira Road, Adajan, Beside Trinidhi Apartment, Surat-395007 Ghod Dod Road, Regent Mall, Surat-395007 Pan No. Aabfw 4804 F ""थ" /Respondent अपीलाथ"/Appellant

Section 143(3)Section 254(1)

…vabhai Nakhava Appeal No.50 of 2011, on the ratio of that once the assessee has discharged initial onus by furnishing copy of PAN, confirmation of lenders, it was the duty of Assessing Officer to investigate or verify about the lenders, Rohini Builders [2002] 256 ITR 360 [2003] 127 Taxman 523 (Guj). 5. The ld. CIT(A) after considering the submission of assessee upheld the addition of unsecured loan as well as disallowance of interest expense by holding that to prove the genuineness of unsecured loan it is the duty of assessee as mandated under section 68 to prove the identity, creditworthiness and 6 M/s White Wi…

Sampat Lal Lodha, Nathdwara vs. ITO, Ward-2, Rajsamand

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 2/JODH/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur02 Aug 2023AY 2011-12

Section 143(1)Section 147Section 68

…d which may help in rebutting the onus of assessee. The Assessing Officer has not brought any material on record in its support CIT(A) while deleting the addition has also relied on the decision of the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Rohini Builders 256 ITR 360 and the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court, in the case of Orissa Corporation Ltd. 153 ITR 78. Before us, nothing has been brought on record by the revenue to controvert the findings of CIT(A). Revenue has relied on the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of N.R. Portfolio (Supra). We however find that the ratio of the aforesaid Delhi…

Sampat Lal Lodha, Nathdwara vs. ITO, Ward-2, Rajsamand

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1/JODH/2022[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur02 Aug 2023AY 2010-11

Section 143(1)Section 147Section 68

ACIT (Central), Ujjain vs. M/S Globus Housing Pvt. Ltd., Bhopal

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 615/IND/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Indore25 Jul 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniacit (Central) M/S. Globus Housing Pvt. Ltd. 176, Zone-Ii, First Floor, M.P. Ujjain Vs. Nagar, Bhopal (Appellant / Revenue) (Respondent/ Assessee) Pan: Aaecg 0623 J Revenue By Shri P.K. Mishra, Cit-Dr Respondent By Shri Hitesh Chimnani & Yash Kukreja, Ars Date Of Hearing 20.07.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 25.07.2023

Section 68

…CIT [1966] 59 ITR 632 (Assam), CIT v. Daulat Ram Rawatmull[1972] CTR 411: [1973] 87 ITR 349 (SC), Sarogi Credit Corporation v. CIT 1975 CTR (Pat)1: (1976) 103 ITR 344 (Pat)." ii) The Hon'ble Gujarat High Court, in the case of Dy. CIT v. Rohini Builders [2002] 256 ITR 360/12003] 127 Taxman 523, has held 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, the Assessing Officer is dissatisfied about the source of in the hands of the creditors', the proper course w…

Ace Build Tech, Gurgaon vs. Addi. CIT Range-1, Gurgaon

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

ITA 9322/DEL/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Jul 2023AY 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri Kanav Bali Sr. DRFor Respondent: Shri Gautam Jain, Adv

Section 68

….8 to 2.10 of written synopsis and submitted that in view of principle laid down by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Orrisa Corporation 159 ITR 78 (SC) which was referred by Hon’ble High Court of Gujarat in the case of DCIT vs. Rohini Builders reported as 256 ITR 360 (Guj.) wherein it was observed that when the assessee furnishes names and address of alleged creditors along with GIR/PAN numbers, the burden shift to the Department to establish the revenue case and in order to sustain addition the revenue has to pursue the enquiry to establish the lack of creditworthiness and failing which the additions cannot…

Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle- 1(1), Bhilai vs. Shri Nitin Sankhla, Durg

In the result, grounds no 2 to 7 on this single issue of the appeal of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 98/RPR/2020[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur08 Jun 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.98/Rpr/2020 (Assessment Year: 2017-18) Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax- Vs Shri Nitin Sankhla 1(1), Bhilai 1St Floor, Navkar Bullion, Above Navin Jeweller, Jawahar Chowk, Durg Pan No. :Bbups 4874 C (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. : Shri Ravi Agarwal, Ca "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Ila M. Parmar, Cit- Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 02/06/2023 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 08/06/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Arun Khodpia, Am :

For Respondent: Shri Ila M. Parmar, CIT- DR

Section 129Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 68

…the facts on the records, thus, the allegation of AO were absolutely baseless. In this respect, the ld. AR of the assessee relied upon the judgment the case of CIT VS. ORISSA CORPORATION PVT LTD. 159 ITR 78 (SC), in the case of ROHINI BUILDERS' CASE, GUJ HC [ 256 ITR 360 wherein it has been held that no additions u/s 68 can be made if the primary owns is discharged by the assessee by providing confirmations, ITRs and bank statement of the loan creditors. Ld AR also relied upon the case of Pawan Kumar Agarwal vs. ITO, Ward 2(2), Bilaspur (Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court of Chhattisgarh, Bilaspur in Tax case No.…

ITO, Ward-14(1)(1), Mumbai vs. M/S. Bansal Separators and Spares Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3173/MUM/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 May 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Bleito – Ward – 14(1)(1) V. M/S. Bansal Separators & Spares Pvt. Ltd., Room No. 431, 4Th Floor 6, Laxminarayan Shopping Centre Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Sion Trombay Road, Chembur Mumbai - 400020 Mumbai - 400071 Pan: Aabcb8468M (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 68

…y the company, there has to be some cogent reasons and materials for the Ld. AO and he cannot go on the realm of suspicion. Page No. | 10 M/s. Bansal Separators and Spares Pvt. Ltd., Lastly, the Hon. Gujarat High Court in case of DCIT v.Rohini Builders (2002) 256 ITR 360 (Guj) held that mere identification of the source of the creditors even without evidence as to the nature of the income could justify acceptance, where the assessee has given PAN and also shows that the amounts were received by account payee cheque. Hon. High Court, in this case, endorsed the finding of the Tribunal that it is not necessary that…

Mumtaz Dilawar Gani, Bharuch vs. The ITO, Ward-1, Bharuch

Appeal is allowed

ITA 1443/AHD/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Surat23 May 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं/.Ita Nos.1442 & 1443/Ahd/2017 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: (2011-12 & 2012-13) (Physical Court Hearing) Mumtaz Dilawar Gani Income Tax Officer, 6, White House, Near Railway Ward-1, Bharuch Vs. Crossing, Dahej Byepass Road, Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(2), Bharuch-392001 Bharuch "थायीलेखासं /.जीआइआरसं /.Pan/Gir No.: Adcpg 1175 D (अपीलाथ" /Assessee ) (""थ" /Respondent) "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Krutarth Desai, Advocate & Ms. Disha Kharod, C.A राज"व क" ओर से /Respondent By : Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr-.Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख / Date Of Hearing : 31/03/2023 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 23/05/2023

For Appellant: Shri Krutarth Desai, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr-.DR

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 145(3)

…mporary loan, did not turn up before him, as discussed in the assessment order. 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 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 the identity of the creditor is established and actual receipt of money from such creditor is proved. In case, the Assessing Officer is dissatisfied about the source of cash deposited in the bank accounts of the credit…