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.

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 360)

Prakash Godhwani, Raipur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(2), Raipur

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 136/RPR/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur21 Sept 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अऩीऱ सं./Ita No.136/Rpr/2019 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2015-2016) Prakash Godhwani, Vs Ito-1(2), Raipur Prop. M/S Prakash Agency, Near Girls High School, Neora(Cg) Pan No. : Aglpg 2669 J (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) ..

For Appellant: Shri R.B.Doshi, CAFor Respondent: Shri G.N.Singh, Sr. DR

Section 68

…self (page no. 223 & 234 of Reports). 5. AO examined affairs of lenders and made addition : Adversity drawn on the basis of affairs of creditors. No fact or evidence claimed by the assessee is disproved. Reliance on: Reliance on DCIT vs Rohini Builders (2002) 256 ITR 360 (Guj.), SLP dismissed vide (2002) 254 ITR (St.) 275, page no. 369 of Reports, para no. 7. 6. Addition made on the sole ground that cash deposited in the bank account of lender i) Event of cash deposit by itself could not result into addition. It could have at the most, triggered an enquiry. ii) Assessee not burdened to explain how cash was deposi…

Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1(1)(4), Surat vs. M/S. Mansi Industries Pvt. Ltd., Surat

In the result, ground No.2 raised by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 111/SRT/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Surat19 Sept 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.111/Srt/2017 Assessment Year: (2012-13) (Physical Court Hearing) The Ito, Ward-1(1)(4), Vs. M/S. Mansi Industries Pvt. Ltd., Surat. Block No.80, Village. Navi Pardi, Tal: Kamrej, Dist. Surat. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aafcm6514M (Revenue)/(Assessee) (Assessee)/(Respondent) Assessee By Shri Rasesh Shah, Ca Respondent By Shri H. P. Meena, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 14/07/2022 29/09/2022 Date Of Pronouncement

Section 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, SURAT BENCH, SURAT BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JM & DR. A. L. SAINI, AM आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.111/SRT/2017 Assessment Year: (2012-13) (Physical Court Hearing) The ITO, Ward-1(1)(4), Vs. M/s. Mansi Industries Pvt. Ltd., Surat. Block No.80, Village. Navi Pardi, Tal: Kamrej, Dist. Surat. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: AAFCM6514M (Revenue)/(Assessee) (Assessee)/(Respondent) Assessee by Shri Rasesh Shah, CA Respondent by Shri H. P. Meena, CIT(DR) Date of Hearing 14/07/2022 29/09/2022 Date of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R PER DR. A. L. SAINI, AM: Captioned appeal filed by the Re…

The Asstt. Commr. of Income Tax, Morbi Circle, Morbi vs. M/S Vikas Sanitarywares, Morbi

In the result appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 396/RJT/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot09 Sept 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyalआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 396/Rjt/2016 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Years: 2013-2014

For Appellant: Shri Deepak Rindani, A.RFor Respondent: Shri B.D. Gupta, Sr. D.R

Section 68

…er view would be possible, there was no reason to interfere with the impugned order passed by the Tribunal. [Para 6] 11.9 We also find support and guidance from the judgment of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of the CIT Vs. Rohini builders reported in 256 ITR 360 wherein it was held as under: “The genuineness of the transaction is proved by the fact that the payment to the assessee as well as repayment of the loan by the assessee to the depositors is made by account payee cheques and the interest is also paid by the assessee to the creditors by account payee cheques.” 11.10 In view of the above and after…

DCIT Circle-3(3), Ahmedabad vs. Shri Alpeshkumar C.Patel, Ahmedabad

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

ITA 1991/AHD/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad09 Sept 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumarआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 1908/Ahd/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2011-2012 Alpeshkumar C. Patel, A.C.I.T., 503, Milestone Building, Vs. Circle-3(3), Drive In Road, Ahmedabad. Thaltej, Ahmedabad-380052. Pan: Aeapp9489G

For Appellant: Shri Deepak R. Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Pratap Singh CIT. D.R with Shri V.K. Singh, Sr.D.R

Section 41(1)Section 54F

…e taken in case of creditor and not in case of appellant. Explanation about 'source of source' or 'origins of origin' cannot be asked from the appellant while making inquiry under section 68 as per ratio laid down in the case of DCIT v. Rohini Builders (2002) 256 ITR 360 (Guj): "Mere identification of the source of the creditors even without evidence as to the nature of the income could justify acceptance, where the assesseee has given the GIR number / PAN of the creditor and also shows that the amounts were received by account payee cheques. It was further held that it is not necessary, that there should be an e…

