Suresh Kumar T. Jain v. Income-tax Officer, Ward-2(1)

128 ITD 74Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2011#8598 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2018 to 2025.

Also reported as

136 TTJ 247

Sections most often in play

Section 115BBE Section 132 Section 132A Section 144 Section 145(3)Section 147 Section 148 Section 153A

Issues it is cited on

section 41(1)section 41 sundry creditors section 145(3)section 145 income-tax officer commissioner (appeals)unexplained cash credit section 68 section 142(1)previous year section 143(2)

Judgments citing Suresh Kumar T. Jain v. Income-tax Officer, Ward-2(1)

UPENDRA KUMAR SONI,KOTA vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CORCLE-KOTA, KOTA

In the result, both the appeals of the assesee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 827/JPR/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur11 Aug 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI GAGAN GOYAL (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Saurav Harsh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mrs. Alka Gautam, CIT-DR

Section 144Section 145(3)Section 153ASection 68Section 69A

…nt proceedings. No evidence furnished in the appellate proceedings also. Hence, a separate addition for creditors made by the AO is found to be justified. The ITAT Bangalore Bench 'A' in the case of Suresh Kumar T. Jain v. Income-tax Officer, Ward-2(1) [2011] 128 ITD 74 (Bangalore)/[2011] 136 TTJ 247 (Bangalore) [08-01-2010] held as under:- "As could be seen from the assessment order that during the course of proceedings before the Assessing Officer, the assessee had furnished a list of creditors with names and addresses of 39 cases and perhaps in ten cases, there were no addresses. In compliance to the Assessing…

UPENDRA KUMAR SONI,KOTA vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-KOTA, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA

In the result, both the appeals of the assesee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 826/JPR/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur11 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI GAGAN GOYAL (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Saurav Harsh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mrs. Alka Gautam, CIT-DR

Section 144Section 145(3)Section 153ASection 68Section 69A

VITRAG PRINTS,SURAT vs. NFAC, DELHI

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

ITA 338/SRT/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Surat14 Dec 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.338/Srt/2023 Assessment Year: (2015-16) (Physical Hearing) Vitrag Prints, Vs. The Acit (Osd), K-2619 To 2622, Millenium Ward -1(2)(5), Textile Market Ring Road, Surat. Surat - 395002 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aalfv5612L (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri Jaykishan Goel, Ca Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr. Dr Respondent By 22/09/2023 Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement 14/12/2023

Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 40A(2)(b)

…were shown in books of account by assessee as outstanding and not written back, would not, tie down revenue to hold such liabilities to be subsisting liability - Held, yes [Paras 9 and 10] [In favour of revenue]". (C). Yet, in another case reported in [2011] 128 ITD 74 (Bangalore)/[2011] 136 TTJ 247 (Bangalore), IN THE ITAT BANGALORE BENCH 'A1, in the case of Suresh Kumar T. Jain v. Income-tax Officer, Ward-2(1), in IT APPEAL NO. 667 (BANG.) OF 2009, [ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005-06] .DATED: JANUARY 8, 2010 , the issue considered was:: "Section 68 , read with section 41(1), of the Income-tax Act, 1961 -Cash credits - As…

ORISSA CHROME EXPORT & MINING COMPANY PVT. LTD.,BHUBANESWAR vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1(2), BHUBANESWAR

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

ITA 4/CTK/2020[2014-15]Status: HeardITAT Cuttack22 Feb 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Before S/Shri George Mathan, Judicial & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpiaassessment Year : 2014-15 Orissa Orissa Chrome Chrome Export Export & & Vs. Acit, Circle Acit, Circle-1(2), Mining Company Pvt Ltd., A Mining Company Pvt Ltd., A- Bhubaneswar Bhubaneswar 65/1, 65/1, Nayapali, Nayapali, Bhubaneswar Bhubaneswar Pan/Gir No. Pan/Gir No.Aaaco 4389 B (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : Shri P.R.Mohanty, Ar P.R.Mohanty, Ar Revenue By : Shri Suresh Shivanand Shivanandan, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 22/0 02/2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 22/0 /02/2023 O R D E R Per Bench This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld Cit(A) -1, Bhubaneswar, 1, Bhubaneswar, Dated17.9.2019 In Appeal No. In Appeal No.0344/16-17 For The Assessment Year Assessment Year 2014-15. 2. Shri P.R.Mohanty, Ld Ar Appeared For Th Shri P.R.Mohanty, Ld Ar Appeared For The Assessee & Shri S E Assessee & Shri Suresh Shivanandan, Ld Cit Dr Appeared For The Revenue. , Ld Cit Dr Appeared For The Revenue.

