Maddi Sudarsanam Oil Mills Co. v. CIT

37 ITR 369High Court1959#2737 most cited

What is Maddi Sudarsanam Oil Mills Co. v. CIT authority for?

When books of account are rejected and income is estimated, tax authorities cannot simultaneously rely on those rejected books to make specific additions, such as unexplained cash credits forming part of the balancing scheme of accounts, or to disallow specific expenses.

43

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,314 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Maddi Sudarsanam Oil Mills Co. v. CIT · rejection of books of account · Section 145(3) · estimated assessment · flat rate profit · unexplained cash credits Section 68 · disallowance of expenses Section 40 · specific additions after estimation · cannot rely on rejected books · double addition · simultaneous additions

Sections most often in play

Section 115BBESection 133ASection 143(1)Section 145Section 145(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250

Issues it is cited on

section 264asection 264block of assetssection 10aasection 10arejection of books of accountsection 30section 145(3)section 145addition u/s 68section 40(a)(ia)unexplained expenditure

Judgments citing Maddi Sudarsanam Oil Mills Co. v. CIT

M/S.Vibgyor Texotech Private Limited, Mumbai vs. ACIT-8(3)(2), Mumbai

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

ITA 1514/MUM/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Sept 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Vranda U. Matkari
Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 264ASection 40

…oks, it is for him to prove that it is so [CIT vs. Devi Prasad Vishwanath Prasad (1969) 72 ITR 194 (SC) reversing Devi Prasad Vishwanath Prasad vs. CIT (1963) 50 ITR 641 (All) and impliedly approving on this point Maddi Sudarsanam Oil Mills Co. vs. CIT (1959) 37 ITR 369 (AP) and CIT vs. Krishna Mining Co. (1972) 83 ITR 860 (AP). The Supreme Court in this case of CIT vs. Devi Prasad Vishwanath Prasad observed thus : "There is nothing in law which prevents the ITO in an appropriate case in taxing both the cash credit, the source and nature of which is Smt. Shobha Gupta not satisfactorily explained and the business…

M/S Raj Auto Wheels P .Ltd., Ajmer vs. JCIT, Range-1, Ajmer

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

ITA 397/JPR/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur09 Nov 2022AY 2011-12
For Appellant: Shri Mahendra Gargieya, AdvocawteFor Respondent: Shri P.R. Meena, C IT-DR
Section 131Section 145(3)Section 194ASection 40

…iew has been taken in the cases of disallowance made u/s 40A(3) & S. 68 in the cases of : CIT Vs Banwari Lal Banshidhar (1998) 229 ITR 229, 232 (All.), CIT vs. G.K. Contractor (2009) 19 DTR 305 (Raj.), Also refer Maddi Sudarsanam Oil Mills Co. v/s CIT (1959) 37 ITR 369 (AP), ECI Engineering & Construction Co. Ltd in ITA No. 2048/Hyd/2011, Samurai Techno Trading Co. (P) Ltd. v/s CIT (2010) 37 DTR 386 (Ker). 3. The ld. CIT(A) however, rejected such contentions without considering the legal position. He simply held that NBFC is not a banking company ignoring 46 ITA NO. 397/JP/2015 RAJ AUTO WHEELS (P) LTD. VS JCIT…

The ITO, Ward-9(2), Ahmedabad vs. M/S. Bhailalbhai A.Patel, Ahmedabad

In the result appeal of the revenue is hereby dismissed

ITA 308/AHD/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad17 Aug 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad, Judicial Memebr & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Accountant Memebr

For Appellant: ITA Nos. 2610/Ahd/2011 & 308/Ahd/2013 a/w. CO No.64/Ahd/13For Respondent: Shri Alok Kumar, CIT.DR
Section 133ASection 69

…ny difficulty in upholding that order. But, when he proposes to add back an exact item in the profit and loss account, he was relying on the rejectedbooks which he could not do as held by the Bench of this court in Maddi Sudarsanam Oil Mills Co. v. CIT [1959] 37 ITR 369. There is also a further difficulty if section 40, as argued by learned counsel, is to be taken into account even after making an estimate. When there are certain other deductions which are to be disallowed such as wealth-tax payment in section 40, can it be said that after making an estimate, the wealth-tax charged in the profit and loss account…

