Nemi Chand Kothari v. CIT

264 ITR 254High Court2003#227 most cited

What is Nemi Chand Kothari v. CIT authority for?

For a cash credit, merely transacting by cheque is insufficient to discharge the assessee's burden of proof. The assessee must prove the identity of the creditors, the genuineness of the transaction, and the creditworthiness of the creditors; upon which, the burden shifts to the revenue.

340

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2011 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Nemi Chand Kothari v. CIT · Section 68 · cash credit · onus of proof · burden of proof · identity of creditors · genuineness of transaction · creditworthiness of creditors · transaction by cheque · share application money · unexplained cash credit

Also reported as

136 Taxmann 213

Sections most often in play

Section 68Section 143(3)Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 153A

Issues it is cited on

section 106creditworthiness of the creditorsource of sourceonus of proofshare capital and share premiumshell companyaddition under section 68addition u/s 68share application moneygenuineness of the transactionsection 127admission of additional evidence

Judgments citing Nemi Chand Kothari v. CIT

ITO 18(1)(5), Mumbai vs. Jitendra Madanlal Kitawat (HUF), Mumbai

In the result,appeal filed by the AO is rejected and the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 7100/MUM/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Apr 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: S/Shri Rajendra & Sandeep Gosainआयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./I.T.A./7047/Mum/2016,िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Year: 2007-08 आयकर आयकर आयकर अपील अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" Jitendra M. Kitavat (Huf) Ito 18(1)(5) Prop. Of M/S. Jivraj Exports Mumbai. 61, Purnima Apartment Vs. 43, Ridge Road, Mumbai-400 006. Pan:Assesseebpk 9960 C (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./I.T.A./7100/Mum/2016,िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Year: 2007-08 आयकर आयकर अपील अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" Ito 18(1)(5) Vs. Jitendra M. Kitavat(Huf) Mumbai. Mumbai-400 006 (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) Revenue By: Shri Rajesh Kumar Yadav-Cit-Dr Assessee By: Shri Vimal Punmiya

For Appellant: Shri Vimal PunmiyaFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar Yadav-CIT-DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 254(1)Section 69

…inder Rawley (2014) 366 ITR 232 (P&H); ii) CIT V/s Sachital Communications (2014) 227 Taxman 219 (Mag); iii) CIT V/s Patel Ramniklal Hirji (2004) 222 Taxman 15 (Mag); iv) CIT V/s Jaikumar Bakliwal (2014) 366 ITR 217 (Raj); v) Nemi Chand Kothari V/s CIT (2003) 264 ITR 254(Gauhati); vi) CIT V/s Shalimar Buildwell Pvt (2014) 220 Taxman 138) (All); vii) CIT V/s Lalpuria Construction P L (2013) 215 Taxman 12(Mag) (Raj) viii) M/s Rushabh Enterprise V/s ACIT (Mum) WP 167/2015 and other three appeals 7047/Mum/2016&7100/Mum/2016 Jitendra M. Kitavat (HUF) ix) Andaman Timber Industries V/s CCE (2015) 281 CTR 0241 (SC) x)…

Gemorioum, Jaipur vs. ITO, Jaipur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 378/JPR/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur28 Feb 2018AY 2010-11
For Appellant: Shri Rohan Sogani (CA)For Respondent: Smt. Poonam Rai, (DCIT)
Section 145(3)Section 68

…8 of the Act, assessee cannot be expected to establish source of the source. In this context, he placed heavy reliance on the following decisions : (1) CIT v. Jay Dee Securities & Finance Ltd.[2013] 32 taxmann.com 91 (All.) (2) Nemi Chand Kothari v. CIT[2003] 264 ITR 254/[2004] 136 Taxman 213 (Gau.). (3) S. Hastimal v. CIT[1963] 49 ITR 273 (Mad.) 6.1 Counsel further submitted that assessee had not only established the identity of the depositors, had received the amount through cheque. Genuineness of the transaction therefore, could not have been doubted. The creditworthiness of the depositors also was sufficient…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. M.N. Securities Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the department are dismissed

