Orient Trading Co. Ltd. v. CIT

49 ITR 723High Court1963#844 most cited

What is Orient Trading Co. Ltd. v. CIT authority for?

When a cash credit is found, the assessee discharges the initial burden by proving the identity of the creditor and the genuineness of the transaction, shifting the burden to the Revenue. The assessee is not required to prove the source of the creditor's funds (source of source).

123

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Orient Trading Co. Ltd. v. CIT · Section 68 · cash credits · onus of proof · identity of creditor · genuineness of transaction · source of source · shifting burden · creditworthiness · addition under section 68

Sections most often in play

Section 68Section 143(3)Section 131Section 147Section 148Section 132Section 115BBESection 133(6)

Issues it is cited on

summons under section 131section 131(1)source of sourcepermanent account numberonus of proofcreditworthiness of the creditorpaper companyaddition under section 68addition u/s 68genuineness of the transactionshare application moneysection 131

Judgments citing Orient Trading Co. Ltd. v. CIT

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, CC-1, Ludhiana vs. Shree Ganesh Edibles Pvt. Ltd., Khanna

The appeal stand dismissed

ITA 308/CHANDI/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh24 Feb 2026AY 2022-23

Bench: SHRI RAJPAL YADAV (Vice President), SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL (Accountant Member)

For Respondent: Sh. Abhishek Pal Garg (CIT) – Ld. DR
Section 115JSection 132Section 147Section 148Section 68

…neither direct nor circumstantial evidence on record to show that the said loan amount actually belonged to or were owned by the appellant. (On identity) AY: 2019-20 & 2022-23 The Hon'ble High Court of Mumbai in the case of Orient Trading Company Ltd. vs. CIT 49 ITR 723 held as under: “when the entry stands in the name of the third party and the assessee establishes the identity of the creditor and produces evidence showing that the entry is not fictitious, initial burden lying on the assessee stands discharged; the burden shifts on to the Revenue to show that the entry represented assessee’s suppressed income.”…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, CC-1, Ludhiana vs. Shree Ganesh Edibles Pvt. Ltd., Khanna

The appeal stand dismissed

ITA 307/CHANDI/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh24 Feb 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: SHRI RAJPAL YADAV (Vice President), SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL (Accountant Member)

For Respondent: Sh. Abhishek Pal Garg (CIT) – Ld. DR
Section 115JSection 132Section 147Section 148Section 68

…neither direct nor circumstantial evidence on record to show that the said loan amount actually belonged to or were owned by the appellant. (On identity) AY: 2019-20 & 2022-23 The Hon'ble High Court of Mumbai in the case of Orient Trading Company Ltd. vs. CIT 49 ITR 723 held as under: “when the entry stands in the name of the third party and the assessee establishes the identity of the creditor and produces evidence showing that the entry is not fictitious, initial burden lying on the assessee stands discharged; the burden shifts on to the Revenue to show that the entry represented assessee’s suppressed income.”…

Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-4 Delhi vs. Krbl Infrastructure Ltd

ITA/494/2024HC Delhi13 Nov 2025

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR

For Appellant: Mr. Abhishek Maratha, SSC, Mr. ApoorvFor Respondent: Mr. Sachit Jolly, Senior Advocate with Ms
Section 132Section 143Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 260A

…bank accounts of those creditors because under law the assessee can be asked to prove the source of the credits in its books of account but not the source of the source as held by the Bombay High Court in the case of Orient Trading Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1963] 49 ITR 723. 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. xxxx” (emphasis supplied) 40. Even in the latest decision…

Dy.Commissioner of Income Tax, CC-2, Kanpur vs. Shri.Mohammad Asfand Akhtar, Kanpur

In the result, the appeal of Revenue in ITA

ITA 144/LKW/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow26 Sept 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Anadee Nath Misshraassessment Year: 2018-19 Dcit, Cc-2 V. Shri Mohammad Asfand Laxmi Niwas, 10/503, Akhtar Allenganj, Kanpur-208001. Plot No.02, Block-B, Scheme-39, Ram Rai Ki Sarai, Jajmau, Kanpur Nagar-208010. Tan/Pan: Aempa0823R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2018-19 Shri Mohammad Asfand Akhtar V. Dcit, Central Circle-Ii Plot No.02, Block-B, Scheme-39, 10/503, Allenganj, Kanpur- Ram Rai Ki Sarai, Jajmau, 208001. Kanpur Nagar-208010. Tan/Pan: Aempa0823R (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Ashish Jaiswal, Advocate Respondent By: Shri R. K. Agarwal, Cit(Dr) O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Ashish Jaiswal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri R. K. Agarwal, CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(va)Section 37Section 41Section 41(1)Section 68Section 69C