For Appellant: Shri P.R.Mohanty, ARFor Respondent: Shri Suresh Shivanand

…was right in making the disallowance as the assessee has been unable to prove the genuineness of the said claim. He has placed reliance on the decision of the decision of the Co-ordinate Bench of Bangalore ITAT in the case of Suresh Kumar T Jain vs ITO (2011) 128 ITD 74 (Bangalore), wherein, the Co-ordinate Bench has categorically held that the assessee has failed to discharge the onus cast on him to substantiate his claim whereas the Assessing Officer has brought on record with documentary evidences that such liability did not exist at the end of the accounting year and had rightly added the said liability which…

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

…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 AO. In the case of Suresh Kumar T. Jain [2011] 128 ITD 74, Bangalore dated 08.01.2010 the Page 7 of 8 jurisdictional ITAT, Bangalore upheld the action of the AO in similar circumstances. The said decision has already been upheld by the jurisdictional Karnataka High Court in the case of Suresh Kumar T Jain v. Income-tax Officer, Ward 2(1), Bengaluru [2019] 101 taxmann.com 164 (Karnataka). 5.6 As regards t…

SRI SIMHADRI PONNALURU REDDY,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - 3(1)(1), BANGALORE

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

ITA 1106/BANG/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore05 Jul 2022AY 2015-16

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

For Appellant: Shri Ravi Shankar, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. Priyadarshini Baseganni, D.R

Section 143Section 37Section 41(1)

…editors as bogus and added the same to the income of the assessee by considering the amount as cessation of liability under Section 41 of the Act. The AO relied upon the decision of the jurisdictional ITAT, Bangalore in the case of Suresh Kumar T. Jain (2011) 128 ITD 74. Bangalore dated 08.01.2010. 5.2 During appellate proceedings the assessee has made detailed submissions and argued that he had furnished signed confirmation from creditors along with their name and PAN and as such he had discharged his onus of proving the genuineness of the sundry creditors existing in his books of account. The assessee submitte…

SHRI ANKUSH GOKHROO,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, JAIPUR

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

ITA 387/JPR/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur30 Jun 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Or At The Time Of Hearing.” 2. The Assessee Is An Individual & Engaged In The Business Of Trading Of Diamond & Color Stones Through His Proprietorship Concern

For Appellant: Shri Piyush Chhajed, CAFor Respondent: Shri Saroj Kumar Dubey, CIT

Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 68

…7 Taxman 298 (Punjab & Haryana) • Smt. Rekha KrishnaRaj vs. ITO [2013] 33 taxmann.com 64 (Karnataka) • Smt. Rekha Krishnaraj vs. ITO [2017] 85 taxmann.com 256 (SC) • P.M. Abdulla vs. ITO [2015]60 taxmann.com 52 (Karnataka) • Suresh Kumar T. Jain vs. ITO [2011]128 ITD 74 (Bangalore) • Suresh Kumar T. Jain vs. ITO [2019] 101 taxmann.com 164 (Karnataka) 9 Shri Ankush Gokhroo vs. ITO • Satpal Goyal vs. CIT ITA No. 117 of 2016 (O&M) • CIT vs. Karnataka Planters Coffee Curing Work (P.) Ltd. [2016] 74 taxmann.com 256 (SC) • ITO vs. Lal Chand Yadav [2017] 82 taxmann.com 429 (Jaipur- Trib.) • Champalal S. Shah vs. ITO [20…