ITA 3833/DEL/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Feb 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Ms. Suchitra Kamble, Jm Ita No. 3832/Del/2014 : Asstt. Year : 2005-06 Ita No. 3833/Del/2014 : Asstt. Year : 2006-07 Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Vs M/S M. N. Securities Pvt. Ltd., 8Th Floor, Statesman House, Tax, Central Circle-19, New Delhi Barakhamba Road, New Delhi-110001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aadcm0102D Assessee By : Sh. Shashi Tulsiyan, Adv. Revenue By : Smt. Shefali Swroop, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 06.02.2018 Date Of Pronouncement : 27.02.2018 Order Per N. K. Saini, Am: These Two Appeals By The Department Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Each Dated 25.04.2014 Of Ld. Cit(A)-Xii, New Delhi.

For Appellant: Sh. Shashi Tulsiyan, AdvFor Respondent: Smt. Shefali Swroop, CIT DR
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 68

…ssa Corporation (P) Ltd. 159 ITR 78 (SC) " CIT Vs Dwarkadhish Investment ltd. 194 Taxman 43 (Del.) " ACIT Vs Hanuman Agarwal 151 ITR 150 (Patna) " CIT Vs Rohini Builders 256 ITR 360 (SC) " CIT Vs Orissa Corporation (P) Ltd. 159 ITR 78 (SC) " Nem Chand Kothari 264 ITR 254 (Gau) 11. It was further submitted that the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Lovely Exports (supra) have been followed by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the following case laws: " CIT Vs Oasis Hospitalities (P.) Ltd. 333 ITR 119 " CIT Vs Winstral Petrochemicals (P) Ltd. 330 ITR 603 " CIT Vs Kamdhenu Steel and Alloys Ltd. 248…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. M.N. Securities Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the department are dismissed

ITA 3832/DEL/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Feb 2018AY 2005-06

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Ms. Suchitra Kamble, Jm Ita No. 3832/Del/2014 : Asstt. Year : 2005-06 Ita No. 3833/Del/2014 : Asstt. Year : 2006-07 Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Vs M/S M. N. Securities Pvt. Ltd., 8Th Floor, Statesman House, Tax, Central Circle-19, New Delhi Barakhamba Road, New Delhi-110001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aadcm0102D Assessee By : Sh. Shashi Tulsiyan, Adv. Revenue By : Smt. Shefali Swroop, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 06.02.2018 Date Of Pronouncement : 27.02.2018 Order Per N. K. Saini, Am: These Two Appeals By The Department Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Each Dated 25.04.2014 Of Ld. Cit(A)-Xii, New Delhi.

For Appellant: Sh. Shashi Tulsiyan, AdvFor Respondent: Smt. Shefali Swroop, CIT DR
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 68

…ssa Corporation (P) Ltd. 159 ITR 78 (SC) " CIT Vs Dwarkadhish Investment ltd. 194 Taxman 43 (Del.) " ACIT Vs Hanuman Agarwal 151 ITR 150 (Patna) " CIT Vs Rohini Builders 256 ITR 360 (SC) " CIT Vs Orissa Corporation (P) Ltd. 159 ITR 78 (SC) " Nem Chand Kothari 264 ITR 254 (Gau) 11. It was further submitted that the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Lovely Exports (supra) have been followed by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the following case laws: " CIT Vs Oasis Hospitalities (P.) Ltd. 333 ITR 119 " CIT Vs Winstral Petrochemicals (P) Ltd. 330 ITR 603 " CIT Vs Kamdhenu Steel and Alloys Ltd. 248…

Sri B Sundara Prakash, Bengaluru vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-15(3), Bengaluru

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2815/BANG/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 Feb 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri A.K.Garodia, Accounant Member

For Appellant: Shri V. Srinivasan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Shankar Prasad .K, JDIT (DR)
Section 68