The DCIT, Circle-9, Ahmedabad vs. M/S. Bhailalbhai A.Patel, Ahmedabad

In the result appeal of the revenue is hereby dismissed

ITA 2610/AHD/2011[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad17 Aug 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad, Judicial Memebr & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Accountant Memebr

For Appellant: ITA Nos. 2610/Ahd/2011 & 308/Ahd/2013 a/w. CO No.64/Ahd/13For Respondent: Shri Alok Kumar, CIT.DR
Section 133ASection 69

…ny difficulty in upholding that order. But, when he proposes to add back an exact item in the profit and loss account, he was relying on the rejectedbooks which he could not do as held by the Bench of this court in Maddi Sudarsanam Oil Mills Co. v. CIT [1959] 37 ITR 369. There is also a further difficulty if section 40, as argued by learned counsel, is to be taken into account even after making an estimate. When there are certain other deductions which are to be disallowed such as wealth-tax payment in section 40, can it be said that after making an estimate, the wealth-tax charged in the profit and loss account…

Income Tax Officer 8(3)(3), Mumbai vs. M/S.Vibgyor Texotech Private Limited, Mumbai

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

ITA 1484/MUM/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Apr 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2009-10 Income Tax Officer-8(3)(3), M/S Vibgyor Texotech Pvt. Ltd., Room No. 616, 6Th Floor, Aayakar 309, Navyug, T.J. Road, Sewree, Bhavan, M.K. Road, Vs. Mumbai-400015. Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aaccv 0752 D Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/S Vibgyor Texotech Pvt. Ltd., The Asst. Commissioner Of 309, Navyug, T.J. Road, Sewree, Income Tax-8(3)(2), Mumbai-400015. Vs. Mumbai. Pan No. Aaccv 0752 D Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. Pavan Ved, ARFor Respondent: Mr. Achal Sharma, CIT-DR/
Section 10ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 148Section 264ASection 40

…oks, it is for him to prove that it is so [CIT vs. Devi Prasad Vishwanath Prasad (1969) 72 ITR 194 (SC) reversing Devi Prasad Vishwanath Prasad vs. CIT (1963) 50 ITR 641 (All) and impliedly approving on this point Maddi Sudarsanam Oil Mills Co. vs. CIT (1959) 37 ITR 369 (AP) and CIT vs. Krishna Mining Co. (1972) 83 ITR 860 (AP). The Supreme Court in this case of CIT vs. Devi Prasad Vishwanath Prasad observed thus : "There is nothing in law which prevents the ITO in an appropriate case in taxing both the cash credit, the source and nature of which is Smt. Shobha Gupta ==================== not satisfactorily expla…

M/S.Vibgyor Texotech Private Limited, Mumbai vs. ACIT-8(3)(2), Mumbai

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

ITA 487/MUM/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Apr 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2009-10 Income Tax Officer-8(3)(3), M/S Vibgyor Texotech Pvt. Ltd., Room No. 616, 6Th Floor, Aayakar 309, Navyug, T.J. Road, Sewree, Bhavan, M.K. Road, Vs. Mumbai-400015. Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aaccv 0752 D Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/S Vibgyor Texotech Pvt. Ltd., The Asst. Commissioner Of 309, Navyug, T.J. Road, Sewree, Income Tax-8(3)(2), Mumbai-400015. Vs. Mumbai. Pan No. Aaccv 0752 D Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. Pavan Ved, ARFor Respondent: Mr. Achal Sharma, CIT-DR/
Section 10ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 148Section 264ASection 40

…oks, it is for him to prove that it is so [CIT vs. Devi Prasad Vishwanath Prasad (1969) 72 ITR 194 (SC) reversing Devi Prasad Vishwanath Prasad vs. CIT (1963) 50 ITR 641 (All) and impliedly approving on this point Maddi Sudarsanam Oil Mills Co. vs. CIT (1959) 37 ITR 369 (AP) and CIT vs. Krishna Mining Co. (1972) 83 ITR 860 (AP). The Supreme Court in this case of CIT vs. Devi Prasad Vishwanath Prasad observed thus : "There is nothing in law which prevents the ITO in an appropriate case in taxing both the cash credit, the source and nature of which is Smt. Shobha Gupta ==================== not satisfactorily expla…

