Roshan Di Hatti v. CIT

107 ITR 938Supreme Court of India1977#147 most cited

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.

477

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,154 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Roshan Di Hatti v. CIT · Section 68 · assessee onus of proof · cash credits · genuineness of transaction · identity of creditor · creditworthiness of creditor · additions to income · unexplained money · Section 143(3) · Section 147

Also reported as

2 SCC 378

Sections most often in play

Section 68Section 143(3)Section 147Section 142(1)Section 115BBESection 69ASection 148Section 144
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

creditworthiness of the creditoronus of proofsource of sourceshare capital and share premiumpreponderance of probabilitysection 31paper companyaddition u/s 68survey under section 133aaddition under section 68share application moneygenuineness of the transaction

Judgments citing Roshan Di Hatti v. CIT

Raheja Legency Trust, Mumbai vs. ACIT, Cir-22(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2268/MUM/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jan 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Amarjit Singhassessment Year: 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri Bharat Raichandani & Bhagrati SahuFor Respondent: Smt. Sanyogita Nagpal, CIT/DR
Section 250Section 68

…account as required under the provisions of Section 68. The Supreme Court in the land mark case of CIT v. Orissa Corporation A.Y. 2018-19 (P) Ltd. [1986] 159 ITR 78 (SC), Kale Khan Mohammed Hanif v. CIT [1963] 50 ITR 1 (SC) and Roshan Di Hatti v. CIT [1977] 107 ITR 938 (SC) and other cases relied upon by the appellant has 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. Once the assessee has submitted the documents relating to identity, genuineness of the transaction, and credit-worthiness, then the AO must conduct an inquiry, and ca…

Suresh Kumar Saini, Jaipur vs. NFAC, Delhi

16. For the foregoing discussion and findings, this appeal deserves to be allowed

ITA 1256/JPR/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur27 Jan 2025AY 2016-17

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

For Appellant: Sh. Neeraj Gupta, C.AFor Respondent: Sh. Anup Singh, Addl.CIT
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 234ASection 250Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 69

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”B” JAIPUR Jh jkBkSM+ deys'k t;UrHkkbZ] ys[kk lnL; ,o Jh ujsUnz dqekj] U;kf;d lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM & SHRI NARINDER KUMAR, JM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No.1251/JPR/2024 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year :2012-13 Sh. Prem Chand Gupta cuke The ITO, Vs. D-83, Hasan Kha Mewat Nagar, Ward-2(3), Alwar. Alwar. LFkk;hys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AMFPG6481J vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksjls@Assesseeby :Sh. Neeraj Gupta, C.A. jktLo dh vksjls@Revenue by: Sh. Anup Singh, Ad…

Prem Chand Gupta, Alwar vs. ITO Ward 2(3), Alwar

16. For the foregoing discussion and findings, this appeal deserves to be allowed

ITA 1251/JPR/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur27 Jan 2025AY 2012-13

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

For Appellant: Sh. Neeraj Gupta, C.AFor Respondent: Sh. Anup Singh, Addl.CIT
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 234ASection 250Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 69

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”B” JAIPUR Jh jkBkSM+ deys'k t;UrHkkbZ] ys[kk lnL; ,o Jh ujsUnz dqekj] U;kf;d lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM & SHRI NARINDER KUMAR, JM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No.1251/JPR/2024 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year :2012-13 Sh. Prem Chand Gupta cuke The ITO, Vs. D-83, Hasan Kha Mewat Nagar, Ward-2(3), Alwar. Alwar. LFkk;hys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AMFPG6481J vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksjls@Assesseeby :Sh. Neeraj Gupta, C.A. jktLo dh vksjls@Revenue by: Sh. Anup Singh, Ad…

Dashmesh Timber and Furniture House, Ajnala vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle, Amritsar

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

ITA 542/ASR/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar22 Jan 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Sh. Udayan Dasgupta & Sh. Krinwant Sahay

For Appellant: Sh. P. N. Arora, Adv
Section 115BSection 133ASection 133A(3)(iii)Section 143(3)Section 250(6)Section 69Section 69A

…, the same was assessable as deemed income u/s 69A of the Act 61. 13 I.T.A. No. 542/Asr/2024 Dashmesh Timber and Furniture House v. Dy. CIT 18. The Ld CIT(A) further relied upon the Hon’ble Apex court judgement in the case of Roshan Di Hatti vs CIT [1977] 107 ITR 938 , and Kale Khan Md Hanif vs CIT 1963 50-ITR-1, where the Honb’le court has laid down the law that 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 is of money or other property , cannot be satisfactorily explained by the assessee , it is open to th…