Manibhadra Securities Services Pvt. Ltd, Ahmedabad vs. ITO, Ward-2(1)(4), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2507/AHD/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad24 Aug 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Smt.Suchitra Kamble & Shri Waseem Ahmed

For Appellant: Shri P.F. Jain, ARFor Respondent: Shri Alok Kumar, CIT-DR, and Shri V.K. Singh, Sr.DR

Section 133Section 133(6)Section 68

…e possible, there was no reason to interfere with the impugned order passed by the Tribunal. [Para 6] 14. In this respect we also find support and guidance from the judgment of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of the CIT Vs. Rohini builders reported in 256 ITR 360 wherein it was held as under: “The genuineness of the transaction is proved by the fact that the payment to the assessee as well as repayment of the loan by the assessee to the depositors is made by account payee cheques and the interest is also paid by the assessee to the creditors by account payee cheques.” 15. In view of the above and after…

Manibhadra Securities Services Pvt. Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. ITO, Ward-2(1)(4), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1302/AHD/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad24 Aug 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Smt.Suchitra Kamble & Shri Waseem Ahmed

For Appellant: Shri P.F. Jain, ARFor Respondent: Shri Alok Kumar, CIT-DR, and Shri V.K. Singh, Sr.DR

Section 133Section 133(6)Section 68

…e possible, there was no reason to interfere with the impugned order passed by the Tribunal. [Para 6] 14. In this respect we also find support and guidance from the judgment of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of the CIT Vs. Rohini builders reported in 256 ITR 360 wherein it was held as under: “The genuineness of the transaction is proved by the fact that the payment to the assessee as well as repayment of the loan by the assessee to the depositors is made by account payee cheques and the interest is also paid by the assessee to the creditors by account payee cheques.” 15. In view of the above and after…

The Jt. CIT, Sabarkantha Range, Himatnagar vs. Shree Ganesh Construction, Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 394/AHD/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad24 Aug 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Pramod M. Jagtap & Ms. Madhumita Royassessment Year : 2010-11 The Jt.Cit Shree Ganesh Construction S.K. Range Vs 511-B, Sarvodaya Commercial Centre Himatnagar Nr.Gpo Mirzapur Ahmedabad-380 001 Pan: Abffs 3302 P अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri S.N. Soparkar, Sr.Advocate & Shri Parin Shah, Ar Revenue By : Shri Shramdeep Sinha, Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 20/07/2022 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 24/08/2022 आदेश/O R D E R Per Pramod M. Jagtapthis Appeal Is Preferred By The Revenue Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)-10, Ahmedabad [Cit(A)] Dated 10Th December-2015. 2. In Ground No.1, The Revenue Has Challenged The Action Of The Ld.Cit(A) In Deleting The Addition Of Rs.2,88,85,846/- Made By The Assessing Officer U/S.68 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”) On Account Of Unsecured Loans By Treating The Same As Unexplained Cash Credit. Jt.Cit Vs. Shree Ganesh Construction Asst.Year 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Soparkar, Sr.Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Shramdeep Sinha, Sr.DR

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

…or as to the source from which the creditor has deposited amount, it is open to the AO to make the addition in the hands of respective creditors after making appropriate inquiry. In the judgment of the Gujarat High Court in the case of DCIT v. Rohini Builders 256 ITR 360 [SLP Dismissed by Supreme Court) it has been held that when assessee had discharged initial onus by providing identity of all creditors by giving their complete addresses, GIR numbers/permanent account numbers and copies of assessment orders wherever readily available and also proved capacity of creditors by showing that amounts were received by…

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Kanpur vs. Shri Mohammad Asfand Akhtar, Kanpur

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue stands dismissed

ITA 99/LKW/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow05 Aug 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain & Shri T. S. Kapoor

Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 145Section 147

…urt in the case of Orissa Corpn. (P) Ltd. (supra) 159 ITR 78 • Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. Jagdish Prasad Tewari reported in 220 Taxman 141 (Allahabad) • Hon'ble Gujarat High Court, in the case of Dy. CIT v. Rohini Builders [2002] 256 ITR 360 /[2003] 127 Taxman 523 • Nemi Chand Kothari 136 Taxman 213, (supra), the Hon'ble Guahati High Court • CIT v Real Time Marketing (P) Ltd reported in 306 ITR 35 • CIT v. S. Kamaljeet Singh [2005] 147 Taxman 18(AII.) • S.K. Bothra & Sons, HUF vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward- 46(3), Kolkata 347 ITR 347 7.7 The appellant has further also contended in th…

