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 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

Champion Builder Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-1(3), Gurgaon

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are partly

ITA 462/DEL/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Aug 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasadआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A Nos.462 & 463/Del/2024 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years: 2015-16 & 2016-17

Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 68

…ineness of the transaction has been established and the assessee had discharged its onus and there was no requirement of the assessee to prove anything else. The decision of the ITAT was upheld by the Gujarat High Court in the case of DCIT vs. Rohini Builders 256 ITR 360 (Guj). I.T.A.Nos.462 & 463/Del/2024 o Calcutta High Court in the case of CIT, Kolkata - III vs. M/s. Dataware Private Limited ITAT No.263 of 2011 dated 21-09-2011 (Cal), wherein it was observed that as long as the return filed by the loan creditor has not been rejected by the AO, the AO is bound to accept the same as genuine when the identity a…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Aurangabad vs. Vista Nirman Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

ITA 1340/PUN/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune05 Aug 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Jaiprakash BairagraFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Kumar Keshari
Section 132Section 133(6)Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151(1)

…84 (vi) Murlidhar Lahorimal vs. CIT, 280 ITR 512 (Guj) (vii) Labh Chand Bohra v. ITO, 219 CTR 571 (Raj) (viii) CIT vs. Dwarkadish Investment Pvt. Ltd., 330 ITR 298 (Delhi) (ix) Sarogi Credit Corporation v. CIT, 103 ITR 344 (Patna) (x) DCIT v. Rohini Builders, 256 ITR 360 (Guj) (xi) Aravali Trading Co. v. ITO, 220 CTR 622 (Raj) (xii) ITO vs. Neelkanth Finbuild Ltd., 70 SOT 368 (xiii) Nemi Chand Kothari vs. CIT (2004) 264 ITR 254 (Gau) (xiv) CIT v. Shiv Dhooti Pearls & Investment Ltd., 237 Taxman 104 29. He submitted that when the assessee has proved the source of the investor companies by producing their PAN, let…

DCIT, Ahmedabad vs. Tripoli Management Private Limited, Ahmedabad

In the result, the Revenue’s appeal stands dismissed

ITA 5/AHD/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad01 Aug 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.5/Ahd/2024 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2016-17 The Dcit Tripoli Management Pvt.Ltd. Ahmedabad बनाम/ 8-301, Safal Pegasis 100 Ft. Road V/S. Prahladnagar Ahmedabad- 380 015 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aabct 0588 J (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) ….. ("" यथ"/ Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Vartik Chokshi, Ar Revenue By : Shri Kamlesh Makwana, Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 29/07/2024 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 01/08/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am: This Appeal Is Filed By The Revenue As Against The Order Dated 19/10/2023 Passed By The Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)-12, Ahmedabad [Hereinafter Referred To As “The Ld.Cit(A)” In Short] Arising Out Of The Assessment Order Dated 27/12/2018 Passed By The Assessing Officer (Ao) Under Section 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As "The Act") Relevant To The Assessment Year (Ay) 2016-17. The Dy.Cit Vs. Tripoli Management Pvt.Ltd. Asst. Year : 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri Vartik Chokshi, ARFor Respondent: Shri Kamlesh Makwana, CIT-DR
Section 131Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 68Section 69C

…the AO has not relied on any concrete evidence or information to prove that the lender companies do not have creditworthiness to lend money. The assessee placed reliance on the decision of Hon’ble High Court of Gujarat in the case of DCIT Vs. Rohini Builders 256 ITR 360(Guj.) and other judicial pronouncements. The assessee also rebutted the judicial pronouncements relied on by the AO. Regarding the disallowance of interest as unexplained expenditure, the assessee stated that the AO has disallowed the same only based on assumptions and surmise. 3.3. The Ld.CIT(A) deleted the additions both u/s.68 and 69C of the…

Arvindkumar Amulkh Tanna, Ahmedabad vs. The ACIT, Central Circle-2 (3), Ahmeadabad