ITO NON CORPORATE WARD 13 (5), CHENNAI vs. SHRI. G MARIA AUGUSTIN, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed

ITA 847/CHNY/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Apr 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

For Appellant: Mr. G. Baskar, Adv. & Mr. I DineshFor Respondent: Assessee by

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 28Section 44A

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘ए’ "यायपीठ, चे"ई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी महावीर "सह, उपा"य" एवं "ी मनोज कुमार अ"वाल, लेखा सद"य के सम" BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VICE PRESIDENTAND SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.:847/CHNY/2018 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2013 - 2014 The Income Tax Officer, Shri. G. Maria Augustin, Non-Corporate Ward -13(5), Vs. No.73/1, Thiruvengapuram, M.G. Road, Nungambakkam, Choolaimedu, Chennai – 600 034. Chennai – 600 094. PAN : AAIPM 5326P (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) Mr. ARV Sreenivasan, Addl. CIT Department by : As…

M/S HOTHUR TRADERS ,BELLARY vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1 , BELLARY

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 541/BANG/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore25 Mar 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.Assessment Year: 2011-12 M/S. Hothur Traders, Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Plot Nos. 5, 6, 7 & 8, Of Income Tax, “Hothur House”, Infantry Road, Circle 1, Cantonment, Fort Road, Bellary – 583 104. Bellary – 583 102. Pan: Aaefh 7705H Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Shiva Prasad Reddy, IRSFor Respondent: Shri Kannan Narayanan, Jt.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru

Section 10BSection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 41(1)

…ts, there was cessation of trading liability, thus, Assessing Officer was justified in adding impugned amount to income of assessee - Held, yes [Paras 10 & 12] [In favour of revenue]” Page 12 of 14 16. Further the Tribunal in Suresh Kumar Jain v. ITO, [2011] 128 ITD 74 (Bang) held as follows:- “Section 68 , read with section 41(1) , of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Cash credits - Assessment year 2005-06 - In course of assessment, Assessing Officer asked assessee to prove genuineness of sundry creditors shown in return of income - In reply, assessee merely filed confirmation letters issued by some of alleged credit…

NEEL KAMAL AGARWAL,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD-35(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

Appeal is partly allowed in above terms

ITA 2350/KOL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Feb 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Sainiassessment Year :2012-13 Neel Kamal Agarwal V/S. Income Tax Officer, Mr. M.L. Jain & Ward-35(2), Aayakar Associates, 9/12 Lal Bazar Bhawan, Poorva, Stret, Block-E, 4Th Floor, 110, Shanti Pally, Kolkata-700001 E.M. Bypass, [Pan No.Acipa 1982 B] Kolaktata-107 .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Shri Miraj D Shah, Advocate अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri Robin Choudhury, Addl. Cit-Dr ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 06-02-2019 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 28-02-2019 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S.Godara:- This Assessee’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2012-13 Arises Against The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-10 Kolkata’S Order Dated 29.09.2016 Passed In Case No.49/Cit(A)-10/W-35(2)/15-16/Kol, Involving Proceedings U/S 144 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961; In Short ‘The Act’. Heard Both The Parties. Case File Perused. 2. The Assessee’S Former Substantive Ground Challenges Correctness Of Both The Lower Authorities’ Action Adding His Sundry Credits Of ₹1,10,17,324/- As Unexplained In The Course Of Assessment As Upheld In The Lower Appellate Discussion As Follows:- “05. Grounds No. 3 Relates To The Action Of The Ld. Ao In Adding Rs. 1,10,17,324/- Under Head 'Unexplained Credit-Sundry Creditor'. The Matter Has Been Dealt By The Ld. A.O As Under:

Section 144Section 271(1)(c)

