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 367,368 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

ACIT, New Delhi vs. Filatex India Limited, Delhi

ITA 5000/DEL/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jun 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal

…ITA Nos.4635, 5000, 2060, 4999, 4648, 3988, 2061, 1455, 2062 & 1456/Del/2024 & C.O.Nos.11, 32, 33, 34/Del/2025 & 89, 90 & 91/Del/2024 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘B’, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos.4635, 5000, 2060, 4999, 4648, 3988, 2061, 1455, 2062 & 1456/Del/2024 & C.O.Nos.11, 32, 33, 34/Del/2025 & 89, 90 & 91/Del/2024 (Assessment Years 2013-14, 2015-16, 2016-17, 2017-18, 2019-20, 2020-2 & 2021-22) S1. No ITA/CO No(s) Asst. Year(s) Appeal(s) by Appellant vs. Respondent Appellant Respondent 1. 4635/Del/2024 2013-1…

Ambey Laboratories Limited, Delhi vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi

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

ITA 2334/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri S.Rifaur Rahmanambey Laboratories Limited, Vs. Acit, Circle 2(2), Ground Floor, Property No.555, Delhi. Tarla Mohalla Ghitorni, Delhi – 110 030. (Pan : Aaaca4317R) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Ms. Apoorva Bhardwaj, Ca Revenue By : Shri Ashish Tripathi, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 24.04.2025 Date Of Order : 27.06.2025 O R D E R Per S.Rifaur Rahman: 1. This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Ld. Cit (A)] Dated 31.01.2024 For Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are, Assessee Filed Its Return Of Income On 04.11.2017 Declaring Loss Of Rs.15,30,39,,439/-. The Case Was Selected For Scrutiny Under Cass & Notices Under Section 143(2) & 142(1) Of The Income-Tax

For Appellant: Ms. Apoorva Bhardwaj, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ashish Tripathi, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(2)Section 68

…ind out source of money of his Lender or genuineness of transactions, which took place between lender and sub-lenders and/or creditworthiness of sub-lenders for these aspects may not be within special knowledge of assessee. a. Nemi Chand Kothari vs CIT [2003] 264 ITR 254 (Gauhati High Court), b. CIT vs Shiv Dhooti Pearls & Investment Ltd. [2015] 64 taxmann.com 329 (Delhi High Court) [Please refer Page No. 62-67 of Case Law Compilation] c. Gaurav Triyugi Singh vs ITO [2020] 4231TR 531 (Bombay High Court) d. Mod. Creations Pvt. Ltd. v ITO (2013) 354 ITR 282 (Delhi High Court) 9. Therefore, the Appellant has duly es…

Shri Bharatkumar Iashwarbhai Bhatiya, Rajkot vs. The ITO, Ward-1 (1) (2), Rajkot

ITA 46/RJT/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot19 Jun 2025AY 2013-14

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT BEFORE DR. ARJUN LAL SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & DINESH MOHAN SINHA, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No. 134 & 135/RJT/2023 (निर्धारणवर्ष / Assessment Years: (2007-08 & 2008-09) Income Tax Officer, Ward- Shri Kherajmal Lekhrajbjai 1(2)(1), Aaykar Bhavan, 5th Vs. Thavrani, 4- Parsana Nagar, Shri Floor, Room No. 517, Race Vaheguru Grupa, Near Refugee Course Ring Road, Rajkot-360 Colony, Rajkot-360 001 001 स्थायी लेखा सं./जी आइ आर सं./PAN/GIR No.: ADRPT 5807 E (Appellant) (Respondent) CO. No. 01&02/RJT/2023 (a/o ITA No.134 & 135/Rjt/2023) (निर्धारण वर्ष/Ass…

Shri Bharatkumar Iashwarbhai Bhatiya, Rajkot vs. The ACIT, Central Cirl-1, Rajkot

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue, in ITA No

ITA 44/RJT/2023[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot19 Jun 2025AY 2006-07