…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 account but not the source of the source as held by the Bombay High Court in the case of Orient Trading Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1963] 49 ITR 723. 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. Merely because summons issued to some of the creditors could not be s…

Mohd. Asfand Akhtar, Kanpur vs. Deputi Commissioner of Income Tax CC-2, Kanpur

In the result, the appeal of Revenue in ITA

ITA 139/LKW/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow26 Sept 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Anadee Nath Misshraassessment Year: 2018-19 Dcit, Cc-2 V. Shri Mohammad Asfand Laxmi Niwas, 10/503, Akhtar Allenganj, Kanpur-208001. Plot No.02, Block-B, Scheme-39, Ram Rai Ki Sarai, Jajmau, Kanpur Nagar-208010. Tan/Pan: Aempa0823R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2018-19 Shri Mohammad Asfand Akhtar V. Dcit, Central Circle-Ii Plot No.02, Block-B, Scheme-39, 10/503, Allenganj, Kanpur- Ram Rai Ki Sarai, Jajmau, 208001. Kanpur Nagar-208010. Tan/Pan: Aempa0823R (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Ashish Jaiswal, Advocate Respondent By: Shri R. K. Agarwal, Cit(Dr) O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Ashish Jaiswal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri R. K. Agarwal, CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(va)Section 37Section 41Section 41(1)Section 68Section 69C

…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 account but not the source of the source as held by the Bombay High Court in the case of Orient Trading Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1963] 49 ITR 723. 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. Merely because summons issued to some of the creditors could not be s…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax-Circle 4(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Disha Dynamic Buildwell Private Limited, Mumbai

In the result, grounds of appeal raised by revenue are dismissed

ITA 3805/MUM/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Sept 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Prabhash Shankar(Physical Hearing) Acit, Circle – 4(2)(1), Mumbai Disha Dynamic Buildwell Private Limited Room No. 640, 6Th Floor, Vs 101, Janet Castle, Marve Road, Opp. Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Joseph High School, Orlem Malad West, New Marine Lines, Mumbai – 400064. Mumbai – 400020.] [Pan: Aadcd9697E] Appellant / Revenue Respondent / Revenue

Section 133(6)Section 254(1)Section 68

…sessee and lenders along with statement of repayment of loan. The assessee specifically relied on the decision of Gujarat High Court in DCIT vs Rohini Builders (2002) 256 ITR 360, decision of jurisdictional High Court in Orient Trading Co. Ltd. Vs CIT (1963) 49 ITR 723 (Bom) (HC) and decisions of various benches of Tribunal. 4. The ld. CIT(A) on considering the submissions of assessee noted that loan, which is otherwise a capital receipt can only be added by invoking deeming 3 Disha Dynamic Buildwell Private Limited provision under section 68. Section 68 can be invoked where there is a credit of amount in…

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Noida vs. M/S Rudra Buildwell Homes Pvt. Ltd, Delhi

ITA 602/DEL/2025[2016]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Aug 2025

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwalassessment Year: 2016-17 Vs. M/S. Rudra Buildwell Homes Dcit, Central Circle-I, Noida Pvt. Ltd., 53, Okhla Phase, Delhi Pan: Aafcr6959P (Appellant) (Respondent) With C.O. No.106/Del/2025 [Arising Out Of Ita No.602/Del/2025] Assessment Year: 2016-17 M/S. Rudra Buildwell Vs. Dcit, Central Circle-I, Homes Pvt. Ltd., Noida A-66, Sector-63, Noida Pan: Aafcr6959P (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Sh. Rohit Kapoor, Adv. Sh. Veersen Agarwal, Itp Department By Sh. Rajesh Chandra, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 12.08.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 29.08.2025 Order Per Satbeer Singh Godara, Jm This Revenue’S Appeal Ita No.602/Del/2025 & Assessee’S Cross Objection C.O. No. 106/Del/2025 For Assessment Year 2016-

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 148ASection 151Section 151(1)Section 151(2)

…ifying the credit as acceptable. There are plethora of judgments which clarify the extent to which the assessee is supposed to justify the above three criterias. (On identity) The Hon'ble High Court of Mumbai in the case of Orient Trading Company Ltd. vs. CIT 49 ITR 723 held as under: 19 | P a g e ITA No.602/Del/2025 & C.O. No. 106/Del/2025 "When the entry stands in the name of the third party and the assessee establishes the identity of the creditor and produces evidence showing that the entry is not fictitious, initial burden lying on the assessee stands discharged; the burden shifts on to the Revenue to sho…