…explained, addition may be made in the hands of the lender but not in the hands of the borrower. In support of this contention, he placed reliance on the judgment of Hon’ble Gauhati High Court rendered in the case of Nemi Chand Kothari vs. CIT as reported in 264 ITR 254. Learned DR of the revenue supported the orders of the authorities below. 3 ITA No. 2815(Bang)2017 4. I have considered the rival submissions. I find that the only objection of the AO is this that the source of cash in the hands of the so called lenders is not established. The identity of lenders is established as they are relatives of the asse…

Navnidhi Steel and Engg Co. P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 5(2)(1), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 3420/MUM/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Jan 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh, Assessment Year: 2007-08

Section 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 148Section 68Section 69C

…ITR 820 (Cal.), it was held that mere mention of file number of creditor will not suffice and each entry has to be explained separately by the assessee (CIT vs R.S. Rathaore) 212 ITR 390 (Raj.). The Hon’ble Guwahati High Court in Nemi Chandra Kothari vs CIT (264 ITR 254)(Gau) held that transaction by cheques may not be always sacrosanct. 42 Navnidhi Steel & Engg. Co. Pvt. Ltd. 2.7. The ratio laid down in ACIT vs Rajeev Tandon 294 ITR (AT) 219 (Del.), which was confirmed by Hon’ble High Court , in 294 ITR 488, supports the case of the Revenue. Identical ratio was laid down in CIT vs Anil Kumar 392 ITR 552 (…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Abhinav Steels Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 4354/DEL/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Nov 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri B.P. Jain & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava[Assessment Year: 2009-10] The Dy.C.I.T Vs. M/S Abhinav Steels Pvt. Ltd Circle -1(1) 401, Mahaveer Ji Complex New Delhi Lsc, Rishab Jain Vihar New Delhi Pan : Aabca 3974 H [Appellant] [Respondent] Date Of Hearing : 02.11.2017 Date Of Pronouncement : 20.11.2017 Assessee By : Shri Ved Jain, Adv Shri Ashish Goel, Ca Revenue By : Shri Surendrapal, Sr. Dr

For Appellant: Shri Ved Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Surendrapal, Sr. DR
Section 68

…on cannot be made in the hands of the assessee for not proving the source of source of investment and the assessee is not required to prove that the sub creditor had the creditworthiness of making the investment. 10. In the case of Nemi Chand Kothari Vs. CIT 264 ITR 254, the Hon'ble High Court held as under:- “Keeping in view the above position of law, when we turn to the factual matrix of the present case, we find that so far as the appellant is concerned, he has established the identity of the creditors, namely, Nemichand Nahata and Sons (HUF) and Pawan Kumar Agarwalla. The appellant had also shown, in accord…

ACIT 24(3), Mumbai vs. Ramesh Ramswarupdas Jindal, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 3096/MUM/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Nov 2017AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri N.K. Pradhan, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Haridas BhattFor Respondent: Shri Saurabh Kumar Rai
Section 132(4)Section 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “I”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI C.N. PRASAD, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI N.K. PRADHAN, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.3091 TO 3096/MUM/2017 (A.Ys: 2008-09 TO 2013-14) Office of the ACIT 24(3) v. Shri Ramesh Ramswarupdas Jindal R.No.413, 4th floor, B/2/601, Greenland CHS Ltd, Piramal Chambers, J.B. Nagar, Andheri (E) Lalbaug, Parel, Mumbai – 400 059 Mumbai – 400 012 PAN No: AADPJ 1124 F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Haridas Bhatt Department by : Shri Saurabh Kumar Rai Date of Hearing : 02.11.2017 Date of Pronouncement : 15.11.2017 O R D E R PER BENC…

