V.I.S.P. (P) Ltd. v. CIT

265 ITR 202High Court2004#3361 most cited

What is V.I.S.P. (P) Ltd. v. CIT authority for?

Section 68 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, is not limited to actual cash entries but extends to liabilities found to be bogus. Such amounts can be added to the assessee's income if a plausible explanation is not provided.

35

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,005 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2025.

Also referred to as

V.I.S.P. (P) Ltd. v. CIT · 265 ITR 202 · section 68 · cash credits · bogus liabilities · unexplained income · addition to income · scope of section 68 · Income Tax Act 1961

Issues it is cited on

section 31paper companysection 251(2)share capital and share premiumsource of sourcecreditworthiness of the creditorsection 251(1)(a)live linkadmission of additional evidenceentry operatorshare application moneyaddition u/s 68

Judgments citing V.I.S.P. (P) Ltd. v. CIT

ITO, New Delhi vs. M/S. Sunlight Tour and Travels Pvt. Ltd., Sahibabad

ITA 5740/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Mar 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

…ition on Court employees benefit expenses • N. R. Portfolio (P) Ltd and other expenses: [2014] 42 taxmann.com 339 (Delhi HC) The details produced during • V.I.S.P. (P) Ltd. V appellate proceedings shows Commissioner Of Income- that expenditure is incurred Tax 265 ITR 202 (MP HC) for the business of the company and bear a close and intimate nexus with the business of the company (Page – 33, Table Para – 5 – CIT(A)’s Order). Major portion of expenditure incurred for complying with statutory formalities and compliances necessary for operation of company. Therefore AO is directed to deleted the disallowance (Page – 3…

ITO, New Delhi vs. M/S. Sintex Consumers Electronics Pvt. Ltd., Delhi

ITA 5736/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Mar 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

…ition on Court employees benefit expenses • N. R. Portfolio (P) Ltd and other expenses: [2014] 42 taxmann.com 339 (Delhi HC) The details produced during • V.I.S.P. (P) Ltd. V appellate proceedings shows Commissioner Of Income- that expenditure is incurred Tax 265 ITR 202 (MP HC) for the business of the company and bear a close and intimate nexus with the business of the company (Page – 33, Table Para – 5 – CIT(A)’s Order). Major portion of expenditure incurred for complying with statutory formalities and compliances necessary for operation of company. Therefore AO is directed to deleted the disallowance (Page – 3…

ITO, New Delhi vs. M/S. Supreme Placement Services Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 5650/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Mar 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

…ition on Court employees benefit expenses • N. R. Portfolio (P) Ltd and other expenses: [2014] 42 taxmann.com 339 (Delhi HC) The details produced during • V.I.S.P. (P) Ltd. V appellate proceedings shows Commissioner Of Income- that expenditure is incurred Tax 265 ITR 202 (MP HC) for the business of the company and bear a close and intimate nexus with the business of the company (Page – 33, Table Para – 5 – CIT(A)’s Order). Major portion of expenditure incurred for complying with statutory formalities and compliances necessary for operation of company. Therefore AO is directed to deleted the disallowance (Page – 3…

ITO, New Delhi vs. M/S Angel Cement Pvt. Ltd., Ghaziabad

ITA 4691/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Mar 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

…ition on Court employees benefit expenses • N. R. Portfolio (P) Ltd and other expenses: [2014] 42 taxmann.com 339 (Delhi HC) The details produced during • V.I.S.P. (P) Ltd. V appellate proceedings shows Commissioner Of Income- that expenditure is incurred Tax 265 ITR 202 (MP HC) for the business of the company and bear a close and intimate nexus with the business of the company (Page – 33, Table Para – 5 – CIT(A)’s Order). Major portion of expenditure incurred for complying with statutory formalities and compliances necessary for operation of company. Therefore AO is directed to deleted the disallowance (Page – 3…

ITO, Ward - 1(4), Kolkata vs. M/S. Josan Deposits & Advances Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2096/KOL/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 Dec 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri P. M. Jagtap, Vice- & Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

Section 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 263Section 68

…um amount, so section 68 of the Act was clearly attracted. In support of this contention, he relied on the decision of Hon’ble 5 | P a g e M/s Josan Deposits & Advances Pvt. Ltd. A.Y. 2008-09 Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of V.I.S.P. (P) Ltd. vs CIT 265 ITR 202. The learned CIT DR contended that the relief given by the Ld. CIT(A) to the assessee on the issue under consideration by holding that section 68 is not applicable thus is not justified and urged us to reverse the decision of Ld. CIT(A) and uphold the A.O’s action and confirm the addition. 7. Per contra, the learned counsel for the assessee Shri…

ACIT, Circle-1, Burdwan vs. M/S. Bardhaman Dharmaraj Paper Mill Pvt. Ltd., Burdwan

ITA 910/KOL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 Jan 2020AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Sainiassessment Year : 2015-16