ITA 577/AHD/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad31 Jul 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar

Section 132Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 153A

…about the same. In the present case, AO has not carried out any such inquiry and added the amount u/s.68 of the Act on the basis of assumption and surmises. He placed reliance on the judgement of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in case of DCIT Vs. Rohini Builders 256 ITR 360 (Guj.). Further, the Ld.AR also stated that the assessee has repaid the unsecured loan along with interest to the depositor parties in subsequent year. The assessee received the unsecured loans by account payee cheques and also repaid the unsecured loans back to the lenders by account payee cheques which establish the genuineness of the transacti…

M/S. Shri Rang Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., Gandhinagar vs. DCIT, Gandhinagar Circle, Gandhinagar

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 665/AHD/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 Jul 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokarassessment Year: 2012-13

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 151Section 68

…ITA No.665/Ahd/2019 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Page 1 of 7 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD “C” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE Ms. SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MAKARAND VASANT MAHADEOKAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/s. Shri Rang Infrastructure Deputy Commissioner of Pvt. Ltd., Income Tax, Shyamvan, Gandhinagar Circle, B/h. Vrundavan Hotel, Gandhinagar. Koba Circle, Vs. Post: Koba Dist. Gandhinagar – 382 007 Gujarat. [PAN – AAICS 9126 J] (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Shri M.S. Chhajed, AR Revenue by Shri Ashok Kumar Suthar, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 15.07.2024 Date of Pr…

Rewin Ceramics Pvt Ltd, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward - 21(3), New Delhi

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

ITA 4580/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Jul 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI SUDHIR PAREEK (Judicial Member)

Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 148Section 68

…Taxman.331. 4. CIT vs Dwarkadhish Investment P. Ltd. (Delhi HC) reported in 330 ITR 298. 5. CIT vs Matachem Industries (MP HC) reported in 245 ITR 160 6. CIT vs. Ram Narain Goel (P&H HC) reported in 224 ITR 180 7. DCIT vs Rohini Builders (Guj HC) reported in 256 ITR 360 PROPOSITION 7: Once the initial onus is discharged by the assessee, than the Revenue has to peruse the matter by enforcing the attendance of the creditor/lender and in absence of the same, addition under section 68 is unsustainable. 1. Commissioner of Income-tax vs. Orissa Corp, (P.) Ltd. (SC) reported in 159 ITR 78. 2. CIT vs. Divine Leasing and…

The Income Tax Officer, Ward-3, Gandhinagar vs. Shri Ramesh Gobarji Thakor, Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 59/AHD/2020[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad11 Jul 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Ms. Suchitra Raghunath Kambleassessment Year : 2010-11 Income-Tax Officer Vs. Shri Ramesh Gobarji Thakor Ward-3 Sector 11 Gandhinagar. Gandhinagar. Pan : Aespt 3446 H (Applicant) (Responent) Assessee By : Shri S.N. Soparkar, Sr.Advocate & Shri Parin Shah, Ars. Revenue By : Shri Kamlesh Makwana, Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 16/04/2024 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 11/07/2024 आदेश आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Soparkar, Sr.Advocate and Shri Parin Shah, ARsFor Respondent: Shri Kamlesh Makwana, CIT-DR
Section 147Section 250Section 68

…f the creditors. In other words, the Assessing Officers had no authority to dispute the correctness of assessments of the creditors of the assesse when a co-ordinate Assessing Officer is satisfied with transaction." c. In the case of DCIT V/s Rohini Builders 256 ITR 360(Guj), Hon'ble High Court held as under:- "substantial Question of Law- cash Credit-Assessee Furnished complete addresses of all the creditors along with GIR numbers /PAN as well as confirmation along with copies of assessment orders passed in the case of individual creditors, wherever available, and copies of returns filed by the creditors bin t…

Jhaveri Trading and Investment Pvt.Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The DCIT, Cent. Cir. 1(1), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 403/AHD/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad13 Jun 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Tr Senthil Kumarआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos. 401 To 403/Ahd/2023 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Years: (2012-2013 To 2014-2015) & आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos. 399 & 400/Ahd/2023 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Years: (2010-2011 & 2011-12)