Shri Shri Niteshkumar Goyal, Raipur, Raipur (Cg) vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-4(4), Raipur, Raipur (Cg)

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 36/BIL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur30 Mar 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Jamlappa D Battullआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 36/Rpr/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13 Shri Nitesh Kumar Goyal Prop. Com Con India Net Work Solution Shop No.327 Lal Ganga, Shopping Mall, Raipur (C.G.) Pan : Aigpg6386B .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer Ward-4(4), Raipur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent Assessee By : Shri Prafulla Pandse, Ar Revenue By : Shri Sanjay Kumar, Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing :15.03.2022 घोषणा क" तार"ख / Date Of Pronouncement : 30.03.2022

For Appellant: Shri Prafulla Pandse, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar, DR
Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 234BSection 40Section 68

…officer is not required to specify or prove what that source is which from the nature of the case must be known only to the assessee (SethKalekhan Md. Haif V. CIT (1958) 34 ITR 669, 673, 674 (MP) affirmed (1963) 50 ITR 1 (SC) CIT V. Krishna Mining Co. (1972) 83 ITR 860 ( AP). Observing the provisions of Section 68 and the proof of having shown that the payment was made through account payee cheques through banking channels it was held by the Hon’ble Kerala High Court “ "It is clear on the terms of section 68 that the burden is on the assessee to offer a satisfactory explanation about the nature and source lekhan…

Basir Ahmed Sisodia vs. The Income Tax Officer

Appeal is allowed

C.A. No.-006110-006110 - 2009Supreme Court24 Apr 2020

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.M. KHANWILKAR

Section 143(2)Section 24(1)Section 260ASection 272(1)(c)Section 68

…1 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO. 6110 OF 2009 Basir Ahmed Sisodiya .....Appellant versus The Income Tax Officer ..…Respondent J U D G M E N T A.M. Khanwilkar, J. 1. This appeal takes exception to the final judgment and order dated 21.8.2008 passed by the High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan at Jodhpur (for short, “the High Court”) in Income Tax Appeal No. 69 of 2006, whereby the appellant’s appeal was dismissed and the order of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal,…

ACIT, Circle-3(1), Vijayawada vs. Sri Bhaskar Contractors Company, Vijayawada

In the result, appeals of the revenue for the A

ITA 432/VIZ/2017[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam04 Oct 2019AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.No.109/Viz/2013 (निर्धारणवर्ा/Assessment Year : 2008-09) Asst.Commissioner Of Vs. M/S Sri Bhaskar Contractors Income Tax Company Circle-3(1) D.No.60-3-27, F.No.101 Vijayawada Sai Aniketh Apartment Iti Bus Stop, Ashok Nagar Vijayawada [Pan : Aaqfs5687P] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) Cross Objection No.70/Viz/2013 (Arising Out Of I.T.A. No.109/Viz/2013) M/S Sri Bhaskar Contractors Asst.Commissioner Of Company Income Tax D.No.60-3-27, F.No.101 Circle-1(1) Sai Aniketh Apartment Vijayawada Iti Bus Stop, Ashok Nagar Vijayawada [Pan : Aaqfs5687P] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri P.V.Subba Rao, ARFor Respondent: Shri D.K.Sonowal, CIT DR
Section 131Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…orthiness and identity is incorrect and there is no case for making the addition on account of unsecured creditors. Further, the Ld.CIT(A) relied on the decision of Hon’ble Andhra Pradesh High Court in the case of Maddi Sudarsnam Oil Mills Co., Vs. CIT (1959) 37 ITR 369, where in Hon’ble High Court held that if the income tax authorities have rejected the books of accounts, they cannot make addition on account of unexplained cash credit on the very same books. Therefore, we do not find any infirmity in the order of the Ld.CIT(A) and the same is upheld. 27 I.T.A. No.109/Viz/2013, CO No.70/Viz/2013, A.Y. 2008-09…

ACIT., Circle - 1(1), Vijayawada vs. M/S Sri Bhaskar Contractors Company

In the result, appeals of the revenue for the A

ITA 109/VIZ/2013[2008-2009]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam04 Oct 2019AY 2008-2009

