Lakhmichand Baijnath v. CIT

35 ITR 416Supreme Court of India1959#1570 most cited

What is Lakhmichand Baijnath v. CIT authority for?

When an amount is credited in business books, it is a reasonable inference and can be presumed to be a receipt from business. This principle helps determine the head of income and address unexplained cash credit issues under Section 68.

72

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2009 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Lakhmichand Baijnath v. CIT · 35 ITR 416 · business books credits · receipts from business · Section 68 · unexplained cash credit · deemed income · head of income · business income presumption · income tax assessment

Sections most often in play

Section 115BBESection 143(3)Section 68Section 69ASection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 69CSection 145(3)

Issues it is cited on

section 69dsection 40(b)set off of lossessection 69bthird party informationsurrender of incomesection 115bbpreponderance of probabilitysection 115bsection 115bbesection 127section 145(3)

Judgments citing Lakhmichand Baijnath v. CIT

DCIT Circle-1 vs. Rana Papers Ltd

ITA 2184/DEL/2008[2002-2003]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Nov 2019AY 2002-2003

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Sanjog Kapoor, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 148Section 68

…are application and copies of Income Tax Return acknowledgment of I.T. Return could not be treated as sufficient evidence to prove genuineness of a credit. Reliance is also placed on Hon’ble SC decision is placed on 57 ITR 532, 53 ITR 623, 50 ITR , 49 ITR 112 35 ITR 416, 34 ITR 807 (All. S.S. decision). Considering all these facts and legal position the share application money received is treated as unexplained and will be added to the income of the assessee. (Addition Rs. 4,28,50,000) Unsecured Loans As per schedule for attached to balance sheet, company’s unsecured loans in the previous year and in the current…

Shri Vasudeo Patidar, Villate Tillore Khurd, Indore vs. Income Tax Officer 2(4), Indore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 473/IND/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Indore30 Oct 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradassessment Year: 2013-14 Shri Vasudev Patidar, Income Tax बनाम/ Village- Tillor Khurd, Officer -2(4), Vs. District Indore(Mp) Indore (Appellant) (Revenue) Pan: Bybpp1563R Appellant By Shri Ashish Goyal & Shri N.D. Patwa, Advs. Revenue By Shri R.S. Ambedkar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 24.10.2019 Date Of Pronouncement: 30.10.2019 आदेश / O R D E R Per Manish Borad, A.M: This Appeal At The Instance Of Assessee Pertaining To A.Y. 2014-14 Is Directed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax-(Appeals)-I, Indore, (In Short ‘Cit’), Dated 24.03.2017 Which Is Arising Out Of The Order U/S 144 Of The Income Tax Act 1961(Hereinafter Called As The ‘Act’) Framed On 28.01.2016 By Ito- 2(4), Indore. 2. The Assessee Has Raised Following Grounds Of Appeal:

Section 143(2)Section 144

…come (except specific source of income being bank deposit), unaccounted income, if any shall be agricultural income. For this reliance is placed on Krishnakant Paliwal 9 ITJ 348 (Trib. Indore). It is a settled proposition of law as laid in Laxmichand Baijnath 35 ITR 416 (SC), that where unaccounted income is found, it shall be from same source as the accounted source. This judgment was further followed in Margret’s Hope Tea Mfg Co. 201 ITR 747 (Cal.), where it was held that cash credits were the tea income of the assessee, as this was the known source of income. In DIT (Exemption) vs Raunaq Education Foundation…

The ITO, Trivandrum vs. M/S.Perrorkada Service Co-Op Bank Ltd, Trivandrum

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in I

ITA 47/COCH/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin26 Jun 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 143(3)Section 194A(3)(viia)Section 195Section 263Section 40Section 40A(3)Section 80P

…must be taken as receipt from business. Whether the amount of credit u/s. 68 is income from business or income from other sources depends on the evidence and explanation furnished by the assessee. 9.6 It was held in the case of Laxmichand Baijnath vs. CIT (35 ITR 416) (SC) that if credits are found in business account of the assessee and the explanation as to the nature and source of account is rejected by the Income-tax authorities, such authorities are entitled to treat the credit as income from business. The said decision cannot be interpreted to mean that in all cases such credits must be treated as incom…

