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 366,314 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 68Section 143(3)Section 133(6)Section 147Section 132Section 69ASection 148Section 131

Issues it is cited on

creditworthiness of the creditorsource of sourcestatement under section 132(4)permanent account numberaddition under section 68retracted statementpaper companyshare application moneygenuineness of the transactionaddition u/s 68section 131section 133(6)

Judgments citing DCIT v. Rohini Builders

Smt. Parulben Rajubhai Trivedi, Ahmedabad vs. ITO, Ward-6(1)(3), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1308/AHD/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Mar 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Mahavir Prasad, Judicial Memebr आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 1308/Ahd/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14)

For Respondent: Shri O. P. Sharma, CIT.D.R
Section 143(3)Section 263

…lso carries a proper and identifiable trail. In these circumstances, it was not incumbent upon the AO to make cross verification necessarily with the lender in the light of the decisions of the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of DCIT vs. Rohini Builder 256 ITR 36 (Guj); Nemichand Kothari vs. CIT 264 ITR 254 (Guwahati) and long line of other judicial precedents which holds that no obligation is cast upon the assessee to prove the ‘source of source’ of funds received by the lender per se prior to its lending to the assessee. The action of the AO in not making cross inquiry is thus not fatal per se to hold th…

Bidit Financial Management Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Circle-7(1), Kolkata

ITA 579/KOL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Mar 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri A.T.Varkey, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.579/Kol/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2012-13)

For Appellant: Shri Miraj D Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Saurabh Mukherjee, Addl. CIT DR
Section 131Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 234ASection 68

…s the regards the issue of non-appearance of the share applicants, we note that 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 Samco Alloys (India) Pvt. Ltd., Meerut vs. ACIT, Meerut

In the result, appeal of assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2372/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Feb 2019AY 2011-12
Section 133(6)Section 68

…itworthiness and genuineness of the transaction in the matter. Assessee relied upon several decisions to prove that genuine credits have been received. The assessee 5 also relied upon decision of the Gujarat High Court in the case of DCIT vs. Rohini Builders 256 ITR 360 in which it was held that assessee cannot be asked to prove source of the source. As regards, the interest paid to the creditors it was submitted that addition is wholly unjustified. 5. The Ld. CIT(A) after considering the issue in detail similarly noted that in the cases of the creditors there is a low income declared and that except in the cas…

Income Tax Officer, Ludhiana vs. Sh Surender Kumar Prop, Ludhiana

The appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 747/CHANDI/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh08 Feb 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Itat Shall Not Be Filed In Cases Where The Tax Effect Does Not Exceed The Monetary Limit Of Rs. 20 Lacs. The Tax Will Not Include Any Interest Thereon. It Is Further Clarified That If In The Case Of An Assessee, Disputed Issues Arise In More Than One Assessment Year, Appeal Can Be Filed In Respect Of Such Assessment Year Or Years In Which The Tax Effect In Respect Of Disputed Issues Exceeds The Monetary Limit So Specified.

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Manjit Singh

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण,च"डीगढ़ "यायपीठ “बी”, च"डीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH BENCH ”B”, CHANDIGARH "ी संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य एवं डा. बी.आर.आर, कुमार, लेखा सद"य BEFORE: Sh.SANJAY GARG, JM & DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, AM आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No. 747/Chd/2016 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12 The ITO Sh. Surender Kumar, बनाम Ward 3(3), Prop. M/s BBS Exports, 1175/1-A, Ludhiana Kalyan Nagar, Circular Road Ludhiana "थायी लेखा सं./PAN No: ACCPK4304K अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Cross Objection No. 2/Chd/2017 (आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No. 747/Chd/2016) "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12 Sh. Surend…

Surinder Kumar, Ludhiana vs. DCIT, Ludhiana

The appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 475/CHANDI/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh08 Feb 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Itat Shall Not Be Filed In Cases Where The Tax Effect Does Not Exceed The Monetary Limit Of Rs. 20 Lacs. The Tax Will Not Include Any Interest Thereon. It Is Further Clarified That If In The Case Of An Assessee, Disputed Issues Arise In More Than One Assessment Year, Appeal Can Be Filed In Respect Of Such Assessment Year Or Years In Which The Tax Effect In Respect Of Disputed Issues Exceeds The Monetary Limit So Specified.