Smt. Seema Agrawal, Raigarh vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward -I, Raigarh

In the result, the appeal of assessee is dismissed

ITA 179/RPR/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur02 Aug 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.179/Rpr/2017 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year :2011-2012) Seema Agrawal, Vs Ito, Ward-1, Raigarh Sewa Kunj Road, Near Girls College, Raigarh (C.G.) Pan No. : Affpa 4990 K (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) ..

For Appellant: Shri R.B.Doshi, CAFor Respondent: Shri G.N.Singh, Sr. DR

Section 132Section 68

…been made. Reliance on: - i) CIT vs Orissa Corporation P. Ltd. (1986) 159 ITR 78 (SC) (PN 103 to 108 of PB). ii) CIT vs Metachem Industries (2000) 245 ITR 160 (MP) (PN 109 to 112 of PR. relevant finding on PN 112. para 5). iii) DCIT vs Rohini Builders (2002) 256 ITR 360 (Guj.), SLP dismissed vide 254 ITR (St.) 275 (PN 113 to 115 of PB). iv) Claris Lifesciences Ltd. vs ACTT (2008) 1 12 ITD 307 (Ahd.) (PN 1 16 to 129 of PB, relevant finding on PN 123- last 5 lines). v) ACIT vs M/s Sunder Nagar Filing Station (PN 130 to 133 of PB. relevant finding on PN 132). 4. CIT(A)’s action of sustaining 10% of addition is illo…

M/S Scc Investment, Raigarh vs. Income Tax Officer Ward - I, Raigarh

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 178/RPR/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur02 Aug 2022AY 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri R.B.Doshi, CAFor Respondent: Shri G.N.Singh, Sr. DR

Section 132Section 139Section 148Section 68

…en made. Reliance on: - 4 i) CIT vs Orissa Corporation P. Ltd. (1986) 159 ITR 78 (SC) (PN 103 to 108 of PB). ii) CIT vs Metachem Industries (2000) 245 ITR 160 (MP) (PN 109 to 112 of PR. relevant finding on PN 112. para 5). iii) DCIT vs Rohini Builders (2002) 256 ITR 360 (Guj.), SLP dismissed vide 254 ITR (St.) 275 (PN 113 to 115 of PB). iv) Claris Lifesciences Ltd. vs ACTT (2008) 1 12 ITD 307 (Ahd.) (PN 1 16 to 129 of PB, relevant finding on PN 123- last 5 lines). v) ACIT vs M/s Sunder Nagar Filing Station (PN 130 to 133 of PB. relevant finding on PN 132). 4. CIT(A)’s action of sustaining 10% of addition is illo…

Radhe Renewable Energy Development Pvt Ltd, Rajkot vs. The PCIT, Rajkot-1, Rajkot

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

ITA 110/RJT/2022[2017-18]Status: HeardITAT Rajkot08 Jul 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Sanjeev Jain, CIT. D.RFor Respondent: Shri Mehul Ranpura, A.R

Section 143(3)Section 263

…Ltd through banking channel. The repayment of the loan amount by the assessee was duly accepted by the Revenue. In this regard, we find support and guidance from the judgment of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of the CIT Vs. Rohini builders reported in 256 ITR 360 wherein it was held as under: “The genuineness of the transaction is proved by the fact that the payment to the assessee as well as repayment of the loan by the assessee to the depositors is made by account payee cheques and the interest is also paid by the assessee to the creditors by account payee cheques.” 23.7 Thus, there remains no doubt th…

The Deputy Commr. Income Tax, Circle-1(2), Rajkot vs. M/S Radhe Renewable Energy Development Pvt. Ltd., Rajkot

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

ITA 322/RJT/2017[2012-13]Status: HeardITAT Rajkot08 Jul 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Sanjeev Jain, CIT. D.RFor Respondent: Shri Mehul Ranpura, A.R