For Appellant: Shri Deepak Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sudhendu Das, CIT.DR
Section 132(4)Section 68

…he Revenue has not challenged the submission of the assessee that such borrowing has been repaid to the companies. In this respect, we find support and guidance from the judgment of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of 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.” 6.3 The above ratio was further foll…

Jhaveri Trading and Investment Pvt.Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The DCIT, Cent. Cir. 1(1), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 402/AHD/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad13 Jun 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Tr Senthil Kumarआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos. 401 To 403/Ahd/2023 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Years: (2012-2013 To 2014-2015) & आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos. 399 & 400/Ahd/2023 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Years: (2010-2011 & 2011-12)

For Appellant: Shri Deepak Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sudhendu Das, CIT.DR
Section 132(4)Section 68

…he Revenue has not challenged the submission of the assessee that such borrowing has been repaid to the companies. In this respect, we find support and guidance from the judgment of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of 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.” 6.3 The above ratio was further foll…

Jhaveri Trading and Investment Pvt.Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The DCIT, Cent. Cir. 1(1), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 401/AHD/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad13 Jun 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Tr Senthil Kumarआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos. 401 To 403/Ahd/2023 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Years: (2012-2013 To 2014-2015) & आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos. 399 & 400/Ahd/2023 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Years: (2010-2011 & 2011-12)

For Appellant: Shri Deepak Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sudhendu Das, CIT.DR
Section 132(4)Section 68

…he Revenue has not challenged the submission of the assessee that such borrowing has been repaid to the companies. In this respect, we find support and guidance from the judgment of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of 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.” 6.3 The above ratio was further foll…

Jhaveri Trading and Investment Pvt.Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The DCIT, Cent. Cir. 1(1), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 400/AHD/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad13 Jun 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Tr Senthil Kumarआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos. 401 To 403/Ahd/2023 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Years: (2012-2013 To 2014-2015) & आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos. 399 & 400/Ahd/2023 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Years: (2010-2011 & 2011-12)

For Appellant: Shri Deepak Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sudhendu Das, CIT.DR
Section 132(4)Section 68

…he Revenue has not challenged the submission of the assessee that such borrowing has been repaid to the companies. In this respect, we find support and guidance from the judgment of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of 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.” 6.3 The above ratio was further foll…

Jhaveri Trading and Investment Pvt.Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The DCIT, Cent. Cir. 1(1), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 399/AHD/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad13 Jun 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Tr Senthil Kumarआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos. 401 To 403/Ahd/2023 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Years: (2012-2013 To 2014-2015) & आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos. 399 & 400/Ahd/2023 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Years: (2010-2011 & 2011-12)

For Appellant: Shri Deepak Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sudhendu Das, CIT.DR
Section 132(4)Section 68

…he Revenue has not challenged the submission of the assessee that such borrowing has been repaid to the companies. In this respect, we find support and guidance from the judgment of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of 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.” 6.3 The above ratio was further foll…

The DCIT, Central Circle-1(2), Ahmedabad vs. M/S. Volga International Ltd., Sarangpur

In the result appeal of the revenue is hereby dismissed

ITA 1538/AHD/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad10 Jun 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri Deepak R Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Atul Pandey, Sr.DR
Section 68

…ng channel and repayment of the same was also made through banking channel then the genuineness cannot be doubted. In this respect, we find support and guidance from the judgment of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of 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.” 10.2 The above ratio was further fo…

DCIT-CC-4(2), Mumbai vs. Rubberwala Realty, Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee for AYs 2015-16 to