Section 143(3)Section 68

…s of account of the assessee with credit made to the share capital and share premium amount section 68 was clearly attracted. In support of this contention, he relied on the decision of Hon'ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of V.I.S.P. (P) Ltd. vs CIT 265 ITR 202 and the decision of Mumbai Bench of this Tribunal in the case of Panna S. Khatau vs ITO rendered vide its order dated 03.07.2015 passed in ITA No. 3596/Mum/2012. The learned DR contended that the relief given by the Ld. CIT(A) to the assessee on the issue under consideration by holding that section 68 is not applicable thus is not justified and t…

M/S. Bardhaman Dharmaraj Paper Mill Pvt. Ltd., Burdwan vs. ACIT, Circle-2, Burdwan

ITA 1187/KOL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 Jan 2020AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Sainiassessment Year : 2015-16

Section 143(3)Section 68

…s of account of the assessee with credit made to the share capital and share premium amount section 68 was clearly attracted. In support of this contention, he relied on the decision of Hon'ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of V.I.S.P. (P) Ltd. vs CIT 265 ITR 202 and the decision of Mumbai Bench of this Tribunal in the case of Panna S. Khatau vs ITO rendered vide its order dated 03.07.2015 passed in ITA No. 3596/Mum/2012. The learned DR contended that the relief given by the Ld. CIT(A) to the assessee on the issue under consideration by holding that section 68 is not applicable thus is not justified and t…

M/S Manish Finlease (P) Ltd, Patna vs. ITO, Ward-2(1), Patna

ITA 25/PAT/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Patna09 Aug 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2010-2011 Manish Finlease Pvt Ltd., Vs. Ito, Ward 2(1), Patna Chandi House Exhibition Road, Patna Pan/Gir No.Aaccm 6252 B (Appellant) .. ( Respondent) Assessee By : Shri A.K.Rastogi & Rakesh Kumar, Ars Revenue By : Shri Indrajeet Singh, Dr Date Of Hearing : 20/06/ 2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 09/08/ 2019 O R D E R Per Bench This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Cit(A)-1, Patna Dated 27.9.2018 For The Assessment Year 2010-2011. 2. The Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Delayed By 51 Days. The Assessee Has Filed Application For Condonation Of Delay Stating The Reasons For Not Filing The Appeal In Time Before The Tribunal. After Hearing The Submissions Of The Parties, We Are Satisfied That The Assessee Had A Bonafide Reason For Not Filing The Appeal In Time. Therefore, We Condone The Delay & Proceed To Decide The Appeal Of The Assessee On Merits.

For Appellant: Shri A.K.Rastogi & Rakesh Kumar, ARsFor Respondent: Shri Indrajeet Singh, DR
Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148(1)Section 68

…e accounts is found to be bogus, in the absence of any plausible and as the explanation offered by the assessee. the model can be added towards the income of the assessee and brought to tax in the hands of the assessee as held in the case of V.I.S.P. (P) Ltd. 265 ITR 202 (MP). The honourable Supreme Court. in the case of A Govindarajalu Mudaliar 34 ITR 8007. the honourable Supreme Court had held that there is ample authority for the proposition that when an assessee fails to prove satisfactorily the source and nature of a certain amount of cash received during the accounting year, the AO is entitled to draw the i…

DCIT 6(2)(2), Mumbai vs. Edesk Services Ltd, Mumbai

ITA 7113/MUM/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 May 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No.7113/Mum/2016 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2012-13) बिाम/ Dcit 6(2)(2) M/S. Edesk Services Ltd. R.No. 563, Aayakar Bhavan, 6-A, Lalwani Indl. Estate M.K Road, Churchgate, 14, G.D. Ambekar Road, V. Mumbai 400020 Wadala, Mumbai 400031 स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ Pan : Aabcb5087H

For Appellant: Shri. Jayesh DadiaFor Respondent: Shri. O.P Meena (DR)
Section 143(3)Section 68

…redited in books of accounts which could be a credit entry appearing towards payable to creditors for purchases made by the tax-payer. Reference is drawn to the decision of Hon’ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of V.I.S.P. Private Limited v. CIT(2004) 265 ITR 202(MP), wherein Hon’ble High Court held as under: “1. This appeal under section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter for short, "the Act of 1961"), has been preferred by the assessee against the order passed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal on April 15, 2002, in I.T. Appeal No. 402 (Indore) of 1995 pertaining to the assessment year 1990…

Shri Om Prakash Patidar (HUF), Indore vs. The ITO 2(4), Indore

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 220/IND/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Indore03 Jan 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradassessment Year: 2013-14

Section 131(1)Section 143(3)