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.No.109/Viz/2013 (निर्धारणवर्ा/Assessment Year : 2008-09) Asst.Commissioner Of Vs. M/S Sri Bhaskar Contractors Income Tax Company Circle-3(1) D.No.60-3-27, F.No.101 Vijayawada Sai Aniketh Apartment Iti Bus Stop, Ashok Nagar Vijayawada [Pan : Aaqfs5687P] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) Cross Objection No.70/Viz/2013 (Arising Out Of I.T.A. No.109/Viz/2013) M/S Sri Bhaskar Contractors Asst.Commissioner Of Company Income Tax D.No.60-3-27, F.No.101 Circle-1(1) Sai Aniketh Apartment Vijayawada Iti Bus Stop, Ashok Nagar Vijayawada [Pan : Aaqfs5687P] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri P.V.Subba Rao, ARFor Respondent: Shri D.K.Sonowal, CIT DR
Section 131Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…orthiness and identity is incorrect and there is no case for making the addition on account of unsecured creditors. Further, the Ld.CIT(A) relied on the decision of Hon’ble Andhra Pradesh High Court in the case of Maddi Sudarsnam Oil Mills Co., Vs. CIT (1959) 37 ITR 369, where in Hon’ble High Court held that if the income tax authorities have rejected the books of accounts, they cannot make addition on account of unexplained cash credit on the very same books. Therefore, we do not find any infirmity in the order of the Ld.CIT(A) and the same is upheld. 27 I.T.A. No.109/Viz/2013, CO No.70/Viz/2013, A.Y. 2008-09…

Kalpataru Electricals, Kolkata vs. ITO, WD-50(1), Kolkata

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

ITA 759/KOL/2015[2004-2005]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata27 Sept 2019AY 2004-2005

Bench: "ी जे. सुधाकर रे"डी, लेखा सद"य एवं/And "ी ऐ. ट". वक", "यायीक सद"य) [Before Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

Section 133ASection 143(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148

…en taken into account while making such an estimate. This will also mean that the embargo placed in section 40 is also taken into account.” 11. We also rely on the decision of Hon’ble Andhra Pradesh High Court in Maddi Sundarsanam Oil Mills Co. Vs. CIT (1959) 37 ITR 369 (AP) wherein the Hon’ble High court has observed as under: “If once the income tax authorities have rejected the books, they cannot have it both ways, namely, adopting a flat rate to compute gross profit as well as rely on the books for the purpose of adding unexplained cash credits which were part of the scheme of balancing the accounts….. ” 12…

Shri Sanjiv Walia, Bathinda vs. The Income Tax Officer, Bathinda

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 355/ASR/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar31 May 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arorai.T.A. No. 355/Asr/2014 Assessment Year: 2009-10

For Appellant: Sh. P. N. Arora (Adv.)For Respondent: Sh. Charan Dass (D.R.)
Section 144Section 69A

…ount having been rejected, no addition u/s. 69A could in law be made, relying on the decisions in CIT v. Aggarwal Engg. Co. [2008] 302 ITR 246 (P&H); Ram Avtar Pareek v. ITO (in ITA No. 274/2017, dated 21/12/2017); and Maddi Sudarsanam Oil Mills v. CIT [1959] 37 ITR 369 (AP), besides by the Tribunal. He, however, was unable to answer the question that the addition, sustained by the ld. CIT(A), though assessed as business income, is qua the balance in the assessee’s undisclosed bank account as at the year-end, i.e., for the asset found, unexplained u/s. 69A. In fact, the same has been, accepting the assessee’s ple…

The ACIT, Circle-1(2), Baroda vs. Iwi Cryogenic Vaporization System (I) Pvt. Ltd., Baroda

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

ITA 1508/AHD/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 Apr 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Waseem Ahmed)

For Appellant: Shri Lalit P. Jain, Sr. D.RFor Respondent: Shri Mukund Bakshi, A.R

…Ahd/2014 9 . A.Y. 2009-10 quantitative records and same is part of page no. 9 to 10 of appellate order and Argon Gas cannot sell in an open market. 8. In support of its contention, assessee cited following case laws: 1. Maddi Sudarsanam Oil Mills Co. Vs. CIT 37 ITR 369 (AP) where further addition on account of cash credit was found to be unjustified where the profit was estimated at a flat rate on rejection of accounts. The Hon'ble Court held that the I.T. authorities cannot adopt a flat rate to compute gross profit as well as rely on the books for purpose of adding unexplained cash credit which were the part of…