ITA 3531/MUM/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Jun 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: We Advert To The Grounds Taken In The Cross Appeals, It Would First Be Relevant To Cull Out The Basic Facts Of The Case & Effect Of Law In Brief In Respect Of Certain Ays. Search U/S 132 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As "The Act") Was Conducted Against The Rubberwala Group, On 17-03-2021 Thereby Triggering Section 153A Of The Act. Prior To The Date Of Search, The Income-Tax Assessments For Ays 2015-16 To 2019-20 Were Either Completed U/S 143(1)/143(3) Of The Act And/Or The Time Limit For Issue Of Notice U/S 143(2) Of The Act Had Expired. Accordingly, The Income-Tax 3

For Respondent: Shri Sanyogita Nagpal, CIT
Section 132Section 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 68Section 69C

…erse or based on no evidence. If the conclusion is based on some evidence on which a conclusion could be arrived at, no question of law as such arises." 4.14 We also rely on the decision of Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Dy. CIT v. Rohini Builders (256 ITR 360), 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 accounts of the creditors,…

DCIT-CC-4(2), Mumbai vs. Rubberwala Housing and Infrastructure Limited, Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee stands allowed and

ITA 3508/MUM/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Jun 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Br Baskaran, Am & Shri Aby T Varkey, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T. A. No. 3448/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T. A. No. 3447/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T. A. No. 3446/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year: 2017-18) & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T. A. No. 3445/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year: 2018-19) & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T. A. No. 3444/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year: 2019-20) & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T. A. No. 3459/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year: 2020-21) & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T. A. No. 3432/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year: 2021-22) Rubberwala Housing & Infrastructure Ltd. Ground Floor, Rubberwala House, Dr. A Nair Road, Agripada, Mumbai-400011. बनाम / Vs. Dcit, Central Circle-4(2) 19Th Floor, Air India Building, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400021. आयकर अपील सं/ I.T. A. No. 3508/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T. A. No. 3505/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T. A. No. 3504/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year: 2017-18) & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T. A. No. 3549/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year: 2018-19) & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T. A. No. 3503/Mum/2023

For Appellant: Shri Mani Jain FCAFor Respondent: Smt Sanyogita Nagpal
Section 132Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 68Section 69C

…t justified in making addition u/s 68 of the Act. Accordingly the High Court dismissed the appeal of the Department. 4.26 In the above decision the Hon'ble High Court is noted to have referred to its earlier decision in the case of Dy. CIT v. Rohini Builders (256 ITR 360), 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 accounts of the creditors,…

Rubberwala Housing and Infrastructure Limited, Mumbai vs. DCIT CC-4(2), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee stands allowed and

ITA 3448/MUM/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Jun 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Br Baskaran, Am & Shri Aby T Varkey, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T. A. No. 3448/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T. A. No. 3447/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T. A. No. 3446/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year: 2017-18) & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T. A. No. 3445/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year: 2018-19) & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T. A. No. 3444/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year: 2019-20) & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T. A. No. 3459/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year: 2020-21) & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T. A. No. 3432/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year: 2021-22) Rubberwala Housing & Infrastructure Ltd. Ground Floor, Rubberwala House, Dr. A Nair Road, Agripada, Mumbai-400011. बनाम / Vs. Dcit, Central Circle-4(2) 19Th Floor, Air India Building, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400021. आयकर अपील सं/ I.T. A. No. 3508/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T. A. No. 3505/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T. A. No. 3504/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year: 2017-18) & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T. A. No. 3549/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year: 2018-19) & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T. A. No. 3503/Mum/2023 2

For Appellant: Shri Mani Jain FCAFor Respondent: Smt Sanyogita Nagpa
Section 132Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 68Section 69ASection 69C

…t justified in making addition u/s 68 of the Act. Accordingly the High Court dismissed the appeal of the Department. 4.26 In the above decision the Hon'ble High Court is noted to have referred to its earlier decision in the case of Dy. CIT v. Rohini Builders (256 ITR 360), 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 accounts of the creditors,…