Section 143(3)Section 263

…Ltd through banking channel. The repayment of the loan amount by the assessee was duly accepted by the Revenue. In this regard, we find support and guidance from the judgment of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of the CIT Vs. Rohini builders reported in 256 ITR 360 wherein it was held as under: “The genuineness of the transaction is proved by the fact that the payment to the assessee as well as repayment of the loan by the assessee to the depositors is made by account payee cheques and the interest is also paid by the assessee to the creditors by account payee cheques.” 23.7 Thus, there remains no doubt th…

The Dy. Commr. of Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Rajkot-Gujarat vs. M/S. Radhe Renewable Energy Developement Pvt. Ltd., Rajkot-Gujarat

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

ITA 156/RJT/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot08 Jul 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Sanjeev Jain, CIT. D.RFor Respondent: Shri Mehul Ranpura, A.R

Section 143(3)Section 263

…Ltd through banking channel. The repayment of the loan amount by the assessee was duly accepted by the Revenue. In this regard, we find support and guidance from the judgment of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of the CIT Vs. Rohini builders reported in 256 ITR 360 wherein it was held as under: “The genuineness of the transaction is proved by the fact that the payment to the assessee as well as repayment of the loan by the assessee to the depositors is made by account payee cheques and the interest is also paid by the assessee to the creditors by account payee cheques.” 23.7 Thus, there remains no doubt th…

M/S Radhe Renewable Energy Development Pvt. Ltd., Rajkot-Gujarat vs. The Asstt. Commr. Income Tax, Circle-5, Rajkot-Gujarat

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

ITA 139/RJT/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot08 Jul 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Sanjeev Jain, CIT. D.RFor Respondent: Shri Mehul Ranpura, A.R

Section 143(3)Section 263

…Ltd through banking channel. The repayment of the loan amount by the assessee was duly accepted by the Revenue. In this regard, we find support and guidance from the judgment of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of the CIT Vs. Rohini builders reported in 256 ITR 360 wherein it was held as under: “The genuineness of the transaction is proved by the fact that the payment to the assessee as well as repayment of the loan by the assessee to the depositors is made by account payee cheques and the interest is also paid by the assessee to the creditors by account payee cheques.” 23.7 Thus, there remains no doubt th…

Narasimha Reddy Kotta, Secunderabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-8(2), Hyderabad

ITA 575/HYD/2019[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad29 Jun 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2007-08 Narasimha Reddy Kotta V Ito,Ward-8(2) Plot No.21 & 22 S. Hyderabad Flat No.302, 2Nd Floor Lahari Residency Shobana Colony West Maredpally Secunderabad-500 026

For Appellant: Shri K.C.Devdas, CAFor Respondent: Shri K.P.R.R.Murthy, Sr.AR

Section 133(6)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad ‘A’ Bench, Hyderabad Before Shri Rama Kanta Panda, Accountant Member AND Shri Laliet Kumar, Judicial Member Assessment Year: 2007-08 Narasimha Reddy Kotta V ITO,Ward-8(2) Plot No.21 & 22 s. Hyderabad Flat No.302, 2nd Floor Lahari Residency Shobana Colony West Maredpally Secunderabad-500 026 PAN : BXPPK4077C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by: Shri K.C.Devdas, CA Revenue by: Shri K.P.R.R.Murthy, Sr.AR Date of hearing: 28.06.2022 Date of pronouncement: 29.06.2022 O R D E R Per Shri Laliet Kumar, J.M. This is the second round of litigation whereby the assessee h…

ACIT Circle-3(1)(2), Mumbai vs. M/S Chemicon Engineering Consultant Pvt Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue stands dismissed and the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 833/MUM/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Jun 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Gagan Goyal, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.7907/Mum/2019 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year:2013-14) Chemicon Engineering बिधम/ Acit, Circle 3(1)(2) Consultant Pvt. Ltd. Room No.607, Aayakar Vs. 21 & 22, 2Nd Floor, 230, Bhawan, Maharshi Karve Sakhar Bhawan, Nariman Road, Mumbai-400020. Point, Mumbai-400021. आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No. 833/Mum/2020 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year:2013-14) Acit, Circle 3(1)(2) बिधम/ Chemicon Engineering Room No.607, Aayakar Consultant Pvt. Ltd. Vs. 21 & 22, 2Nd Floor, 230, Bhawan, Maharshi Karve Road, Mumbai-400020. Sakhar Bhawan, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400021. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaacc2686H (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Anuj Kisnadwala Revenue By: Shri H. N. Singh (Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 11/05/2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 17/06/2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: These Are Appeals Preferred By The Assessee & Revenue Respectively Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A)-08, Mumbai Dated 29.11.2019 For The A.Y.2013-14. 2. The Grounds Raised By The Both The Parties Are As Follows: Assessee Grounds: - 1. For That On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case The Orders Passed By The Assessing Officer U/S 143(3) Of The Act, 1961 (The “Act”) & A.Ys.2013-14 Chemicon Engineering That By The Cit(A) U/S 250 Of The Act So Far It Relates To In Confirming Of The Additions To The Extent Of A) Rs. 6,22,05,000/- Received From Certain Companies Out Of Total Rs. 13,13,50,000/- In Respect Of Shares Allotted Against Share Application Money;