ACIT 24(3), Mumbai vs. Ramesh Ramswarupdas Jindal, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 3094/MUM/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Nov 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri N.K. Pradhan, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Haridas BhattFor Respondent: Shri Saurabh Kumar Rai
Section 132(4)Section 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “I”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI C.N. PRASAD, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI N.K. PRADHAN, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.3091 TO 3096/MUM/2017 (A.Ys: 2008-09 TO 2013-14) Office of the ACIT 24(3) v. Shri Ramesh Ramswarupdas Jindal R.No.413, 4th floor, B/2/601, Greenland CHS Ltd, Piramal Chambers, J.B. Nagar, Andheri (E) Lalbaug, Parel, Mumbai – 400 059 Mumbai – 400 012 PAN No: AADPJ 1124 F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Haridas Bhatt Department by : Shri Saurabh Kumar Rai Date of Hearing : 02.11.2017 Date of Pronouncement : 15.11.2017 O R D E R PER BENC…

ACIT 24(3), Mumbai vs. Ramesh Ramswarupdas Jindal, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 3093/MUM/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Nov 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri N.K. Pradhan, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Haridas BhattFor Respondent: Shri Saurabh Kumar Rai
Section 132(4)Section 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “I”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI C.N. PRASAD, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI N.K. PRADHAN, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.3091 TO 3096/MUM/2017 (A.Ys: 2008-09 TO 2013-14) Office of the ACIT 24(3) v. Shri Ramesh Ramswarupdas Jindal R.No.413, 4th floor, B/2/601, Greenland CHS Ltd, Piramal Chambers, J.B. Nagar, Andheri (E) Lalbaug, Parel, Mumbai – 400 059 Mumbai – 400 012 PAN No: AADPJ 1124 F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Haridas Bhatt Department by : Shri Saurabh Kumar Rai Date of Hearing : 02.11.2017 Date of Pronouncement : 15.11.2017 O R D E R PER BENC…

ACIT 24(3), Mumbai vs. Ramesh Ramswarupdas Jindal, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 3092/MUM/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Nov 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri N.K. Pradhan, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Haridas BhattFor Respondent: Shri Saurabh Kumar Rai
Section 132(4)Section 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “I”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI C.N. PRASAD, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI N.K. PRADHAN, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.3091 TO 3096/MUM/2017 (A.Ys: 2008-09 TO 2013-14) Office of the ACIT 24(3) v. Shri Ramesh Ramswarupdas Jindal R.No.413, 4th floor, B/2/601, Greenland CHS Ltd, Piramal Chambers, J.B. Nagar, Andheri (E) Lalbaug, Parel, Mumbai – 400 059 Mumbai – 400 012 PAN No: AADPJ 1124 F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Haridas Bhatt Department by : Shri Saurabh Kumar Rai Date of Hearing : 02.11.2017 Date of Pronouncement : 15.11.2017 O R D E R PER BENC…

ACIT 24(3), Mumbai vs. Ramesh Ramswarupdas Jindal, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 3091/MUM/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Nov 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri N.K. Pradhan, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Haridas BhattFor Respondent: Shri Saurabh Kumar Rai
Section 132(4)Section 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “I”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI C.N. PRASAD, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI N.K. PRADHAN, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.3091 TO 3096/MUM/2017 (A.Ys: 2008-09 TO 2013-14) Office of the ACIT 24(3) v. Shri Ramesh Ramswarupdas Jindal R.No.413, 4th floor, B/2/601, Greenland CHS Ltd, Piramal Chambers, J.B. Nagar, Andheri (E) Lalbaug, Parel, Mumbai – 400 059 Mumbai – 400 012 PAN No: AADPJ 1124 F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Haridas Bhatt Department by : Shri Saurabh Kumar Rai Date of Hearing : 02.11.2017 Date of Pronouncement : 15.11.2017 O R D E R PER BENC…

M/S. Nova Iron & Steel Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, Ltu, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee-company is

ITA 2159/DEL/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Oct 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: Shri Ashwanikumar, C.A. &For Respondent: Smt.Shafali Swaroop, CIT-DR &
Section 153CSection 234ASection 68