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 134 & 135/Rjt/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: (2007-08 & 2008-09) Income Tax Officer, Ward- Shri Kherajmal Lekhrajbjai 5Th 1(2)(1), Aaykar Bhavan, Thavrani, 4- Parsana Nagar, Shri Vs. Floor, Room No. 517, Race Vaheguru Grupa, Near Refugee Course Ring Road, Rajkot-360 Colony, Rajkot-360 001 001 "थायी लेखा सं./जी आइ आर सं./Pan/Gir No.: Adrpt 5807 E (Appellant) (Respondent)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT BEFORE DR. ARJUN LAL SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & DINESH MOHAN SINHA, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No. 134 & 135/RJT/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: (2007-08 & 2008-09) Income Tax Officer, Ward- Shri Kherajmal Lekhrajbjai 5th 1(2)(1), Aaykar Bhavan, Thavrani, 4- Parsana Nagar, Shri Vs. Floor, Room No. 517, Race Vaheguru Grupa, Near Refugee Course Ring Road, Rajkot-360 Colony, Rajkot-360 001 001 "थायी लेखा सं./जी आइ आर सं./PAN/GIR No.: ADRPT 5807 E (Appellant) (Respondent) CO. No. 01&02/RJT/2023 (a/o ITA No.134 & 135/Rjt/2023) (िनधा"रण वष"/As…

The ITO Ward-1 (2) (1), Rajkot vs. Shri Khrajmal Lekhrajbhai Thavrani, Rajkot

ITA 134/RJT/2023[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot19 Jun 2025AY 2007-08

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT BEFORE DR. ARJUN LAL SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & DINESH MOHAN SINHA, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No. 134 & 135/RJT/2023 (निर्धारणवर्ष / Assessment Years: (2007-08 & 2008-09) Income Tax Officer, Ward- Shri Kherajmal Lekhrajbjai 1(2)(1), Aaykar Bhavan, 5th Vs. Thavrani, 4- Parsana Nagar, Shri Floor, Room No. 517, Race Vaheguru Grupa, Near Refugee Course Ring Road, Rajkot-360 Colony, Rajkot-360 001 001 स्थायी लेखा सं./जी आइ आर सं./PAN/GIR No.: ADRPT 5807 E (Appellant) (Respondent) CO. No. 01&02/RJT/2023 (a/o ITA No.134 & 135/Rjt/2023) (निर्धारण वर्ष/Ass…

Bharatkumar Ishwarbhai Bhatiya, Rajkot vs. Asstt. Commr. of Income Tax, Cen. Cir.-1, Rajkot

ITA 4/RJT/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot19 Jun 2025AY 2013-14

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT BEFORE DR. ARJUN LAL SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & DINESH MOHAN SINHA, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No. 134 & 135/RJT/2023 (निर्धारणवर्ष / Assessment Years: (2007-08 & 2008-09) Income Tax Officer, Ward- Shri Kherajmal Lekhrajbjai 1(2)(1), Aaykar Bhavan, 5th Thavrani, 4- Parsana Nagar, Shri Vs. Floor, Room No. 517, Race Vaheguru Grupa, Near Refugee Course Ring Road, Rajkot-360 Colony, Rajkot-360 001 001 स्थायी लेखा सं./जी आइ आर सं./PAN/GIR No.: ADRPT 5807 E (Appellant) (Respondent) CO. No. 01&02/RJT/2023 (a/o ITA No.134 & 135/Rjt/2023) (निर्धारण वर्ष/Ass…

Srs Educational Society, Faridabad vs. ITO(E), Faridabad

ITA 941/DEL/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Jun 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: SHRI YOGESH KUMAR US (Judicial Member), SHRI MANISH AGARWAL (Accountant Member)

Section 12ASection 131Section 143(3)Section 250Section 68

…R 571; [iii] Aravali Trading Co. vs ITO 220 CTR 622 (Raj.); [iv] CIT vs Metachem Industries 245 ITR 160 (MP); [v] Tolaram Daga vs CIT 59 ITR 632 (Assam); [vi] CIT vs Shri Ram Narain Goel 224 ITR 180 (Pun. & Har.); and [vii] Nemi Chand Kothari vs CIT & another 264 ITR 254 (Gauhati). 4. On the other hand, Ld. Sr.DR for the Revenue vehemently supported the orders of the lower authorities and submits that the assessee has failed to discharge the burden casted upon it of proving the genuineness and creditworthiness of the transactions therefore, the addition has rightly been made and upheld by the lower authorities an…

Mahendra Singh Naruka, Jaipur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-3, Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assesseein ITA no