The Dy. Commissioner of Income-Tax, Jammu vs. M/S. Continental Construction Co, Jammu ( J&K)

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed as well as the appeal filed the Revenue Department is dismissed and Cross Objection also stands disposed off

ITA 27/ASR/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar18 Jan 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arora & Sh. N.K.Choudhryita No.38(Asr)/2013 Assessment Year:2009-10

For Appellant: Sh. R.L. Gupta (Ld. Adv.)For Respondent: Sh. Charan Dass (Ld. DR)
Section 142(1)Section 250(6)Section 32(1)Section 36(1)(iii)Section 40Section 40A(3)Section 68

…qua non-deduction of TDS u/s 40(a)(ia) and Rs.4,77,187/- qua payment made in cash in violation of Sec.40A(3), The issue under consideration dealt with by following Courts:- i) Andhra Pradesh High Court in the case of Maddi Sudharshanam Oil Mills Vs CIT {1959} 37 ITR 369(AP). ii) Andhra Pradesh High Court in Indwell Construction Vs CIT 232 ITR 776(A), followed the decision of High Court in Maddi Sudharshanam Oil Mills Vs CIT(supra) ITA Nos.38 & 27/Asr/2013, C.O No.35(Asr)/2014 5 (Asst. Year: 2009-10) M/s Continental Construction Co., Jammu v. DCIT iii) ITAT Bench at Amritsar in the case of ACIT Vs J.S. Grove…

M/S. Continental Construction Co., Jammu vs. The Dy. Commissioner of Income-Tax (Hqrs), Jammu

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed as well as the appeal filed the Revenue Department is dismissed and Cross Objection also stands disposed off

ITA 38/ASR/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar15 Jan 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arora & Sh. N.K.Choudhryita No.38(Asr)/2013 Assessment Year:2009-10

For Appellant: Sh. R.L. Gupta (Ld. Adv.)For Respondent: Sh. Charan Dass (Ld. DR)
Section 142(1)Section 250(6)Section 32(1)Section 36(1)(iii)Section 40Section 40A(3)Section 68

…qua non-deduction of TDS u/s 40(a)(ia) and Rs.4,77,187/- qua payment made in cash in violation of Sec.40A(3), The issue under consideration dealt with by following Courts:- i) Andhra Pradesh High Court in the case of Maddi Sudharshanam Oil Mills Vs CIT {1959} 37 ITR 369(AP). ii) Andhra Pradesh High Court in Indwell Construction Vs CIT 232 ITR 776(A), followed the decision of High Court in Maddi Sudharshanam Oil Mills Vs CIT(supra) ITA Nos.38 & 27/Asr/2013, C.O No.35(Asr)/2014 5 (Asst. Year: 2009-10) M/s Continental Construction Co., Jammu v. DCIT iii) ITAT Bench at Amritsar in the case of ACIT Vs J.S. Grove…

Kogitala Venkateswara Rao, Vegavaram vs. ITO, Ward-2, Tanuku

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 504/VIZ/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam28 Nov 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.504/Viz/2017 (धििाारण िर्ा/ Assessment Year :2009-10) Kagitala Venkateswara Rao Vs. Income Tax Officer S/O Krishna Murthy Ward-2 D.No.5-141, Vegavaram Tanuku West Godavari Dist. [Pan : Bbypk3278C] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri G.V.N.Hari, Ar प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से / Respondent By : Smt. Suman Malik, Dr

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N.Hari, ARFor Respondent: Smt. Suman Malik, DR
Section 68

…State Breweries Corporation and all purchases are affected only after making advance payment. There can be no outstanding amount payable for purchase of liquor. Andhra Pradesh High Court’s decision in the case of Maddi Suddarsanam Oil Mills Co. Vs. CIT (1959) 37 ITR 369 is not applicable as A.O., did not reject books of account. On the contrary, no books of account were produced before him. Hence, appellant failed to prove the genuineness of unsecured loan either before A.O. or during appeal proceedings. Hence, the addition made on account of unsecured loan creditors amounting to Rs.9,80,000/- is hereby confirmed…

Saunak Mitra, Kolkata vs. ACIT, Cir-25, Kolkata

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

ITA 1252/KOL/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata08 Oct 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am Saunak Mitra Vs. Acit, Circle-25, Kolkata 39, Mahanirban Road, Ground Floor, Aayakar Bhawan, 2, Kolkata – 700 029. Gariahat Road South, Kolkata – 700 068. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Ahspm 6241 J (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) ..