M/S.Peroorkada Service Co-Op Bank Ltd, Trivandrum vs. The ITO, WD-2(1), Trivandrum

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in I

ITA 93/COCH/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin26 Jun 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 143(3)Section 194A(3)(viia)Section 195Section 263Section 40Section 40A(3)Section 80P

…must be taken as receipt from business. Whether the amount of credit u/s. 68 is income from business or income from other sources depends on the evidence and explanation furnished by the assessee. 9.6 It was held in the case of Laxmichand Baijnath vs. CIT (35 ITR 416) (SC) that if credits are found in business account of the assessee and the explanation as to the nature and source of account is rejected by the Income-tax authorities, such authorities are entitled to treat the credit as income from business. The said decision cannot be interpreted to mean that in all cases such credits must be treated as incom…

M/S.Perrorkada Service Co-Op Bank Ltd, Trivandrum vs. The ITO, Trivandrum

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in I

ITA 563/COCH/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin26 Jun 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 143(3)Section 194A(3)(viia)Section 195Section 263Section 40Section 40A(3)Section 80P

…must be taken as receipt from business. Whether the amount of credit u/s. 68 is income from business or income from other sources depends on the evidence and explanation furnished by the assessee. 9.6 It was held in the case of Laxmichand Baijnath vs. CIT (35 ITR 416) (SC) that if credits are found in business account of the assessee and the explanation as to the nature and source of account is rejected by the Income-tax authorities, such authorities are entitled to treat the credit as income from business. The said decision cannot be interpreted to mean that in all cases such credits must be treated as incom…

M/S.Peroorkada Service Co-Op Bank Ltd, Trivandrum vs. The ITO, WD-2(1), Trivandrum

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in I

ITA 400/COCH/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin26 Jun 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 143(3)Section 194A(3)(viia)Section 195Section 263Section 40Section 40A(3)Section 80P

…must be taken as receipt from business. Whether the amount of credit u/s. 68 is income from business or income from other sources depends on the evidence and explanation furnished by the assessee. 9.6 It was held in the case of Laxmichand Baijnath vs. CIT (35 ITR 416) (SC) that if credits are found in business account of the assessee and the explanation as to the nature and source of account is rejected by the Income-tax authorities, such authorities are entitled to treat the credit as income from business. The said decision cannot be interpreted to mean that in all cases such credits must be treated as incom…

M/S.Perrorkada Service Co-Op Bank Ltd, Trivandrum vs. The ITO, Trivandrum

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in I

ITA 141/COCH/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin26 Jun 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 143(3)Section 194A(3)(viia)Section 195Section 263Section 40Section 40A(3)Section 80P

…must be taken as receipt from business. Whether the amount of credit u/s. 68 is income from business or income from other sources depends on the evidence and explanation furnished by the assessee. 9.6 It was held in the case of Laxmichand Baijnath vs. CIT (35 ITR 416) (SC) that if credits are found in business account of the assessee and the explanation as to the nature and source of account is rejected by the Income-tax authorities, such authorities are entitled to treat the credit as income from business. The said decision cannot be interpreted to mean that in all cases such credits must be treated as incom…

Anish Tandon vs. C.I.T. IX

ITA/592/2005HC Delhi30 Aug 2018

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A. K. CHAWLA

Section 69Section 80Section 80H

…ted the stock with business of Benu Exports. And in the absence of any finding or material bought on record by A.O. to prove that the income as surrendered was from activity other than Benu Exports, the principle pronounced by the Hon. Courts of India in 35 ITR 416 (SC) Laxmichand Baijnath, 64 ITR 593 (Cal) Daulat Ram Rawet Mal, 201 ITR 747 (Cal) Margaret Hope Tea Co. Ltd. and decision rendered on 15.7.98 by ITAT, Delhi Bench C in Raj Kumar Mittal (ITA No. 5610/Del/02), would be applicable as it would have to be held that the source of investment in the surrendered stock of fabric of Rs.15 lacs is in…