Humayun Ahmed Shafi Ahmed Shaikh, Mumbai vs. DCIT CC-4(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 3433/MUM/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Jun 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Br Baskaran, Am & Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.3433/Mum/2023 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2020-21) Humayun Ahmed Shafi बनधम/ Dcit, Central Circle-4(2) 19Th Floor, Air India Ahmed Shaikh Vs. Ground Floor, Rubberwala Building, Nariman Point, House, Dr. A Nair Road, Mumbai-400021. Agripada, Mumbai-400011. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Auwps7212G (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Mani Jain, Fca Revenue By: Smt Sanyogita Nagpal Cit

For Appellant: Shri Mani Jain, FCAFor Respondent: Smt Sanyogita Nagpal CIT
Section 132(4)Section 133(6)Section 68

…erse or based on no evidence. If the conclusion is based on some evidence on which a conclusion could be arrived at, no question of law as such arises.” 13. We also rely on the decision of Hon‟ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Dy. CIT v. Rohini Builders (256 ITR 360), 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 accounts of the creditors,…

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-4(4), Mumbai vs. Iris Computers Limited, Delhi

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is accordingly dismissed

ITA 3918/MUM/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 May 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri. Prashant Maharshi & Shri. Raj Kumar Chauhandy. Commissioner Of Income Tax Vs. Iris Computers Limited, Central Circle-4(4), Mumbai Delhi. Room No. 1918, Air India Building, A-155, Road No. 4, New Nariman Point – 400 021. Delhi, Mahipalpur – 110037. Pan: Aaaci9670H (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 250

…d that the assessee's burden is confined to prove creditworthiness of investors with reference to the transactions between the assessee and the creditor. d. M/s Pravir Polymers Pvt. Ltd. 25 ITA No. 2595/M/2019 & CO No. 103/M/2021. e. DCTT vs. Rohini Builder, 256 ITR 360 (Guj) - The Hon'ble Court held that if the identity of the parties proved and the transaction is through cheque and the income tax assessment particulars are provide the assessee has discharged its onus u/s. 68 of the Act. e. Ranchor Jivabhai Nakhava vs. CIT, 21 Taxman 159 (Guj)- The Hon'ble Court held that once the assessee has established that…

Ashwini Kumar Taneja, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward - 46(3), New Delhi

Appeal is allowed

ITA 7391/DEL/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 May 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Sh. G.S.Pannu, Hon’Ble & Sh. Anubhav Sharmash. Ashwini Kumar Taneja Vs. Ito, Ward-46(3), 586, Gandhi Cloth Market New Delhi Chandni Chowk, Delhi-110006 C/O M/S Rra Taxindia, D-28, South Extension, Part-I, New Delhi-110049 Pan : Adbpt3461A (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 68

…nt: • Tolaram Daga vs. Commissioner of Income Tax 59 ITR 632 (Assam) • CIT vs. Shri Ram Narain Goel 224 ITR 180 (Pun. & Har.) • Nemi Chand Kothari vs. CIT & another 264 ITR 254 (Gauhati) • Rohini Builders vs. DCIT 76 TTJ 521 (Ahmd.) • DCIT vs. Rohini Builders 256 ITR 360 (Gujarat) • CIT vs. Rohini Builders 254 ITR 275 (Statute) • CIT vs. Orissa Corporation Pvt. Ltd. 159 ITR 78 (SC) Ashwini Kumar Taneja 6 • GG Films vs. ITO 45 TTJ 644 (Cochin) and Anil Kumar Midha (HUF) vs. ITO 100 TTJ 644 (jodhpur) • Sarogi Credit Corporation vs. CIT, Biahr 103 ITR 344 (Pat) • Jalan Timbers vs. CIT 223 ITR 11 (Gauhati) • Sona El…

Gem Forgings Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir. 8(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeals in ITA No

ITA 1426/KOL/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 May 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am& Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm]

Section 131Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148(2)Section 250Section 68

…y and creditworthiness of the investors and genuineness of the transactions were not proved. 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) Finally the ld AR prayed before the bench that the order of ld CIT(A) may be set aside and the AO may be directed to delete the addition. 17. The Ld. D.R wh…