Rajnikant Vithaldas Patel, Ahmedabad vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(2)(4) Now Ward 3(2)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1084/AHD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad22 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri V K Mangla, Sr. DR
Section 115BSection 143(3)Section 69A

…essee fails to discharge the onus by producing cogent evidence and explanation, the AO would be justified in making the addition back into the income of assessee as held in Kale Khan Moharnmad Hanif v CIT [1963] 50 ITR 1 (SC) and Roshan Di Hatti v. CIT [1977] 107 ITR 938 (SC). This onus on the tax payer has neither been discharged at the assessment stage nor at the appellate stage. Therefore, I find no infirmity in the addition made by the Ld. AO. In this view of the matter, addition of Rs. 27,37,800/- is confirmed. Consequently, the grounds of the appellant are dismissed.” 5. The assessee is in appeal before us…

Suburban Builders Private Limited, Mumbai vs. ITO-8(2)(4), Mumbai

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

ITA 1135/MUM/2024[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Jan 2025AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Ms. Renu Jauhriassessment Year: 2007-08

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay Kapadia, Ld. A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Monika H. Pande, Ld. Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 250

…ishes that it is a well settled law that the onus of proving source of a sum of money found to have been received by an assessee is on him. Reliance is placed on the decisions of Hon'ble Apex Court delivered in the cases of: (i) Roshan Di Hatti vs CIT [1977] 107 ITR 938 (SC) and (ii) Kale Khan Mohd. Hanif vs. CIT (1963) 50 ITR 1 (SC) Thus, it is held that Assessee company has failed to discharge the onus of proving the identity, genuineness and credit worthiness of the creditor, with respect to the credit of Rs.50,00,000/- received from M/s.Yash-V Jewels Ltd. M/s.Banguard Jewels Pvt. Ltd., M/s.Kush Hindustan En…

Samkeet Arya Homes LLP, Ahmedabad vs. The ITO, Ward-3(3)(5), Ahmedabad

In the result, Ground Number 2 of the assessee’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 365/AHD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad16 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Ms. Sunjal Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri B.P. Srivastava, Sr. DR
Section 68

…n.com 48 (SC)/[2019] 262 Taxman 74 (SC)/[2019] 412 ITR 161 (SC) [05-03- 2019], Hon'ble Supreme Court made the following observations: “This Court in the land mark case of Kale Khan Mohammad Hanif v. CIT [1963] 50 ITR 1 (SC) and, Roshan Di Hatti v. CIT [1977] 107 ITR 938 (SC) 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. Once the assessee has submitted the documents relating to identity, genuineness of the transaction, and creditworthiness, then the Assessing Officer must conduct an inquiry, and call for more details before invoking…

Shri Vishal Mehta, Rajkot vs. The ITO Ward-2 (1) (2), Rajkot

Appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes, in above terms

ITA 77/RJT/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot07 Jan 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Sainiand Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपीलसं/.Ita No.74 To 77/Rjt/2024 "नधा"रण वष"/ Assessment Years: (2012-13 To 2015-2016) Vishal Mehta Income Tax Officer, बनाम Pravin Chamber, 1St Floor, Ward-2(1)(2), Rajkot Kothariya Naka Soni Bazar, Vs. Rajkot-360 001 Pan/Gir No.Ahtpm 7247 B "थायीलेखासं /. जीआइआरसं /. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) .. (""यथ"/Respondent) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri Chetan Agarwal, Ar & Shri Brijesh Parekh, Ar राज"व क" ओर से/Revenue By : Shri Sanjay Punglia, Cit-Dr & Shri Abhimanyhu Singh, Sr-Dr

For Appellant: Shri Chetan Agarwal, AR &For Respondent: Shri Sanjay Punglia, CIT-DR &
Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 271BSection 69A

…s remain unexplained under section 68; it cannot apply in a case of different depositors where there has been no transaction of deposits and its repayment between a particular depositor and assessee. 8. In Roshan Di Hatti V/s Commissioner of Income Tax [1992] 2 SCC 378, Hon’ble Supreme Court has held that wherein it has been held that if the assessee fails to discharge the onus by producing cogent evidence and explanation, the assessing officer would be justified in making the additions back into the income of the assessee. In the light of above judicial interpretation and considering the fact that the assessee d…