Gn Resound India Pvt Ltd, Navi Mumbai vs. Income-Tax Officer 10(3)(4), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

ITA 3100/MUM/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Feb 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2010-11 Gn Resound India Pvt. Ltd. Income Tax Office No. 1201, 1202, 1203, Officer-10(3)(4) Vs. 12Th Floor, V. Times Square, Mumbai. Plot No. 3, Sector 15, Palm Beach Road, Cbd Belapur, Navi Mumbai- 400614 Pan No. Aaccg3984C Appellant Respondent Assesseeby : Mr. Ganesh Rajgopalan, Ar Revenue By : Mr. M.C. Omi Ningshen, Dr Date Of Hearing : 11/12/2017 Date Of Pronouncement : 21/02/2018

For Appellant: Mr. Ganesh Rajgopalan, ARFor Respondent: Mr. M.C. Omi Ningshen, DR
Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(2)Section 68

…stant case the appellant has failed to adduce the evidence before the AO to establish the prima facie of the aforesaid transaction as evident from the finding at para 8 hereinbefore. It has been held in Govindarajulu v. CIT 34 ITR 807 (SC); Lakhmichand v. CIT 35 ITR 416 (SC); Kalekhan v. CIT 50 ITR 1 (SC) that where an assessee has failed to prove satisfactorily the source and nature of certain amounts of cash received during the accounting year, the Assessing Officer is entitled to draw the inference that the receipts are of an income nature and it is not necessary for him to locate their exact source. As in the…

ITO 25(1)(4), Mumbai vs. Bhavna N Patel, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1344/MUM/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Aug 2016AY 2009-10
For Appellant: Shri Dharmesh ShahFor Respondent: Shri Randhir Gupta
Section 69A

…son entitled to receive the income in his own right and which he has rightfully done so by crediting the same in his books of accounts. 7.6. The AO while structuring the additions u/s 69A has relied on the following decisions: LakhmichandBaijnath v CIT [1959] 35 ITR 416 (SC) Roshan Di Hatti v CIT [1977] 107 ITR 938 (SC) / Kale Khan Mohammad Hanif v CIT[1963] 50 ITR 1 (SC) CIT v R S Rathore [1995] 212 ITR 390 (Raj.) 7.7. In the case of the above mentioned decisions of the Supreme Court and Rajasthan High Court, the appellant had received / credited a certain sum of money in his books of accounts for which certain…

Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi-II vs. Kishori Lal Construction Ltd

Appeals are disposed of in the aforesaid terms

ITA-783/2007HC Delhi23 Dec 2009
Section 132(4)Section 143(1)Section 148Section 68

…to treat the impugned credit as income of the assessee. It is argued that there are plenty of decisions supporting this stand of the Revenue and some of these are as under: a. Govindrajuly\u Murlidhar vs. CIT, 34 ITR 807 (SC) b. Lakhmichand vs. CIT, 35 ITR 416 (SC) c. Kalekhan vs. CIT, 50 ITR 1 (SC) d. CIT vs. Visvanath Parsad, 72 ITR 194 (SC) The learned counsel also contended that the plea of the assessee that, since the transactions were through cheque, the same are genuine, does not hold good and tenable. He referred to the decision of Calcutta High Court in the case of CIT vs. Precession Fi…

Commissioner of Income T Ax Delhi II vs. Kishori Lal Construction Ltd

Appeals are disposed of in the aforesaid terms

ITA - 783 / 2007HC Delhi23 Dec 2009
Section 132(4)Section 143(1)Section 148Section 68

…to treat the impugned credit as income of the assessee. It is argued that there are plenty of decisions supporting this stand of the Revenue and some of these are as under: a. Govindrajuly\u Murlidhar vs. CIT, 34 ITR 807 (SC) b. Lakhmichand vs. CIT, 35 ITR 416 (SC) c. Kalekhan vs. CIT, 50 ITR 1 (SC) d. CIT vs. Visvanath Parsad, 72 ITR 194 (SC) The learned counsel also contended that the plea of the assessee that, since the transactions were through cheque, the same are genuine, does not hold good and tenable. He referred to the decision of Calcutta High Court in the case of CIT vs. Precession Fi…