For Appellant: Shri Anuj KisnadwalaFor Respondent: Shri H. N. Singh (DR)

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 68

…, finding of the Tribunal to the above extent is set aside. The question framed is answered in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue. 55. We also rely on the decision of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Dy. CIT v. Rohini Builders [2002] 256 ITR 360 /[2003] 127 Taxman 523, wherein the Court 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 accou…

Chemicon Engineering Consultant Pvt Ltd., Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Circle- 3 (1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue stands dismissed and the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 7907/MUM/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Jun 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Gagan Goyal, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.7907/Mum/2019 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year:2013-14) Chemicon Engineering बिधम/ Acit, Circle 3(1)(2) Consultant Pvt. Ltd. Room No.607, Aayakar Vs. 21 & 22, 2Nd Floor, 230, Bhawan, Maharshi Karve Sakhar Bhawan, Nariman Road, Mumbai-400020. Point, Mumbai-400021. आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No. 833/Mum/2020 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year:2013-14) Acit, Circle 3(1)(2) बिधम/ Chemicon Engineering Room No.607, Aayakar Consultant Pvt. Ltd. Vs. 21 & 22, 2Nd Floor, 230, Bhawan, Maharshi Karve Road, Mumbai-400020. Sakhar Bhawan, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400021. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaacc2686H (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Anuj Kisnadwala Revenue By: Shri H. N. Singh (Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 11/05/2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 17/06/2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: These Are Appeals Preferred By The Assessee & Revenue Respectively Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A)-08, Mumbai Dated 29.11.2019 For The A.Y.2013-14. 2. The Grounds Raised By The Both The Parties Are As Follows: Assessee Grounds: - 1. For That On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case The Orders Passed By The Assessing Officer U/S 143(3) Of The Act, 1961 (The “Act”) & A.Ys.2013-14 Chemicon Engineering That By The Cit(A) U/S 250 Of The Act So Far It Relates To In Confirming Of The Additions To The Extent Of A) Rs. 6,22,05,000/- Received From Certain Companies Out Of Total Rs. 13,13,50,000/- In Respect Of Shares Allotted Against Share Application Money;

For Appellant: Shri Anuj KisnadwalaFor Respondent: Shri H. N. Singh (DR)

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 68

…, finding of the Tribunal to the above extent is set aside. The question framed is answered in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue. 55. We also rely on the decision of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Dy. CIT v. Rohini Builders [2002] 256 ITR 360 /[2003] 127 Taxman 523, wherein the Court 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 accou…

Uppal Shah Prop-J K Sugars, Kolhapur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle - 2, Kolhapur

In the result, the cross appeal of the Revenue in ITA

ITA 1954/PUN/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune16 Jun 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravisl.

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil S. PathakFor Respondent: Shri Shivraj B. Morey &

Section 131(1)(d)Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 41(1)Section 68

…ors had not attended enquiry, it does not lead to conclusion that the transactions are not genuine as the loans were already repaid to the said parties placing reliance on the decision of the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of DCIT vs. Rohini Builders, 256 ITR 360 (Guj.) and the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Orissa Corpn, (P.) Ltd., 159 ITR 78 (SC). It was further stated that all the loans were repaid in the subsequent period along with interest and even Tax Deduction at Source (TDS) was also made. However, the Assessing Officer had rejected the explanation by stating that th…

Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle - 2, Kolhapur vs. Uppal Jitendra Shah, Kolhapur

In the result, the cross appeal of the Revenue in ITA

ITA 1893/PUN/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune16 Jun 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravisl.