Shri Vishal Mehta, Rajkot vs. The ITO Ward-2(1) (2) Rajkot, Rajkot

Appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes, in above terms

ITA 76/RJT/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot07 Jan 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Sainiand Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपीलसं/.Ita No.74 To 77/Rjt/2024 "नधा"रण वष"/ Assessment Years: (2012-13 To 2015-2016) Vishal Mehta Income Tax Officer, बनाम Pravin Chamber, 1St Floor, Ward-2(1)(2), Rajkot Kothariya Naka Soni Bazar, Vs. Rajkot-360 001 Pan/Gir No.Ahtpm 7247 B "थायीलेखासं /. जीआइआरसं /. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) .. (""यथ"/Respondent) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri Chetan Agarwal, Ar & Shri Brijesh Parekh, Ar राज"व क" ओर से/Revenue By : Shri Sanjay Punglia, Cit-Dr & Shri Abhimanyhu Singh, Sr-Dr

For Appellant: Shri Chetan Agarwal, AR &For Respondent: Shri Sanjay Punglia, CIT-DR &
Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 271BSection 69A

…s remain unexplained under section 68; it cannot apply in a case of different depositors where there has been no transaction of deposits and its repayment between a particular depositor and assessee. 8. In Roshan Di Hatti V/s Commissioner of Income Tax [1992] 2 SCC 378, Hon’ble Supreme Court has held that wherein it has been held that if the assessee fails to discharge the onus by producing cogent evidence and explanation, the assessing officer would be justified in making the additions back into the income of the assessee. In the light of above judicial interpretation and considering the fact that the assessee d…

Shri Vishal Mehta, Rajkot vs. The ITO Ward-2(1) (2), Rajkot

Appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes, in above terms

ITA 75/RJT/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot07 Jan 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Sainiand Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपीलसं/.Ita No.74 To 77/Rjt/2024 "नधा"रण वष"/ Assessment Years: (2012-13 To 2015-2016) Vishal Mehta Income Tax Officer, बनाम Pravin Chamber, 1St Floor, Ward-2(1)(2), Rajkot Kothariya Naka Soni Bazar, Vs. Rajkot-360 001 Pan/Gir No.Ahtpm 7247 B "थायीलेखासं /. जीआइआरसं /. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) .. (""यथ"/Respondent) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri Chetan Agarwal, Ar & Shri Brijesh Parekh, Ar राज"व क" ओर से/Revenue By : Shri Sanjay Punglia, Cit-Dr & Shri Abhimanyhu Singh, Sr-Dr

For Appellant: Shri Chetan Agarwal, AR &For Respondent: Shri Sanjay Punglia, CIT-DR &
Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 271BSection 69A

…s remain unexplained under section 68; it cannot apply in a case of different depositors where there has been no transaction of deposits and its repayment between a particular depositor and assessee. 8. In Roshan Di Hatti V/s Commissioner of Income Tax [1992] 2 SCC 378, Hon’ble Supreme Court has held that wherein it has been held that if the assessee fails to discharge the onus by producing cogent evidence and explanation, the assessing officer would be justified in making the additions back into the income of the assessee. In the light of above judicial interpretation and considering the fact that the assessee d…

Shri Vishal Mehta, Rajkot vs. The ITO Ward-2 (1) (2), Rajkot

Appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes, in above terms

ITA 74/RJT/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot07 Jan 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Sainiand Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपीलसं/.Ita No.74 To 77/Rjt/2024 "नधा"रण वष"/ Assessment Years: (2012-13 To 2015-2016) Vishal Mehta Income Tax Officer, बनाम Pravin Chamber, 1St Floor, Ward-2(1)(2), Rajkot Kothariya Naka Soni Bazar, Vs. Rajkot-360 001 Pan/Gir No.Ahtpm 7247 B "थायीलेखासं /. जीआइआरसं /. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) .. (""यथ"/Respondent) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri Chetan Agarwal, Ar & Shri Brijesh Parekh, Ar राज"व क" ओर से/Revenue By : Shri Sanjay Punglia, Cit-Dr & Shri Abhimanyhu Singh, Sr-Dr

For Appellant: Shri Chetan Agarwal, AR &For Respondent: Shri Sanjay Punglia, CIT-DR &
Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 271BSection 69A