…t in the case of CIT vs. Orissa Corporation (P) Ltd., (1986) 159 ITR 78 (SC), decision of Gujarat High Court in the case of DCIT vs. Rohini Builders (2002) 256 ITR 360 (Guj.), decision of Guwahati High Court in the case of CIT vs. Nemi Chand Kothari (2003) 264 ITR 254 (Gau.) and decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Mod Creations Pvt. Ltd., 14 ITA.No.2159/Del./2014 M/s. Nova Iron & Steel Ltd., New Delhi. (2013) 354 ITR 282 (Del.). The Ld. CIT(A), however, dismissed the appeal of assessee-company. His findings in paras 2 to 4 of the order are reproduced as under : “Ground No.2: 2.1. I have c…

DCIT 12(1)(2), Mumbai vs. Bairagra Builders P. Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 4692/MUM/2015[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Sept 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri P K Bansal & Shri Pawan Singh

For Appellant: Shri Suman KumarFor Respondent: Shri J P Bairagra
Section 131Section 132Section 147Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES “B”, MUMBAI Before Shri P K Bansal, Vice President & Shri Pawan Singh, Judicial Member ITA Nos.4691 & 4692/Mum/2015 Assessment Years : 2007-08 & 2012-13 DCIT 12(1)(2) Bairagra Builders P Ltd., Mumbai 14 Gokul Residency, Vs. Thakur Village, Kandivali (W) Mumbai 400 101 PAN AAACB4848E (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri Suman Kumar Respondent By : Shri J P Bairagra Date of Hearing : 12.09.2017 Date of Pronouncement : 14.09.2017 O R D E R Per P K Bansal, Vice-President: These appeals have been filed by the Revenue against two separate orders of the…

DCIT 12(1)(2), Mumbai vs. Bairagra Builders P. Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 4691/MUM/2015[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Sept 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri P K Bansal & Shri Pawan Singh

For Appellant: Shri Suman KumarFor Respondent: Shri J P Bairagra
Section 131Section 132Section 147Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES “B”, MUMBAI Before Shri P K Bansal, Vice President & Shri Pawan Singh, Judicial Member ITA Nos.4691 & 4692/Mum/2015 Assessment Years : 2007-08 & 2012-13 DCIT 12(1)(2) Bairagra Builders P Ltd., Mumbai 14 Gokul Residency, Vs. Thakur Village, Kandivali (W) Mumbai 400 101 PAN AAACB4848E (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri Suman Kumar Respondent By : Shri J P Bairagra Date of Hearing : 12.09.2017 Date of Pronouncement : 14.09.2017 O R D E R Per P K Bansal, Vice-President: These appeals have been filed by the Revenue against two separate orders of the…

ITO, WD-5(3), Kolkata vs. M/S Elbee Securities Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, appeal of revenue is dismissed

ITA 456/KOL/2014[2008-2009]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata14 Jul 2017AY 2008-2009

Bench: "ी ऐ. ट". वक", "यायीक सद"य एवं/And "ी एम. बालगनेश, लेखा सद"य) [Before Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri M. Balaganesh, Am]

…regarding the unsecured loans and the same cannot be considered to be unexplained cash credit, This view is further supported by various decisions cited by the appellant, including those in the cases of Rohini Builders 256 ITR 360 (Guj.) and Nemichand Kothari 264 ITR 254 (Gau.). The addition made u/s 68 is accordingly deleted. As a logical consequence, the disallowance of Rs.6,66,827/- in respect of interest on the same is also deleted.” 3.2. We have heard rival submissions and perused the material available on record. And we fully agree with the factual finding recorded by the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. DR could not po…

DCIT 9(2)(2), Mumbai vs. Citygold Farming P.Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 4751/MUM/2015[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Jul 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: D.T. Garasia & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalassessment Year: 2012-13 Dy. Cit 9(2)(2), M/S. Citygold Farming P. Ltd., R.No.414, 4Th Floor, 317, 3Rd Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Raheja Chambers, Vs. M.K. Road, Free Dpress Marg, Mumbai - 400020 Nariman Point, Mumbai – 400 021 Pan: Aafca8865R (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Vishal Doshi, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Rajat Mittal, D.R
Section 133(6)