Mohammed Saleem Abdulkader Kajalwala, Ahmedabad vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(1)(3), Vadodara

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

ITA 536/AHD/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad11 Apr 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member), Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar (Accountant Member)

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)

…n 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 account but not the source of the source as held by the Bombay High Court in the case of Orient Trading Co. Lad v. CIT [1963] 49 ITR 723. 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. Merely because summons issued to some of the creditors could not be s…

Shri Sanjay Dhanraj Jain, Nagpur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(3), Nagpur

ITA 59/NAG/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur25 Feb 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh LoyaFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke
Section 132Section 133ASection 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 234A

…. Orchid Industries (P.) Ltd.[2017] 397 ITR 136 (Bom.) and CIT v/s Gagandeep Infrastructure (P.) Ltd. [2017] 80 taxmann.com 272/247 Taxman 245/394 ITR 680 (Bom.). The Hon'ble Bombay High Court decision in the case of Orient trading Co pvt. Ltd v/s CIT, [1963] 49 ITR 723 (Bom.) has held that as under:- "When, however, in a case where the entry stands in the name of the third party, the assessee satisfies the ITO as to the identity of the third party and also supplies such other evidence which will show, prima facie, that the entry is not fictitious, the initial burden which lies on him can be said to have been dis…

Shri Sanjay Dhanraj Jain, Nagpur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(3), Nagpur

ITA 58/NAG/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur25 Feb 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh LoyaFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke
Section 132Section 133ASection 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 234A

…. Orchid Industries (P.) Ltd.[2017] 397 ITR 136 (Bom.) and CIT v/s Gagandeep Infrastructure (P.) Ltd. [2017] 80 taxmann.com 272/247 Taxman 245/394 ITR 680 (Bom.). The Hon'ble Bombay High Court decision in the case of Orient trading Co pvt. Ltd v/s CIT, [1963] 49 ITR 723 (Bom.) has held that as under:- "When, however, in a case where the entry stands in the name of the third party, the assessee satisfies the ITO as to the identity of the third party and also supplies such other evidence which will show, prima facie, that the entry is not fictitious, the initial burden which lies on him can be said to have been dis…

Shri Sanjay Dhanraj Jain, Nagpur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(3), Nagpur

ITA 57/NAG/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur25 Feb 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh LoyaFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke
Section 132Section 133ASection 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 234A

…. Orchid Industries (P.) Ltd.[2017] 397 ITR 136 (Bom.) and CIT v/s Gagandeep Infrastructure (P.) Ltd. [2017] 80 taxmann.com 272/247 Taxman 245/394 ITR 680 (Bom.). The Hon'ble Bombay High Court decision in the case of Orient trading Co pvt. Ltd v/s CIT, [1963] 49 ITR 723 (Bom.) has held that as under:- "When, however, in a case where the entry stands in the name of the third party, the assessee satisfies the ITO as to the identity of the third party and also supplies such other evidence which will show, prima facie, that the entry is not fictitious, the initial burden which lies on him can be said to have been dis…

Shri Sanjay Dhanraj Jain, Nagpur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(3), Nagpur

ITA 56/NAG/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur25 Feb 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh LoyaFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke
Section 132Section 133ASection 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 234A

…. Orchid Industries (P.) Ltd.[2017] 397 ITR 136 (Bom.) and CIT v/s Gagandeep Infrastructure (P.) Ltd. [2017] 80 taxmann.com 272/247 Taxman 245/394 ITR 680 (Bom.). The Hon'ble Bombay High Court decision in the case of Orient trading Co pvt. Ltd v/s CIT, [1963] 49 ITR 723 (Bom.) has held that as under:- "When, however, in a case where the entry stands in the name of the third party, the assessee satisfies the ITO as to the identity of the third party and also supplies such other evidence which will show, prima facie, that the entry is not fictitious, the initial burden which lies on him can be said to have been dis…

Shri Sanjay Dhanraj Jain, Nagpur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(3), Nagpur

ITA 55/NAG/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur25 Feb 2025AY 2012-13
Section 132Section 133ASection 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 234A

