What is Roshan Di Hatti v. CIT authority for?

An assessee bears the onus to prove the identity, creditworthiness, and genuineness of any cash credit or transaction. If the assessee fails to discharge this burden with cogent evidence and explanation, the Assessing Officer is justified in making additions to their income, and no further burden lies on the revenue.

How many judgments cite Roshan Di Hatti v. CIT?

477 judgments on BharatTax cite Roshan Di Hatti v. CIT (107 ITR 938), spanning 2015 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Roshan Di Hatti v. CIT come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 68, Section 143(3), Section 147, Section 142(1), Section 115BBE, Section 69A.

Roshan Di Hatti v. CIT (107 ITR 938)

Sri Rajkumar C(HUF), Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-7(1), Bangalore

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 1379/BANG/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 Oct 2022AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Ms.Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Sri.Deepesh Waghale, CAFor Respondent: Sri.Gudimella V..P. Pavan Kumar, JCIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 150Section 153Section 153CSection 260A

…fact that assessment were completed after the HUF got disrupted, it must be held, therefore, that the proceedings were irregular and without jurisdiction. The following judicial pronouncements lays down the view as stated above: Roshan Di Hatti v. CIT [1968] 68 ITR 177 (SC), Rameswar Sirkar v. ITO [1973] 88 ITR 374 (Cal.), Shyam Sundar Bajaj v. ITO [1973] 89 ITR 317 (Cal.). Thus, we are of the view that the assessment made on 30.11.2006 on the assessee as HUF is not valid as on that date, the HUF was not in existence. Thus, we cancel the assessment made on the assessee in the status of HUF.” 9. In the instant ca…

Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1(1)(4), Surat vs. M/S. Mansi Industries Pvt. Ltd., Surat

In the result, ground No.2 raised by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 111/SRT/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Surat19 Sept 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.111/Srt/2017 Assessment Year: (2012-13) (Physical Court Hearing) The Ito, Ward-1(1)(4), Vs. M/S. Mansi Industries Pvt. Ltd., Surat. Block No.80, Village. Navi Pardi, Tal: Kamrej, Dist. Surat. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aafcm6514M (Revenue)/(Assessee) (Assessee)/(Respondent) Assessee By Shri Rasesh Shah, Ca Respondent By Shri H. P. Meena, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 14/07/2022 29/09/2022 Date Of Pronouncement

Section 143(3)

…eipt/deposit could not be satisfactorily explained by the assessee, it is open to the revenue to hold that it is the income of the assessee and no burden lies on the revenue to show that the income is from any particular source [Roshan di Hatti Vs. CIT (1977) 107 ITR 938 (SC) / Kalekhan Mohd. Hanif Vs. CIT (1963) 50 ITR 1 (SC)]. It is settled law that if the initial burden is discharged by the assessee by producing sufficient evidences/materials in support of loan transaction, the onus gets shifted to the assessing officer who after verification/examination can further requisition evidence/details from the assess…

Shri Madan Lal Meena, Jaipur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2, Kota

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

ITA 873/JPR/2019[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur29 Aug 2022AY 2007-08

For Appellant: Shri Mahendra Gargieya (Adv.)For Respondent: Ms. Runi Pal (Addl.CIT) a

Section 147Section 148Section 234ASection 54BSection 68

…xport (P.) Ltd. (J2008] 216 CTR 195 (SC)) where the onus on the applicant is limited but cash creditor shown in form of loan where the assessee is required to prove all the ingredients of Section 68 of the Act. The Apex Court in Roshan Di Hatti v. CIT j1977] 107 ITR 938 held that onus of proving the source of a sum of money found to have been received by an assessee is on him. When the nature and source of money or otherwise cannot be satisfactorily explained by the assessee, it is open to the revenue to hold that it is the income of the assessee. Thus, on a totality of the facts involved, I am of the opinion th…

Apple Industries Ltd, Noida vs. DCIT, Central Circle, Noida

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 3694/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Aug 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri R.K. Gupta, CIT DR