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil S. PathakFor Respondent: Shri Shivraj B. Morey &

Section 131(1)(d)Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 41(1)Section 68

…ors had not attended enquiry, it does not lead to conclusion that the transactions are not genuine as the loans were already repaid to the said parties placing reliance on the decision of the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of DCIT vs. Rohini Builders, 256 ITR 360 (Guj.) and the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Orissa Corpn, (P.) Ltd., 159 ITR 78 (SC). It was further stated that all the loans were repaid in the subsequent period along with interest and even Tax Deduction at Source (TDS) was also made. However, the Assessing Officer had rejected the explanation by stating that th…

ACIT, Vapi Circle., Vapi vs. Shri Anand Jayantilal Kharbhari, Vapi

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 231/SRT/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Surat31 May 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकरअपील./Ita No.231/Srt/2020 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: (2013-14) (Virtual Court Hearing) The Acit, Vapi Circle, Vs. Shri Anand Jayantilal Kharbhari, Vapi. 409, Tirupati Towrs, Gidc Char Rasta, Vapi- 396195. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Ajqpk7929K (Assessee) (Respondent) Assessee By: Ms Poonam Joshi, Advocate Revenue By: Shri H. P. Meena, Cit(Dr) सुनवाईक"तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 22/03/2022 घोषणाक"तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 31/05/2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. A. L. Saini, Am: The Captioned Appeal Filed By The Revenue, Pertaining To Assessment Year 2013-14, Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Valsad [In Short ‘Ld. Cit(A)’], In Appeal No. Itba/Apl/S/250/2020-21/1028054664(1) Dated 24.09.2020, Which In Turn Arises Out Of An Assessment Order Passed By Assessing Officer U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’) Dated 30.03.2016. 2. Grounds Of Appeal Raised By The Revenue As Follows:

For Appellant: Ms Poonam Joshi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri H. P. Meena, CIT(DR)

Section 143(3)

…n 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 Dy. CIT v. Rohini Builders [2002] 256 ITR 360 and the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court, in the case of Orissa Corpn. 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 High…

DCIT v. Rohini Builders

What is DCIT v. Rohini Builders authority for?

Also referred to as

Also reported as

Sections most often in play

Issues it is cited on

Judgments citing DCIT v. Rohini Builders

Prakash Godhwani, Raipur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(2), Raipur

Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1(1)(4), Surat vs. M/S. Mansi Industries Pvt. Ltd., Surat

The Asstt. Commr. of Income Tax, Morbi Circle, Morbi vs. M/S Vikas Sanitarywares, Morbi

DCIT Circle-3(3), Ahmedabad vs. Shri Alpeshkumar C.Patel, Ahmedabad

Manibhadra Securities Services Pvt. Ltd, Ahmedabad vs. ITO, Ward-2(1)(4), Ahmedabad

Manibhadra Securities Services Pvt. Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. ITO, Ward-2(1)(4), Ahmedabad

The Jt. CIT, Sabarkantha Range, Himatnagar vs. Shree Ganesh Construction, Ahmedabad

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Kanpur vs. Shri Mohammad Asfand Akhtar, Kanpur

Smt. Seema Agrawal, Raigarh vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward -I, Raigarh

M/S Scc Investment, Raigarh vs. Income Tax Officer Ward - I, Raigarh

Radhe Renewable Energy Development Pvt Ltd, Rajkot vs. The PCIT, Rajkot-1, Rajkot

The Deputy Commr. Income Tax, Circle-1(2), Rajkot vs. M/S Radhe Renewable Energy Development Pvt. Ltd., Rajkot

The Dy. Commr. of Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Rajkot-Gujarat vs. M/S. Radhe Renewable Energy Developement Pvt. Ltd., Rajkot-Gujarat

M/S Radhe Renewable Energy Development Pvt. Ltd., Rajkot-Gujarat vs. The Asstt. Commr. Income Tax, Circle-5, Rajkot-Gujarat

Narasimha Reddy Kotta, Secunderabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-8(2), Hyderabad

ACIT Circle-3(1)(2), Mumbai vs. M/S Chemicon Engineering Consultant Pvt Ltd., Mumbai

Chemicon Engineering Consultant Pvt Ltd., Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Circle- 3 (1)(2), Mumbai

Uppal Shah Prop-J K Sugars, Kolhapur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle - 2, Kolhapur

Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle - 2, Kolhapur vs. Uppal Jitendra Shah, Kolhapur

ACIT, Vapi Circle., Vapi vs. Shri Anand Jayantilal Kharbhari, Vapi