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Manjit Singh

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण,च"डीगढ़ "यायपीठ “बी”, च"डीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH BENCH ”B”, CHANDIGARH "ी संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य एवं डा. बी.आर.आर, कुमार, लेखा सद"य BEFORE: Sh.SANJAY GARG, JM & DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, AM आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No. 747/Chd/2016 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12 The ITO Sh. Surender Kumar, बनाम Ward 3(3), Prop. M/s BBS Exports, 1175/1-A, Ludhiana Kalyan Nagar, Circular Road Ludhiana "थायी लेखा सं./PAN No: ACCPK4304K अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Cross Objection No. 2/Chd/2017 (आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No. 747/Chd/2016) "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12 Sh. Surend…

Ritu Kamal Singhal, Mumbai vs. ITO 24(3)(4), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3017/MUM/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Feb 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri A.K. Garodiaassessment Year : 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Vimal Punamiya, ARFor Respondent: Shri Vijay Kumar Soni, DR
Section 132Section 133(6)

…ill shift to the revenue to disprove it and the assessee's explanation in such case cannot be rejected on mere under :- • Khandelwal Constructions v. CIT (1997) 227 ITR 90O (Gau.) • CIT v. Orissa Corporation Pvt. Ltd, 158 ITR 78 (SC) • CIT v. Rohini Builders 256 ITR 360 (Guj.). iii. It is also settled law that where the assesses provides identity and details pertaining to the lenders/creditors investor of share application money and is unable to produce them and requests the AO to issue summons u/s 331 for their attendance, it is the duty of the AO to issue such summons, failing which the addition would get del…

DCIT, Meerut vs. M/S. Samco Auto India (P) Ltd., Meerut

ITA 4346/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Jan 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.S.Saini & Shri Kuldip Singh

For Appellant: Sh. P.S.Kashlap, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Yogesh Sharma, Sr.DR
Section 131Section 147Section 68

…e creditors by filing their copy of ITR, Bank Accounts, the addition u/s 68 of the Act cannot sustain merely on the ground that assessee has failed to produce them despite issuance of summons u/s 131 of the Act. 6. Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in case cited as 256 ITR 360 Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Rohini Builders decided the identical issue in favour of the assessee that when assessee has discharged initial onus lay on it in terms of Section 68 by providing their complete address, bank statement and the assessee has also proved on record confirmed copy of account of his creditors from its books of account…

The ITO, Ward-3(2)(3), Ahmedabad vs. M/S. Maruti Foods Industries, Ahmedabad

In the result, Revenue’s appeal stands dismissed

ITA 1080/AHD/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad22 Jan 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1080/Ahd/2016 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12)

For Appellant: ShriFor Respondent: -None-
Section 143(2)Section 68

…unt is appellant’s own money generated out of books of account and the same is brought in through bogus creditor. The AO has to place on record the evidences so collected. Reliance is placed on the 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 assessee 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…

ITO, WD-1(1), Siliguri vs. M/S Cachar King Plantations Pvt. Ltd., Siliguri

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1041/KOL/2015[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 Jan 2019AY 2012-2013

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri S.S. Godara) Assessment Year: 2012-13 Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1), Siliguri..………......……….........…………..………….…................Appellant Vs. M/S. Cachar King Plantations Pvt. Ltd..……...........…………..……………….…...……..…….......Respondent Situvita Tea Factory Bidhan Nagar Siliguri [Pan : Aabcc 0744 P] Appearances By: Shri Subash Agarwal, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri Robin Choudhury, Sr. D/R. Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : December 12Th, 2018 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : January 16Th , 2019 Order Per J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am :- This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)- Siliguri, (Hereinafter The ‘Ld. Cit(A)’), Dt. 27/05/2015, Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter The ‘Act’), Relating To Assessment Year 2012-13. 2. The Assessee Is A Company & Is In The Business Of Investment In Shares & Securities. For The Assessment Year 2012-13, It E-Filed Its Original Return Of Income On 22/09/2012, Disclosing Total Business Income At Rs.3,71,534/-. The Assessment Order Was Passed U/S 143(3) Of The Act, On 30/03/2015, Making An Addition Of Unexplained Cash Credit To The Tune Of Rs.1,30,00,000/-, U/S 68 Of The Act. This Was Set Off Against Carried Forward Losses & Gross Total Balance Was Determined At –Nil- Aggrieved The Assessee Carried The Matter In Appeal. The Ld. First Appellate Authority Deleted The Addition For The Reasons Given In His Order.