Section 132Section 143(2)Section 153Section 153ASection 153DSection 68

…TR 465 have observed and held that mere filing of confirmation of transaction through the banking channel is not enough to prove the genuineness of cash credit and it can be assessed. Further, Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of 5hri Roshan D. Hatti Vs CIT (SC) 107 ITR 938 held that in the case of credits in the name of third party, it is the duty of the appellant to prove the identity or credit capacity of the creditors to advance money and genuineness of transaction. In the Instant case, the undersigned is of the view that the credit capacity-of the creditor is not proved by the appellant company. Following chart…

M/S. Yelahanka - Ap Border Tollways Private Limited, Bengaluru vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-7(1)(4), Bangalore

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

ITA 458/BANG/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Aug 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year : 2016-17 M/S. Yelahanka-Ap Border Tollways Pvt. Ltd., # 702, Provident The Income-Tax Welworth City, Officer, Yelahanka- Ward – 7[1][4], Doddaballapur Road, Bengaluru. Vs. Marashandra, Bengaluru – 562 163. Pan: Aaacy7243E Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri V. Srinivasan, Advocate : Shri Sankar Ganesh K, Jcit Revenue By Dr Itat Date Of Hearing : 08-08-2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 22-08-2022 Order Per Beena Pillaipresent Appeal By The Assessee Has Been Filed By Assessee Against The Order Dated 28/03/2022 Passed By The Ld.Cit(A)-11, Bangalore Relating To Assessment Year 2016-17 On Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. The Orders Of The Authorities Below In So Far As They Are Against The Appellant Are Opposed To Law, Equity, Weight Of Evidence, Probabilities, Facts & Circumstances Of The Case.

For Appellant: Shri V. Srinivasan, Advocate

Section 133Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 41Section 68

…er consideration, admittedly the appellant failed to provide any such confirmations. The notices sent by the AO to the creditors also remained un-responded. In the case of Kale Khan Mohammad Hanif v. CIT [1963] 50 ITR 1 (SC) and, Roshan Di Hatti v. CIT [1977] 107 ITR 938 (SC), the SC had laid down that the onus of proving the source of a sum of money found to have been received by an assessee, is on the assessee. Considering above the action of the AO in making addition to the extent of Rs 1,34,25,045/- is upheld, although the relevant provision would be Section 68 of the Act and not Section 41(1) as done by the…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 1(1), Jabalpur vs. Shri Sandesh Kumar Jain, Jabalpur

In the result, the Revenue‟s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 41/JAB/2020[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur27 Jul 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Hon‟Ble & Shri Manomohan Das, Hon'Ble

For Respondent: Shri Rahul Bardia, FCA

Section 115BSection 133ASection 143(3)Section 28Section 68Section 69Section 69B

…erwise not been considered or relied upon by him. 5.2 The matter thus boils down to whether we, as the second appellate authority, ought to admit the same. Rule 29 of the Income Tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963 is mandatory (Roshan Di Hatti v. CIT [1977] 107 ITR 938 (SC)), and toward which no case has been made out. As regards the exercise suo motu of our power to call for and admit the same, we are, at the outset, disinclined to. And for the reason that no reason for non-submission before the AO stands furnished either before the ld. CIT(A), nor indeed before us. Further, the bank statement, procured from t…

Shri Naveen Shivaprakash Kottigere, Bangalore vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 6(3)(1), Bengaluru

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

ITA 621/BANG/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore27 Jul 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri Mallaha Rao, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. Priyadarshini Baseganni, D.R

Section 143(2)Section 234ASection 271(1)(C)Section 68

…rder of the both authorities is bad in law. 5. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), relied the judgments in the Shri Naveen Shivaprakash Kottigere, Bangalore Page 3 of 6 case of Roshan di Hatti vs CIT 107 ITR 938 and Kale Khan Mohammad Hanif vs CIT 50 ITR 1 which is distinguishable fact and case of the Appellant, hence the order of the both authorities are liable to be set aside. 6. Without prejudice, the CIT(A) confirmed the levied tax, interest and under section 234A & 234B, penalty under section 271(1)(C) & 271(F) levied are excessive arbitrary and ou…

M/S Morani Cars Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Ward-6, Jaipur

In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 184/JPR/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur26 Jul 2022AY 2011-12

For Appellant: Sh. Suhani Maharwal (CA)For Respondent: Sh. A. S. Nehara (Addl.CIT)

Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 40ASection 40aSection 68

…ncome of the firm. Under the circumstances, no question of wrong placing of onus arises in the case and no question of law arises out of the order of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal." 13.2.4 The Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Roshan Di Hattiv. CIT [1977] 107 ITR 938 (SC) and Kale Khan Mohammad Hanif v. CIT [1963] 50 ITR 1 (SC) held that the onus of proving the source of a sum of money found to have been received by an assessee is on him. Where the nature and source of a receipt, whether it be of money or other property, cannot be satisfactorily explained by the assessee, it is open to the revenue to hold tha…

Bhadanes Hitech Technology Computer Pvt.Ltd, Nashik vs. Income-Tax Officer, Ward - 1(1), Nashik

Appeal is partly allowed in above terms

ITA 1289/PUN/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune14 Jul 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteनिर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2013-14 Bhadanes Hitech Technology Vs. Ito, Ward Computer Pvt. Ltd. 1(1), Nashik Flat No.10, Padmavishwa Plaza, Nashik Pune Road, Tagore Nagar, Nashik – 422006 Pan : Aadcb9102E Appellant Respondent

Section 143(3)Section 68

…tions though apparent were held to be not real one. 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." 6.13 The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Roshan Di. Hatti Vs. CIT, 107 ITR 938 has held that the law is well settled that the onus of proving the source of a sum of money found to have been received by an assessee is on him. Where the nature and source of a receipt, whether it be of money or of other property, cannot be satisfactorily explained by the assessee, it is open to the revenue to hold that it is the income of the…

Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Kurnool vs. Vasavi Bullion Corporation, Kurnool

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

ITA 279/HYD/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 Jun 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2013-14 Ito,Ward-2 V M/S Vasavi Bullion 2Nd Floor, Aaykar Bhawan S. Corporation N.R.Pet 28/B2, K.S.Complex Opp:Childresn Park Sharoff Bazar, Kurnool-518 001 Kurnool-518 001

For Appellant: Shri Mohan Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Shri K.P.R.R.Murthy, Sr.AR

Section 68Section 69Section 69A

…arishchand & brother Vs ITO 64 ITO 331. 8) The CIT(A) failed to appreciate that onus of providing source of an asset is on the assesseeif assessee disputed liability to tax - he has to prove it as held by the Supreme Court in the case of Roshan D.Hatti Vs CIT 107 ITR 938. 9) The CIT(A) failed to appreciate that unexplained gold/stock seized from assessee's premises - unless cogent evidence is adduced by the assessee, it would have to be presumed that the articles recovered from his premises belonged to him and they were acquired in the year in question and they represented the concealed income of the year in ques…

Jay Nanda Mataji Co.Op. Credit Society Lte, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer WD 31(2) (1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statisti...

ITA 257/MUM/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jun 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2017-18 Jay Nanda Mataji Co-Operative Income Tax Officer Ward 31(2)(1), Credit Society Limited, R. No. 615, 6Th Floor, Kautilya Shop No. 153/5/6, General Vs. Bhavan, C-41 To C-43, G Block, Arunkumar Vaidya Marg, Bandra Kurla Complex, Goregaon (East), Bandra (East), Mumbai-400065. Mumbai-400051. Pan No. Aaaaj 5397 E Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. G.C. Lalka, ARFor Respondent: Mr. Kiran P. Unavekar, DR

Section 69A

…ns back into the income of the assessee as held in Kale Khan Mohammad Hanif v CIT|19631 50 ITR 1 (SC) as held in Kale Khan Mohammad Hanif v CIT|19631 50 ITR 1 (SC) as held in Kale Khan Mohammad Hanif v CIT|19631 50 ITR 1 (SC) and Roshan Di Hatti v. CIT [19771 107 ITR 938 (SC). This onus on the and Roshan Di Hatti v. CIT [19771 107 ITR 938 (SC). This onus on the and Roshan Di Hatti v. CIT [19771 107 ITR 938 (SC). This onus on the tax payer has neither been discharged at the assessment tax payer has neither been discharged at the assessment stage nor at stage nor at the appellate stage. Thus this ground of appeal i…