ITA 205/JPR/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur04 Jun 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM आयकरअपीलसं. / ITA. No. 204 & 205/JPR/2025 निर्धारणवर्ष / AssessmentYears : 2015-16 & 2016-17 Shri Mahendra Singh Naruka B-536, J.D.A. Colony Malivya Nagar, Jaipur 302 017 अपीलार्थी / Appellant स्थायीलेखा सं. / जीआईआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: ABUPN 1656 J बनाम Vs. The ACIT Central Circle-3 Jaipur प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent निधर्धारिती की ओरसे / Assesseeby : Shri S.R. Sharma, Advocate राजस्व की ओरसे /Revenue by : Mrs. Anita Rinesh

For Appellant: Shri S.R. Sharma, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT -DR a
Section 115BSection 143(3)Section 153ASection 68

…as held that mere mention of file number of creditor will not suffice and each entry has to be explained separately by the assesseeCIT v. R.S. Rathaore [1995] 212 ITR 390/86 Taxman 20 (Raj.) The Hon'ble Guwahati High Court in Nemi Chandra Kothari v CIT [2003] 264 ITR 254/[2004] 136 Taxman 213 held that transaction by cheques may not be always sacrosanct….’’ (Emphasis Supplied) Based on the material available on file, I do not find any infirmity in the action of the Id. AO Accordingly, these Grounds of Appeal are dismissed 7. Ground of Appeal No. 4 is as under: Ground No. 4. That the levy of interest under section…

Mahendra Singh Naruka, Jaipur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-3, Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assesseein ITA no

ITA 204/JPR/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur04 Jun 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM आयकरअपीलसं. / ITA. No. 204 & 205/JPR/2025 निर्धारणवर्ष / AssessmentYears : 2015-16 & 2016-17 Shri Mahendra Singh Naruka B-536, J.D.A. Colony Malivya Nagar, Jaipur 302 017 अपीलार्थी / Appellant बनाम Vs. The ACIT Central Circle-3 Jaipur प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent स्थायीलेखा सं. / जीआईआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: ABUPN 1656 J निधर्धारिती की ओरसे / Assesseeby : Shri S.R. Sharma, Advocate राजस्व की ओरसे /Revenue by : Mrs. Anita Rinesh

For Appellant: Shri S.R. Sharma, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT -DR a
Section 115BSection 143(3)Section 153ASection 68

…as held that mere mention of file number of creditor will not suffice and each entry has to be explained separately by the assesseeCIT v. R.S. Rathaore [1995] 212 ITR 390/86 Taxman 20 (Raj.) The Hon'ble Guwahati High Court in Nemi Chandra Kothari v CIT [2003] 264 ITR 254/[2004] 136 Taxman 213 held that transaction by cheques may not be always sacrosanct….’’ (Emphasis Supplied) Based on the material available on file, I do not find any infirmity in the action of the Id. AO Accordingly, these Grounds of Appeal are dismissed 7. Ground of Appeal No. 4 is as under: Ground No. 4. That the levy of interest under section…

Ashok Bricks Industries Private Limited, Belpahar R S vs. Asst Commissioner of Income Tax, Rourkela Circle

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

ITA 182/CTK/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack26 May 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 250Section 56(2)(viib)

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण कटक पीठ, कोलकाता में IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CUTTACK BENCH AT KOLKATA [वर्चुअल कोटु] [Virtual Court] श्री संजय शमाु, न्याधयक सदस्य एवं श्री राकेश धमश्रा, लेखा सदस्य के समक्ष Before SHRI SONJOY SARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI RAKESH MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No.: 182/CTK/2025 Assessment Year: 2018-19 Ashok Bricks Industries Private Asst. Commissioner of Limited Vs. Income Tax (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN: AADCA6930F Appearances: Assessee represented by : None (Adjournment appln. filed). Department represented by : S.C. Mohanty, Sr. DR. Date of concluding the hearing : May 14th,…

Kailash Chand Maheshwari, Jaipur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Jaipur

ITA 1465/JPR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur20 May 2025AY 2017-18
For Appellant: Shri S. L. Poddar, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Ojha, CIT-DR
Section 127Section 132Section 133ASection 144Section 153ASection 57Section 68Section 69C