Section 131Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 68

…pital as bogus is unwarranted. Reliance in this regard is placed on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Orissa Corporation P Ltd reported in 159 ITR 78 (SC) and Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of DCIT vs Rohini Builders reported in 256 ITR 360 (Guj) , wherein it was held that onus of the assessee (in whose books of account, the credit appears) 7 Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/s. Cachar King stands fully discharged, if the identity of the creditor is establishd and actual receipt of money from such creditor is proved. In case, the Assessing Officer is dissatisfied about the source of 'cas…

The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-3, Surat vs. M/S. Happy Home Corporation, Surat

ITA 715/AHD/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Surat15 Jan 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Shri Rasesh Shah, CAFor Respondent: Smt.Smita Nair, Sr.DR
Section 131Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 68Section 80I

…nouncements – • S. Hastimal V. CIT 49 ITR 273 (Mad) • Tolaram Daga Vs. CIT 59 ITR 632 (Assam) • CIT Vs. Daulatram Rawatmal 87 ITR 349 (SC) • Sarogi Credit Corporation Vs. CIT 103 ITR 344 • Nemichand Kothari Vs. CIT 264 ITR 254 (Guj) • DCIT Vs. Rohini Builders 256 ITR 360 (Guj) Nevertheless taking abundant precaution, during appellate proceedings, learned AR of the assessee was asked to submit the evidences to explain the "source of source" out of which impugned loans was granted to the assessee. In response, the assessee filed the explanation vide letter dated 12.04.2016 by filing letters from said lenders explai…

The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-3, Surat vs. M/S. Happy Home Corporation, Surat

ITA 1991/AHD/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Surat15 Jan 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Shri Rasesh Shah, CAFor Respondent: Smt.Smita Nair, Sr.DR
Section 131Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 68Section 80I

…nouncements – • S. Hastimal V. CIT 49 ITR 273 (Mad) • Tolaram Daga Vs. CIT 59 ITR 632 (Assam) • CIT Vs. Daulatram Rawatmal 87 ITR 349 (SC) • Sarogi Credit Corporation Vs. CIT 103 ITR 344 • Nemichand Kothari Vs. CIT 264 ITR 254 (Guj) • DCIT Vs. Rohini Builders 256 ITR 360 (Guj) Nevertheless taking abundant precaution, during appellate proceedings, learned AR of the assessee was asked to submit the evidences to explain the "source of source" out of which impugned loans was granted to the assessee. In response, the assessee filed the explanation vide letter dated 12.04.2016 by filing letters from said lenders explai…

Paras Javerilal Jain, Dhule vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax

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

ITA 1487/PUN/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune11 Jan 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am

For Appellant: Shri Sunil GanooFor Respondent: Shri M.K. Verma
Section 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 68

…urther submitted that no query with respect to deposit of cash was raised by the AO and the same was not confronted to the donor. He thereafter placed reliance on the decision of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of DCIT Vs. Rohini Builders reported in 256 ITR 360, decision of Hon’ble Gauhati High Court in the case of Nemi Chand Kothari Vs. CIT and another and the decision of Pune Tribunal in the case of ITO Vs. Smt. Indira Kamalakar Yeula (in ITA No.021/PN/2012 order dt.27.11.2012). He also placed on record the copy of the aforesaid decisions. He therefore submitted that since the assessee has satisfied…

B.R. Associates Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 4966/DEL/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Jan 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: : Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahu

Section 10Section 132Section 153ASection 2(22)Section 234ASection 68

…substantial question of law arises in this case. With the result, the present appeal is not maintainable and the same is hereby dismissed.” [Emphasis Supplied] 1.16 The appellant also seeks to place reliance on the case of DCIT Vs Rohini Builders reported in 256 ITR 360 (Guj) wherein it has been held as under: “Thus it is clear that the assessee had discharged the initial onus which lays on it terms of section 68 by proving the identity of the creditors by giving their complete addresses, GIR numbers/permanent accounts numbers and the copies of assessment orders wherever readily available. It has also proved th…

B.R. Associates Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 4965/DEL/2012[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Jan 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: : Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahu

Section 10Section 132Section 153ASection 2(22)Section 234ASection 68

…substantial question of law arises in this case. With the result, the present appeal is not maintainable and the same is hereby dismissed.” [Emphasis Supplied] 1.16 The appellant also seeks to place reliance on the case of DCIT Vs Rohini Builders reported in 256 ITR 360 (Guj) wherein it has been held as under: “Thus it is clear that the assessee had discharged the initial onus which lays on it terms of section 68 by proving the identity of the creditors by giving their complete addresses, GIR numbers/permanent accounts numbers and the copies of assessment orders wherever readily available. It has also proved th…

B.R. Associates Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 4964/DEL/2012[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Jan 2019AY 2005-06

Bench: : Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahu

Section 10Section 132Section 153ASection 2(22)Section 234ASection 68

…substantial question of law arises in this case. With the result, the present appeal is not maintainable and the same is hereby dismissed.” [Emphasis Supplied] 1.16 The appellant also seeks to place reliance on the case of DCIT Vs Rohini Builders reported in 256 ITR 360 (Guj) wherein it has been held as under: “Thus it is clear that the assessee had discharged the initial onus which lays on it terms of section 68 by proving the identity of the creditors by giving their complete addresses, GIR numbers/permanent accounts numbers and the copies of assessment orders wherever readily available. It has also proved th…

M/S. South Shourne Corporation (India), Baroda vs. The Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circel-2(2), Baroda

ITA 269/AHD/2017[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad01 Jan 2019AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.269/Ahd/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2004-2005 M/S South Shourne Corporation(India) Acit, 931, Gidc Estate, Circle-2(2), V Makarpura, Baroda. S. Baroda.