…. Orchid Industries (P.) Ltd.[2017] 397 ITR 136 (Bom.) and CIT v/s Gagandeep Infrastructure (P.) Ltd. [2017] 80 taxmann.com 272/247 Taxman 245/394 ITR 680 (Bom.). The Hon'ble Bombay High Court decision in the case of Orient trading Co pvt. Ltd v/s CIT, [1963] 49 ITR 723 (Bom.) has held that as under:- "When, however, in a case where the entry stands in the name of the third party, the assessee satisfies the ITO as to the identity of the third party and also supplies such other evidence which will show, prima facie, that the entry is not fictitious, the initial burden which lies on him can be said to have been dis…

Shri Sanjay Dhanraj Jain, Nagpur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(3), Nagpur

ITA 54/NAG/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur25 Feb 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh LoyaFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke
Section 132Section 133ASection 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 234A

…. Orchid Industries (P.) Ltd.[2017] 397 ITR 136 (Bom.) and CIT v/s Gagandeep Infrastructure (P.) Ltd. [2017] 80 taxmann.com 272/247 Taxman 245/394 ITR 680 (Bom.). The Hon'ble Bombay High Court decision in the case of Orient trading Co pvt. Ltd v/s CIT, [1963] 49 ITR 723 (Bom.) has held that as under:- "When, however, in a case where the entry stands in the name of the third party, the assessee satisfies the ITO as to the identity of the third party and also supplies such other evidence which will show, prima facie, that the entry is not fictitious, the initial burden which lies on him can be said to have been dis…

Shri Sanjay Dhanraj Jain, Nagpur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(3), Nagpur

ITA 53/NAG/2022[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur25 Feb 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh LoyaFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke
Section 132Section 133ASection 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 234A

…. Orchid Industries (P.) Ltd.[2017] 397 ITR 136 (Bom.) and CIT v/s Gagandeep Infrastructure (P.) Ltd. [2017] 80 taxmann.com 272/247 Taxman 245/394 ITR 680 (Bom.). The Hon'ble Bombay High Court decision in the case of Orient trading Co pvt. Ltd v/s CIT, [1963] 49 ITR 723 (Bom.) has held that as under:- "When, however, in a case where the entry stands in the name of the third party, the assessee satisfies the ITO as to the identity of the third party and 37 Shri Sanjay Dhanraj Jain ITA no.53, to 59/Nag./2024 also supplies such other evidence which will show, prima facie, that the entry is not fictitious, the initia…

Kalpana Mishra, Bhubaneswar vs. ITO, Ward 5(4), Bhubaneswar

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

ITA 491/CTK/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack28 Jan 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Manish Agarwalआयकर अपील संसंसंसं/Ita No.491/Ctk/2024 (िनधा"रण िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Year : 2016-2017) वष" Kalpana Mishra, Vs Ito Ward-5(4), Bhubaneswar Plot No.B-87/A, Chandaka Industrial Estate, Patia, Bhubaneswar-751024 Pan No. :Alfpm 2864 E (अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ" /Appellant) अपीलाथ" (""यथ" ""यथ" ""यथ" / Respondent) ""यथ" .. िनधा"रती िनधा"रती क" िनधा"रती िनधा"रती क" क" ओर क" ओर ओर सेसेसेसे /Assessee By ओर : Shri B.R.Pattnaik, Ca राज"व राज"व क" राज"व राज"व क" क" ओर क" ओर ओर सेसेसेसे /Revenue By ओर : Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 28/01/2025 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 28/01/2025 आदेश आदेश / O R D E R आदेश आदेश Per Bench : This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 07.03.2024, Passed By The Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi In Din & Order No.Itba/Nfac/S/250/2023- 24/1062168195(1) For The Assessment Year 2016-2017, On The Following Grounds :- 1. Hon'Ble Cit(Appeals), Nfac Has Erred In Law & On Facts In Confirming The Action Of The Learned Ao Even Though The Learned Ao Has Exceeded His Jurisdiction In A Limited Scrutiny Case Selected Under Cass Only To Examine Whether The Investment & Income Relating To Securities Transactions Are Duly Disclosed Or Not & Added A Sum Of Rs.44,00,000.00 U/S 68 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961, Without Obtaining Prior Administrative Approval Of The Concerned Pr. Cit/Cit As Prescribed In Circular F. No. 225/402/2018/Ita.Ii, Dated 28- 11-2018 & Instruction No.5/2016 [F.No.225/269/2015-