…held that mere mention of file number of creditor will not suffice and each entry has to be explained separately by the assesseeCIT v. R.S. Rathaore [1995] 212 ITR 390/86 Taxman 20 (Raj.). The Hon'ble Guwahati High Court in Nemi Chandra Kothari v. CIT [2003] 264 ITR 254/[2004] 136 Taxman 213 held that transaction by cheques may not be always sacrosanct……….” (Emphasis Supplied) (xvi) It was held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sumati Dayal v. Commissioner of Income-tax [1995] 80 Taxman 89 (SC)/ [1995] 214 ITR 801 (SC)/[1995] 125 CTR 124 (SC)[28-03-1995] as under.- 13. This, in our opinion, is a superf…

Kailash Chand Maheshwari, Jaipur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Centralcircle-2, Jaipur

ITA 1464/JPR/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur20 May 2025AY 2016-17
For Appellant: Shri S. L. Poddar, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Ojha, CIT-DR
Section 127Section 132Section 133ASection 144Section 153ASection 57Section 68Section 69C

…held that mere mention of file number of creditor will not suffice and each entry has to be explained separately by the assesseeCIT v. R.S. Rathaore [1995] 212 ITR 390/86 Taxman 20 (Raj.). The Hon'ble Guwahati High Court in Nemi Chandra Kothari v. CIT [2003] 264 ITR 254/[2004] 136 Taxman 213 held that transaction by cheques may not be always sacrosanct……….” (Emphasis Supplied) (xvi) It was held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sumati Dayal v. Commissioner of Income-tax [1995] 80 Taxman 89 (SC)/ [1995] 214 ITR 801 (SC)/[1995] 125 CTR 124 (SC)[28-03-1995] as under.- 13. This, in our opinion, is a superf…

Kailash Chand Maheshwari, Jaipur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Jaipur

ITA 1463/JPR/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur20 May 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri S. L. Poddar, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Ojha, CIT-DR
Section 127Section 132Section 133ASection 144Section 153ASection 57Section 68Section 69C

…held that mere mention of file number of creditor will not suffice and each entry has to be explained separately by the assesseeCIT v. R.S. Rathaore [1995] 212 ITR 390/86 Taxman 20 (Raj.). The Hon'ble Guwahati High Court in Nemi Chandra Kothari v. CIT [2003] 264 ITR 254/[2004] 136 Taxman 213 held that transaction by cheques may not be always sacrosanct……….” (Emphasis Supplied) (xvi) It was held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sumati Dayal v. Commissioner of Income-tax [1995] 80 Taxman 89 (SC)/ [1995] 214 ITR 801 (SC)/[1995] 125 CTR 124 (SC)[28-03-1995] as under.- 13. This, in our opinion, is a sup…

Gopal Extrusions Pvt Ltd, Jalgaon vs. Income-Tax Officer, Ward - 1(2), Jalgaon

ITA 1633/PUN/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Apr 2025AY 2008-09

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita. No.1633/Pun/2017 Assessment Year : 2008-09

For Appellant: Smt. Deepa KhareFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath Murkunde
Section 143(3)

…d the same in their individual hands but the amount of share money could not be regarded as undisclosed income of the company u/s 68.Lovely Exports decision [216 CTR 295(SC). [Also CIT vs. Orissa Corpn. Pvt. Ltd. (159 ITR 78 (SC)). Nemi Chand Kothari vs. CIT [264 ITR 254 (Gau) and Pr.CIT v.Paradise Inland Shipping (P.) Ltd. [2017] 400 ITR 439 (Bombay)). 9. The hon'ble Delhi High Court in its judgment in the case of MOD Creations (P) Ltd. v. ITO (354 ITR 282 (Del)], has addressed this important question very aptly and has held that, "A mere bald assertion by the A.O. that the credits were a circular route adopte…

ACIT, Circle-18(2), New Delhi vs. Niit Technologies Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 3559/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Apr 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 148Section 37Section 41Section 68Section 69Section 69ASection 69C

…ITA No.3558/Del/2025 & Others INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI “G” BENCH: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Sl. ITA No(s) Asst. Appeal(s) by No Year(s) Appellant vs. Respondent Appellant Respondent 1. 3558/Del/2025 2019-20 DCIT M/s. Allure Developers Pvt. Ltd., Flat No.14, Ground Floor, Central Circle –I Noida DDA MIG, Sura Apartment, Pul Pehladpur, New Delhi- 110044. PAN-AALCA3631R 2. 3559/Del/2025 2020-21 -do- -do- 3. 4108/Del/2025 2021-22 -do- -do- M/s. Ajay Realcon Pvt. Ltd., 4. 3560/Del/2025 2020-21 -do- Plot No.01-B, 7th Floor, Sector-126,…