For Appellant: Shri K. M. Roy, FCAFor Respondent: Shri A. Bhattacharjee, Addl. CIT
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 40

…y difficulty in upholding that order. But, when he proposes to add back an exact item in the profit and loss account, he was relying on the rejected books which he could not do as held by the Bench of this court in Maddi Sudarsanam Oil Mills Co. v. CIT [1959] 37 ITR 369. There is also a further difficulty if Section 40, as argued by learned counsel, is to be taken into account even after making an estimate. When there are certain other deductions which are to be disallowed such as wealth-tax payment in Section 40, can it be said that after making an estimate, the wealth-tax charged in the profit and loss account…

Gudla Sriranganadham, Srikakulam vs. The ITO, Srikakulam

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 92/VIZ/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam09 Mar 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.92/Viz/2016 ("नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2011-12) Sri Gudla Sriranganadham Vs. Income Tax Officer Prop : Sri Krishna Wines Ward-1 D.No.15-24, A.B.Road, Kotturu Srikakulam Srikakulam District [Pan : Ajhpg3664J] (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""थ"/ Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri M.R.Bangari, DRFor Respondent: 28.02.2018
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 145

…ccount are rejected, then the AU is not justThed in making addition to cash credits with reference to the same books of account. In support, the assessee relied on the decision of the Hon’ble AP High Court in the case or Maddi Sudarshanam Oil Mills Co. v. CIT(37 ITR 369) and Indwell Constructions v. CIT(232 ITR 776 AP). In this regard, it is relevant to note a similar issue as to whether addition u/s.68 or 69 could be made when the AO has estimated the income was dealt by the Hon’ble ITAT, Hyderabad in the case or Smt. Shoba Gupta(ITA No.461/Hyd/2013, dt.10.07.2013), wherein it was held that even if the income is…

Sunny Wasan, Korba(Cg) vs. Dy.. C.I.T. Circle, Korba, Korba(Cg)

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 390/BIL/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur19 Jan 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: S/Shri N.S Saini & Pavan Kumar Gadaleassessment Year : 2010-2011

For Appellant: Shri R.B.Doshi, ARFor Respondent: Shri O.P.Chaudhury, DR
Section 40

…as estimated the net profit @ 8% of gross contract receipts. Therefore, once the books of account are rejected, there is no necessity for disallowing any further amounts as held by Hon’ble A.P. High Court in the case of Maddi Sudarsanam Oil Mills Co. vs CIT, 37 ITR 369 (AP). Respectfully following the same, we are of the opinion that the Assessing Officer is not justified in disallowing Rs.16,32,797/- u/s.40(a)(ia) of the Act. Hence, we set aside the orders of lower authorities and delete Rs.16,32,797/- and allow the grounds of appeal of the assessee. 10. In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allow…

Harbans Lal Sethi, Jaipur vs. Addl. CIT, Kota

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and that of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 495/JPR/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur30 May 2017AY 2006-07
For Appellant: Shri Mahendra Gargieya, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri R.A. Verma, Addl. CIT-. DR
Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 234BSection 244A

…makes a difference in the situation, is untenable. In our considered opinion, the answer to the question has to be in the negative and in favour of the assessee. The question is answered accordingly.” 6.1.5 Refer Maddi Sudarsanam Oil Mills Co. v/s CIT (1959) 37 ITR 369 (AP) (DPB 33-35). 6.1.6 The Hon’ble ITAT(Hyd) `B’ bench in the case of ECI Engineering & Construction Co. Ltd in ITA No. 2048/Hyd/2011 (DPB 16-25) held that: “where the books of account have been rejected the revenue cannot rely on the same books of account for making any other addition.” 6.1.7 Also refer Samurai Techno Trading Co. (P) Ltd. v/s CI…