…and balance confirmation but Ld. CIT(A) has not called for the remand report or the Ld. CIT(A) has not verified these details. The Ld. CIT(A) has, simply relying upon the judgment of Hon’ble Guwahati High Court in the case of Nemi Chand Kothari vs. CIT (2014) 264 ITR 254, deleted the addition. Therefore, we reverse the finding of Ld. CIT(A) and restore this matter back to the file of AO and the AO is directed to decide the matter afresh, as per law. 3 M/s. Citygold Farming P. Ltd. 7. In the result, appeal of the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 14.07.2017. (Mano…

ITO 25(2)(2), Mumbai vs. Bela Suresh Agarwal, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 26/MUM/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jun 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri D.T. Garasiaassessment Year: 2007-08 The Ito, M/S. Bela Suresh Agarwal, Office Of The Ito 25(2)(2), Millenium Marbles Pvt. Ltd R.No.507, C-10, 5Th Floor, Service Road, Pratyaksha Kar Bhavan, Vs. Near Airport, Bandra Kurla Compled, W.E. Highway, Bandra (E), Vile Parle East, Mumbai - 400051 Mumbai – 57 Pan: Ackpa0372M (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee By : Ms. Dinkle Hariya, A.R. Revenue By : Shri T.A. Khan, D.R. Date Of Hearing : 12.06.2017 Date Of Pronouncement : 30.06.2017

For Appellant: Ms. Dinkle Hariya, A.RFor Respondent: Shri T.A. Khan, D.R
Section 132Section 148Section 68

…rs because under law the assessee can be asked to prove the source of the credits in its books of accounts but not the source of the source.” 9. Further, it is supported by the judgment of Hon’ble Gauhati High Court in the case of Namichand Kothari vs. CIT – 264 ITR 254 (Gau). During the course of hearing, the Ld. D.R. did not produce any evidence contrary to the finding of Ld. CIT(A). Accordingly, I confirm the order of the Ld. CIT(A). 10. In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court on 30.06.2017. (D.T. Garasia) JUDICIAL MEMBER Mumbai, Dated: 30.06.2017. * Kishore,…

ITO 25(3)(5), Mumbai vs. Vikram Muktilal Vora, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 842/MUM/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 May 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am Ito 25(3)(5), Vs. M/S. Vikram Muktilal Vora, Mumbai – 400 051 702/703, Kshem Kalyan Building, Sanyas Ahram, B.S.Road, Mumbai – 400 056 Pan/Gir No. Aaapv4747P Appellant) Respondent) ..

Section 131Section 144Section 148Section 68

…ess of the cash deposited in the bank accounts of those creditors because under law the assessee can be asked to prove the source of the credits in its books of accounts but not the source of the source. 6.6 Further, in the case of Namichand Kothari vs CIT - [264 ITR 254] [Gau], the Hon'ble High Court had held that: ,"A harmonious construction of section 1 06 of the Evidence Act and section 68 of the Income-tax Act will be that though apart from establishing the identity of the creditor, the assessment establish the genuineness of the transaction as well as the creditworthiness of his creditor, the burden of the…

M/S. Anila Industries Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3415/DEL/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Apr 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri N. K. Saini

For Appellant: Shri Sandeep Sapra, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 133ASection 142Section 144ASection 245(4)Section 251Section 292CSection 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘SMC’, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI N. K. SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 3415/Del/2014 : Asstt. Year : 2008-09 M/s. Anila Industries Limited, Vs DCIT (HQ), 308, Aruncahal Building, Central Circle III, 19, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi. New Delhi – 110 001. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AAECA0390A Assessee by : Shri Sandeep Sapra, Adv. Revenue by : Shri Rajesh Kumar, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 01.02.2017 Date of Pronouncement : 26.04.2017 ORDER This is an appeal by the assessee against the order dated 01.02.2017 of ld. CIT (A)-XXXIII, New Delhi. 2. Following grounds h…