Kath Brothers, Jaipur vs. ACIT, Central Circle-3, Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 77/JPR/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur28 Apr 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Shrawan Kumar Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Anoop Singh, Addl. CIT
Section 115BSection 133ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 234ASection 69

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”B” JAIPUR Mk0 ,l- lhrky{eh] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh jkBksM deys'k t;UrHkkbZ] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 77/JP/2025 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year : 2019-20 cuke Kath Brothers ACIT, Vs. Dausa Road, VPO-Toonga Central Circle-03, Tehsil-Bassi, Jaipur Jaipur LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AANFK3974G vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Sh. Shrawan Kumar Gupta, Adv. jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by…

Ashok Gupta HUF, Alwar vs. DCIT, Central Circle, Alwar

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is disposed off for

ITA 52/JPR/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur17 Apr 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member), SHRI NARINDER KUMAR (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Sh. P. C. Parwal, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Gautam Singh Choudhary, JCIT
Section 127Section 132Section 139Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 250Section 56(2)(ix)

…5-2007] has held as under: "May be the money came by way of bank cheques and paid through the process of banking transaction but that itself is of no consequence." Hon'ble Guwahati High Court in Nemi Chand Kothari v. CIT [2004] 136 Taxman 213 (Gauhati)/[2003] 264 ITR 254 (Gauhati)/[2003] 185 CTR 635 (Gauhati) [02- 09-2003] held that “……….even we do not hold that a transaction, which takes place by way of cheque, is invariably sacrosanct." In the case of CIT v. Precision Finance (P.) Ltd. [1995] 82 Taxman 31 (Calcutta)/[1994] 208 ITR 465 (Calcutta)/[1994] 121 CTR 20 (Calcutta) [14-06- 1993] (Hon'ble Calcutta High…

Prakash Chand Varindani, Jaipur vs. ACIT Certal Cirlce-3, Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1146/JPR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur09 Apr 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Him. 2

For Appellant: Sh. Abhishek Soni, CAFor Respondent: Mrs. Swapnil Parihar, JCIT-DR
Section 144Section 40A(3)Section 68

…as held that mere mention of file number of creditor will not suffice and each entry has to be explained separately by the assesseeCIT v. RS. Rathacre [1995] 212 ITR 390/86 Laxman 20 (Raj). The Hon'ble Guwahati High Court in Nemi Chandra Kothari v. CIT [2003] 264 ITR 254/[2004] 136 Taxman 213 held that transaction by chesques may not be always sacrosanct.............." (Emphasis Supplied) The contention of the appellant that since penalty for non-maintenance of proper books of account was initiated by the Assessing Officer under section 271A of the Act, addition for unexplained cash deposits in bank account canno…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-4(2), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan Poorva vs. Alom Poly Extrusions Limited, Kolkata

In the result, both the appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed

ITA 1425/KOL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata25 Mar 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar&Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey]

Section 132Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 234BSection 68

…creditors and his conclusion was only based on statements recorded from certain entry operators of Kolkata during the aforesaid search and seizure operation by the Investigation wing. The similar position of law was observed in the case of Nemi Chand Kothari 136 Taxmann 213 (HC), where the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court held the following: “A person can be required to prove only such facts which are in his knowledge. Once it is found that an assessee has actually taken money from depositor/lender who has been fully identified, the assessee/borrower cannot be called upon to explain, much less prove the affairs…

DCIT, Central Circle-4(2), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan Poorva vs. Ms. Alom Poly Extrusions Limited, Pretoria Street

In the result, both the appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed

ITA 1007/KOL/2024[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata25 Mar 2025AY 2016-2017

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar&Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey]

Section 132Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 234BSection 68

…creditors and his conclusion was only based on statements recorded from certain entry operators of Kolkata during the aforesaid search and seizure operation by the Investigation wing. The similar position of law was observed in the case of Nemi Chand Kothari 136 Taxmann 213 (HC), where the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court held the following: “A person can be required to prove only such facts which are in his knowledge. Once it is found that an assessee has actually taken money from depositor/lender who has been fully identified, the assessee/borrower cannot be called upon to explain, much less prove the affairs…