Section 68

…14) 361 ITR 155 (Del). d) CIT vs. Orbital Communication Private Limited (2010) 327 ITR 566 (Del) e) CIT vs. Haresh D. Mehta (2017) 86 Taxmann.com 22 (Bombay). f) Nemi Chand Kothari vs. CIT (2003) 264 ITR 254 (GAU) g) Orient Trading Company Ltd. vs. CIT (1963) 49 ITR 723 (BOM), 3.2.15. Despite this, the learned AO was not satisfied with the explanation of the appellant for an aggregate sum of Rs.44,00,000.00 out of the total amount of Rs.68,50,000.00 which was remitted to Kotak Securities Ltd. 3.2.16. Accordingly, Rs.44,00,000.00 was added to the returned income of the appellant u/s 68. 3.2.17. The appellant wou…

Mithu Ram, Dirba vs. Income Tax Officer, Sunam

In the result, ground no. 4 & 5 are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 621/CHANDI/2023[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh23 Dec 2024AY 2015-2016

Bench: Cit(A) Proves This Fact. 2. That The Assessee Was Prevented By Sufficient & Reasonable Cause In Not Attending To The Proceedings Before The Cit(A) Due Oversight/ Skip Of Mail Regarding The Date Of Hearing Because Busy In Filling The Income Tax Returns.

For Appellant: Shri Kushal Chopra, Advocate for Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardhan, JCIT, Sr. DR
Section 133(6)Section 144Section 68

…wered; why would an unknown person agree to provide him loan? Why was it not repaid? Why couldn't the appellant obtain confirmation letter or details of creditors? The appellant has relied on Bombay High Court in the case Orient TradingCo. Ltd. vs. CIT [1963] 49 ITR 723 wherein the court has held that 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 assesse 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. In this, case, the depositor is unknown…

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Meerut vs. Smt. Kamlesh, Delhi

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 2152/DEL/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Dec 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri M. Balaganeshassessment Year: 2014-15 Dcit, Vs. Smt. Kamlesh, Central Circle, 1402/1403, Vidhyanchal Meerut Tower, Kaushambi, Ghaziabad Pan :Akypk3905E (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Sh. Rohit Agarwal, Ca Department By Ms. Jaya Choudhary, Cit(Dr)

Section 153ASection 56(2)(vi)Section 68

…ing the credit as acceptable. There are plethora of judgments which clarify the extent to which the assessee is supposed to justify the above three criterias. (On identity) 5.1.26 The Hon'ble High Court of Mumbai in the case of Orient Trading Company Ltd. CIT 49 ITR 723 held as under: "When the entry stands in the name of the third party and the assessee establishes identity of the creditor and produces evidence showing that the entry is not fictitious, initial burden lying on the assessee stands discharged; the burden shifts on to the Revenue to show that the entry represented assessee's suppressed Income." (On…

Chandrakumar Madhusudanji Jajodia, Thane vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Amravati Circle

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 399/NAG/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur28 Nov 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Kishore P. DewaniFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 148Section 234ASection 36(1)(iii)Section 68Section 69A

…lender is on record. Lender is not related party. Interest paid, TDS deducted and loan amount repaid. Onus to explain receipt of loan u/s 68 or u/s 69A has been satisfactorily discharged. No enquiry made by A.O. before making addition. Reliance on : i) (1963) 49 ITR 723 (Bom) Orient Trading Co. Ltd. vs. CIT (P- 154 – 163) (54) ii) (2014) 366 ITR 232 (P&H) CIT vs. Varinder Rawlley (P- 164 – 168) (167, 168) iii) (1986) 159 ITR 0078 (SC) CIT vs. Orissa Corporation Pvt. Ltd. (P- 169 – 175) (171, 175) iv) (2017) 397 ITR 0136 (Bom.) CIT vs. Orchid Industries Pvt. Ltd. (P- 176 – 178) (177, 178) C) The A.O. has discusse…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circel-1(2, Nagpur vs. M/S. Vibrant Global Capital Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 229/NAG/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur25 Oct 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Kishore P. DewaniFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 68

…same as unproved cash credit or undisclosed source. He submitted that the assessee was not required to show as to from which source the creditor acquired the money to make the loan to the assessee. He placed reliance on Orient Trading Co. Ltd. vs. CIT (1963) 49 ITR 723 (Bom): TC 42R.1039. 15 M/s. Vibrant Global Capital Ltd. ITA no.229/Nag./2022 5. Shri Vyas, on the other hand, submitted that the proposed questions out of four questions are also the questions of facts and are not referable questions of law. 6. In (1963) 49 ITR 723 (supra), it is held as under:– “When, however, in a case where the entry stands in…