…s remain unexplained under section 68; it cannot apply in a case of different depositors where there has been no transaction of deposits and its repayment between a particular depositor and assessee. 8. In Roshan Di Hatti V/s Commissioner of Income Tax [1992] 2 SCC 378, Hon’ble Supreme Court has held that wherein it has been held that if the assessee fails to discharge the onus by producing cogent evidence and explanation, the assessing officer would be justified in making the additions back into the income of the assessee. In the light of above judicial interpretation and considering the fact that the assessee d…

Rajesh Kumar Dalmia, Surat vs. I.T.O., Ward - 6(1), Kolkata

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

ITA 1859/KOL/2024[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata01 Jan 2025AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishrarajesh Kumar Dalmia, Income Tax Officer, B-3, Flat No. 803, Nandni One, Ward 6(1), Kolkata, Vs Vesu, Surat - 395007 P-7, Chowringhee Square, (Pan: Amxpd1909Q) Kolkata - 700069 (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: P.M. Jagasheth, C.AFor Respondent: Rajak Datta, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 68

…x, it is for him to show either that the receipt was not income or that if it was, it was exempt from taxation under the provisions of the Act. In the absence of such proof, the ITO is entitled to treat it as taxable income". b. Roshan di Hatti vs. CIT [1977] 107 ITR 938 (SC) dated 08/03/1977 where the Hon'ble Apex Court has held that "where nature and source of a receipt, whether it be of money or of other property, cannot be satisfactorily explained by assessee, it is open to revenue to hold that it is income of assessee and no further burden lies on revenue to show that that income is from any particular sourc…

Inder Kumar Vaswani, Jaipur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-3, Jaipur

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

ITA 998/JPR/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur01 Jan 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri R.K. Bhatra, C.AFor Respondent: Smt. Anita Rinesh, JCIT-DR
Section 127Section 143(2)

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”A” JAIPUR MkWa- ,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, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA. No. 998/JPR/2024 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years : 2018-19 cuke Shri Inder Kumar Vaswani Deputy Commissioner of Income 110-113 Gomes Defence Colony, Vs. Tax, Gautam Marg, Vaishali Nagar, Central Circle-3, Jaipur. Jaipur LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AEHPV5795G vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Asse…

Raj Kumari Agarwal, Jaipur vs. ACIT Cen Cir 2, Jaipur

ITA 1024/JPR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur26 Dec 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Sh. S. L. Poddar, AdvFor Respondent: Smt Hitiesha Ruhela, Addl.CIT
Section 115BSection 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 68

…f the assesse, it is not necessary for the department to locate its exact source (CIT v. M.Ganapathi Mudaliar [1964] 53 ITR 623 (SC)/A. Govindarajulu Mudaliar v. CIT [1958] 34 ITR 807 (SC)). In the case of Roshan Di Hatti v. Commissioner of Income-tax [1977] 107 ITR 938 (SC)[08-03-1977] it is held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court as under:- "Now, 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. If he disputes the liability for tax, it is for him to show either that the receipt was not income or that if it was, it was exempt from taxa…

M/S. Bhikshu Polymers Pvt. Ltd. (Earlier Known As M/S. Jeevan Commotrade Pvt. Ltd.), Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward - 6(2), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1538/KOL/2024[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 Dec 2024AY 2009-2010

Bench: SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI (Accountant Member)

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 263Section 68

…Hon'ble Apex Court has dealt with the issue from a legal perspective and some of the passages deserve to be extracted for reference: “This Court in the land mark case of Kale Khan Mohammad Hanif v. CIT [1963] 50 ITR 1 (SC) and, Roshan Di Hatti v. CIT [1977] 107 ITR 938 (SC) laid down that the onus of proving the source of a sum of money found to have been 10 I.T.A. No. 1538/Kol/2024 M/s Bhikshu Polymers Pvt. Ltd. (Earlier known as M/s Jeevan Commotrade Pvt. Ltd.) received by an assessee, is on the assessee. Once the assessee has submitted the documents relating to identity, genuineness of the transaction, and…

Hitesh Jagat Parekh, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 25(2)(4), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands dismissed