…dvances received from the debtors (customers), the assessee has not supported such claims either before the Ld.AO or before this forum. 4. In the case of Suresh Kumar T Jain Vs ITO, Ward-2(1), Banalore, the Hon'ble ITAT, Bangalore, Bench-A, reported in [2011] 128 ITD 74 (Bangalore) by their order dated 08.01.2010 have held as follows: Section 68 read with section 41(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Cash credits - Assessment year 2005-06 - In course of assessment, Assessing Officer asked assessee to prove genuineness of sundry creditors shown in return of. income - In reply, assessee merely filed confirmation lett…

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. CHAUDHARY CARS PVT. LTD.,, JALGAON

In the result, the impugned order is upheld and the appeal of Revenue is dismissed

ITA 956/PUN/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune18 Oct 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil PathakFor Respondent: Dr. Vivek Agarwal

Section 132Section 139Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 2(22)(e)

…heir veracity is verified. To support his submissions the ld. DR placed reliance on the following decisions : i. Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Jansampark Advertising & Marketing (P.) Ltd., 375 ITR 373 (Delhi); ii. Suresh Kumar T. Jain Vs. Income Tax Officer, 136 TTJ 247 (Bangalore). 3.1 In respect of deemed dividend the ld. DR submitted that in the Balance sheet for the year ending 31-03-2011 the assessee had shown Rs.3,68,27,750/- as loan taken from its sister concern M/s. B.N.C. Power Projects Ltd. Shri Bhagwat Narayan Chaudhary is the common and substantial shareholder of both the companies having interest t…

DURGESH AUTOFIN P.LTD,BIJNOR vs. PRCIT, MUZAFFARNAGAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2539/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Oct 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Ms. Suchitra Kamble, Jm Ita No. 2539/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2013-14 Durgesh Autofin P. Ltd., Vs Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax, C/O Sh. Pankaj Kumar, Director, Muzaffarnagar-251002 S/O Late Sh. Tejpal Singh, Mandi Kotla, Near Nehru Murti, Chandpur, Bijnot, Bijnor, Uttar Pradesh (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaccd0768P Assessee By : Sh. Vivek Bansal, Adv. Revenue By : Ms. Rachna Singh, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 29.08.2018 Date Of Pronouncement : 09.10.2018 Order Per N. K. Saini, Am: This Is An Appeal By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 13.03.2018 Of Ld. Pr. Cit, Muzaffarnagar U/S 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The Act).

For Appellant: Sh. Vivek Bansal, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Rachna Singh, CIT DR

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 269SSection 271DSection 41(1)Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘D’, NEW DELHI Before Sh. N. K. Saini, AM and Ms. Suchitra Kamble, JM ITA No. 2539/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2013-14 Durgesh Autofin P. Ltd., Vs Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax, C/o Sh. Pankaj Kumar, Director, Muzaffarnagar-251002 S/o Late Sh. Tejpal Singh, Mandi Kotla, Near Nehru Murti, Chandpur, Bijnot, Bijnor, Uttar Pradesh (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AACCD0768P Assessee by : Sh. Vivek Bansal, Adv. Revenue by : Ms. Rachna Singh, CIT DR Date of Hearing : 29.08.2018 Date of Pronouncement : 09.10.2018 ORDER Per N. K. Saini, AM: This is an appeal by the asse…

R.V. STEELS PVT. LTD,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLEII(3), CHENNAI

In the result appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 2201/CHNY/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai13 Aug 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri A.Mohan Alankamony & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

For Appellant: Shri AR.V. Sreenivasan, JCITFor Respondent: 13.06.2018

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250(6)Section 41(1)

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, ‘ए’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी ए. मोहन अलंकामणी, लेखा सद"य एवं "ी धु"वु" आर.एल रे"डी, "या"यक सद"य के सम" BEFORE SHRI A.MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.2201/Chny/2017 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2007-08) M/s. R.V. Steels Pvt. Ltd., Vs The ACIT, 108, Mahatma Gandhi Road, Central Circle III(3), Nungambakkam, Chennai – 34. Chennai – 34. PAN: AAACR2457B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) : Shri Sital Kumar Jain, CA अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant by : Shri AR.V. Sreenivasan…