For Appellant: Shri Parimal Parmar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Apoorva Bhardwaj, Sr.DR
Section 234ASection 271Section 36Section 68

…of money in his bank accounts. The assessee is not expected to justify the source of funds in the hands of the lenders. In this connection, we place our reliance on the judgment of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of DCIT Vs. Rohini builders reported in 256 ITR 360 wherein it was held as under: “It has also proved the capacity of the creditors by showing that the amounts were received by the assessee by account payee cheques drawn from bank accounts of the creditors and the assessee is not expected to prove the genuineness of the cash deposited in the bank accounts of those creditors because under law the a…

Pooja Tyre Marketing, Himatnagar vs. The Income Tax Officer, S.K. Ward-3, Himatnagar

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

ITA 253/AHD/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad01 Jan 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.253/Ahd/2016 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2012-2013 Pooja Tyre Marketing, Income Tax Officer, Aakar Complex, S.K Ward 3, Vs. Himatnagar. Opp. Vyapar Bhawan, Himatnagar-383 001. Pan: Aabfa9200G

For Respondent: Shri
Section 133(6)Section 68

…2 Similarly, there was the repayment of the loan amount by the assessee which has been 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.” 10.3 Besides the above we also note…

Shri Jyotindra Bachubhai Patel, Vadodara vs. The Dy.CIT, Circle-7, Vadodara

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1770/AHD/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad01 Jan 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Smt Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 1770/Ahd/2015 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10) Jyotindra Bachubhai Patel, Dcit, बनाम/ B-4, Nitarang Society, Circle – 4(1), Vs. New Sama Road, G.E.B. Building, Vadodara – 08 Vadodara. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Acqpp 8663 C .. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri P. B. Parmar, A.R. ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By: Shri G. C. Daxini, Sr. D.R.

For Appellant: Shri P. B. Parmar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri G. C. Daxini, Sr. D.R
Section 234ASection 271(1)(c)Section 68

…t period does not affect creditworthiness. " S.68 doesn't require an assessee to prove source of the source of deposits. Hence, no addition is called for u/s 68. Reliance is placed on: Jyotindra Bachubhai Patel vs. DCIT A.Y. 2009-10 " DCIT vs. Rohini Builders 256 ITR 360 (Guj.) " Murlidhar Lahorimal vs. CIT 280 ITR 512 (Guj.) " CIT vs. Pragati Co. Op. Bank Ltd. 278 ITR 170 (Guj.) " CIT vs. Orissa Corporation Pvt. Ltd. 159 ITR 78 (SC) " Having furnished aforesaid details, the concerned credits, by no stretch of imagination, remain unexplained any further in the assessee's hands. • As regards cash deposits aggregat…

ITO, Ward - 6(1), Kolkata vs. M/S. Delight Grih Nirman Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

ITA 1755/KOL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata14 Dec 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.1755/Kol/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13)

For Appellant: Shri Rabin Chowdhury, Addl. CIT, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Shri A.K. Tulsiyan, FCA
Section 131Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 68

…addition was because the directors of the share subscribers did not turn up before him. In such a case the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Orissa Corpn. (P) Ltd. 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 M/s Delight GrihNirman Pvt. Ltd. Assessment Year: 2012-13 Assessing Officer is dissatisfied about the s…

Bhutoria Electricals Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward - 7(4), Kolkata

ITA 2024/KOL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata12 Dec 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: "ी ऐ. ट". वक", "यायीक सद"य एवं/And "ी एम .बालागणेश, लेखा सद"य) [Before Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri M. Balaganesh, Am] I.T.A. No. 2024/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2012-13

Section 143(1)Section 68

…1 Bhutoria Electricals Pvt. Ltd., AY 2012-13 आयकर अपील"य अधीकरण, "यायपीठ – “C” कोलकाता, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH: KOLKATA (सम") Before "ी ऐ. ट". वक", "यायीक सद"य एवं/and "ी एम .बालागणेश, लेखा सद"य) [Before Shri A. T. Varkey, JM & Shri M. Balaganesh, AM] I.T.A. No. 2024/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Bhutoria Electricals Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Income-tax Officer, Wd-7(4), Kolkata (PAN: AABCB1494M) Appellant Respondent Date of Hearing 28.11.2018 Date of Pronouncement 12.12.2018 For the Appellant Shri Miraj D. Shah, AR For the Respondent Shri Saurabh Kumar, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR ORDER Per Shri A.T…