ITA 4429/MUM/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Dec 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Omkareshwar Chidaravs. Ito, Ward 25(2)(4) Hitesh Jagat Prekh R No. 218, Kautilya 2-3, Ground Floor, Shivam Bhavn, C-41 To C-43, Hatkesh Society, N.S. G Block, Bkc, Bandra Road, No.8, Vile Parle (W) (E), Mumbai – 400 056. Mumbai – 400 051. Pan/Gir No. Agqpp9134J (Applicant) (Respondent)

Section 115BSection 143(3)Section 250Section 44ASection 69A

…said amount came from sale of wearing apparel and traditional silver utensils, since there was no evidence and material to establish sale or inheritance, etc., impugned addition made by authorities below was to be confirmed. 11. Roshan Di Hatti V. CIT [1992] 2 SCC 378 (SC) wherein it was held that i the assessee fails to discharge the onus by 7 Hitesh Jagat Parekh, Mumbai producing cogent evidence and explanation, the AO would be justified in making the additions back into the income of the assessee. 12. Rakesh Kumar Gupta vs. CIT 115 taxmann.com 38 (Allahabad) (2020) cash deposit claimed it from agricultural…

Yuwam Education Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur vs. DCIT, Circle-6, Jaipur

ITA 1029/JPR/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur20 Dec 2024AY 2016-17

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

For Appellant: Sh. P. C. Parwal, CAFor Respondent: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT-Sr. DR
Section 115BSection 143(2)Section 143(3)

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”A” JAIPUR Jh jkBkSM+ deys'k t;UrHkkbZ] ys[kk lnL; ,o Jh ujsUnz dqekj] U;kf;d lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM & SHRI NARINDER KUMAR, JM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No.1029/JP/2024 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year : 2016-17 cuke Yuwam Education Private Ltd. The DCIT, Vs. G-3 Prisom Tower, Opposite Old Circle-06, Subzi Mandi Lalkothi, Jaipur Jaipur LFkk;hys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AAACY 5912 G vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@Assessee by : Sh. P. C. Parwal, CA jktLo d…

ITO Ward 14(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Malvika Herbopharma Private Limited, Mumbai

ITA 4594/MUM/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Dec 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh ()

For Respondent: Mrs. Suby Srivastava
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 148Section 68

…rs. ITO without making any further enquiry, disbelieving the evidence of the assessee made addition. ITAT held the additions not sustainble have to be deleted. 2. Further the Honorable Supreme Court held it in case as given below - Roshan Di Hatti Vs CIT (SC) 107 ITR 938 Kale Khan Mohammad Hanif Vs CIT (SC) 50 In this case there were Credits shown in the name of third parties. The Court held that the assessee must prove identity of credits, capacity of creditor to advance money and genuineness of transaction. Once that is done then burden shifts to the Department. I. In view of this decision of the Apex Court; on…

ACIT -Central Circle-1, Ludhiana vs. M/S Oswal Trends Pvt. Ltd., Ludhiana

In the result, this appeal of the Revenue stands dismissed

ITA 29/CHANDI/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh17 Dec 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Krinwant Sahay

Section 132Section 153A

…P) Ltd.” (supra) is concerned, we note that the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the said case has taken note of the observations made by the Supreme Court in the land mark case of Kale Khan Mohammed Hanif v. CIT [1963] 50 ITR 1 (SC) and Roshan Di Hatti v. CIT [1977] 107 ITR 938 (SC) laying down the proposition that the onus of proving the source of a sum of money found to have been received by an assessee, is on the assessee. Once the assessee has submitted the documents relating to identity, genuineness of the transaction, and credit-worthiness, then the AO must conduct an inquiry, and call for more details before invo…

ACIT -Central Circle-1, Ludhiana vs. M/S Oswal Trends Pvt. Ltd., Ludhiana

In the result, this appeal of the Revenue stands dismissed

ITA 28/CHANDI/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh17 Dec 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Krinwant Sahay

Section 132Section 153A

…P) Ltd.” (supra) is concerned, we note that the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the said case has taken note of the observations made by the Supreme Court in the land mark case of Kale Khan Mohammed Hanif v. CIT [1963] 50 ITR 1 (SC) and Roshan Di Hatti v. CIT [1977] 107 ITR 938 (SC) laying down the proposition that the onus of proving the source of a sum of money found to have been received by an assessee, is on the assessee. Once the assessee has submitted the documents relating to identity, genuineness of the transaction, and credit-worthiness, then the AO must conduct an inquiry, and call for more details before invo…