…contention that section 68 cannot be invoked as no books are maintained is found to be without merits. In this context it is relevant to note the observations of the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of VISP (P) Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Income Tax 265 ITR 202 MP which are reproduced below. Learned counsel, appearing for the assessee placing reliance on the decision of the Supreme Court reported in Baladin Ram v. CIT (1969) 71 ITR 427 and the decisions of the Mumbai and Allahabad High Courts reported in CIT v. Bhaichand H. Gandhi (1983) 141 ITR 67 and Sundar Lal Jain v. CIT (1979) 117 ITR 316, respecti…

The Assisatant Commissioenr of Income-Tax, Hoshiarpur vs. Sh. Maninder Singh Cheema, Hoshiarpur

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

ITA 719/ASR/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar31 Jul 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arora & Sh. N. K. Choudhryi.T.A. No. 719/Asr/2013 Assessment Year: 2007-08

For Appellant: Sh. Rajeev K. Gubgotra (D.R.)For Respondent: Sh. Surinder Mahajan, (C.A.)
Section 131Section 143(3)Section 68Section 69

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR. BEFORE SH. SANJAY ARORA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. N. K. CHOUDHRY, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No. 719/Asr/2013 Assessment Year: 2007-08 Asstt. Commissioner of Income Vs. Maninder Singh Cheema, Tax, Hoshiarpur Circle, H. No. 298, St. No. 20, Hoshiarpur Guru Nanak Nagar, Hoshiarpur [PAN: AEYPC 4778B] (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Sh. Rajeev K. Gubgotra (D.R.) Respondent by: Sh. Surinder Mahajan, (C.A.) Date of Hearing: 26.06.2018 Date of Pronouncement: 31.07.2018 ORDER Per Sanjay Arora, AM: This is an Appeal by the Revenue directed aga…

Jasamrit Constructions P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO 6(3)(2), Mumbai

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

ITA 1091/MUM/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Feb 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Joginer Singh & Shri Rajesh Kumarm/S. Jasamrit Constructions Income Tax Officer-6(3)(2) Private Ltd. Room No. 503, 5Th Floor Flat No. 901, Building 'B' Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Ashok Tower, Near Itc Hotel Mumbai 400020 Parel, Mumbai 400017 Pan – Aabcj8295L Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Vijay MehtaFor Respondent: Shri Aarju Goradia
Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 68

…ITR 375 (Del) xviii. CIT vs. Divine Leasing and Finance Ltd. & Anr. 299 ITR 263 (Del) xix. Sumati Dayal vs. CIT 214 ITR 801 (SC) xx. Smt. Vasantibai N. Shaha vs. CIT 213 ITR 803 (Bom) a. Govindarajulu Mudaliar vs. CIT 34 ITR 807 (SC) xxi. VIP (P) Ltd. vs. CIT 265 ITR 202 (MP) xxii. CIT vs. Sophia Finance Ltd. 205 ITR 98 (Del) xxiii. CIT vs. Active Traders (P) Ltd. 214 ITR 583 (Cal) xxiv. CIT vs. Nivedan Vanijya Niyojan Ltd. 263 ITR 623 (Cal) xxv. CIT vs. Bhagwati Jewels Ltd. 201 ITR 461 (Del) xxvi. CIT vs. Prateek Finance and Investment Co. Ltd. 215 ITR 272 (Del) xxvii. Shankar Industries vs. CIT 114 ITR 689 (Cal…

Addl CIT RG 24(2), Mumbai vs. Saraswati Developers, Mumbai

In the result, the Revenue’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 8337/MUM/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Aug 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Am & Shri Pawan Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 8337/Mum/2010 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2006-07) Dy. Cit-24(2), Saraswati Developers Room No. 601, 6Th Floor, 54/55, Rani Sati Marg, बनाम/ Pratyakshakar Bhavan, Malad (E), Mumbai-400 097 Bandra-Kurla Complex, Vs. Bandra (E), Mumbai-400 051 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aaofs 5105 N (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant By : Shri Kailash Gaikwad ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Viraj Shah

For Appellant: Shri Kailash GaikwadFor Respondent: Shri Viraj Shah
Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 68

…the same includes only cash credits within its purview, for which, i.e., the latter proposition, reliance stands also placed by the assessee on CIT v. P. Mohanakala [2007] 291 ITR 278 (SC), even as the decision in the case of V.I.S.P. (P) Ltd. vs. CIT [2004] 265 ITR 202 (MP) was cited and put across by the Bench to the ld. Authorized Representative (AR) during hearing. In the facts of that case, it was found by the Tribunal that the purchase of goods could not be satisfactorily proved. The alleged supplier firm, belonging to the same group, was not assessed to tax and its’ credentials were doubtful. It’s books o…

ACIT, Meerut vs. M/S. Kastoori Devi Foundation, Meerut

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue stands dismissed

ITA 5098/DEL/2012[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Jan 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri J.S. Reddy & Shri Chandra Mohan Garg

For Appellant: Shri P. DAM Kanunjna, Sr.DRFor Respondent: Shri S.K. Kalra, Adv
Section 11Section 115Section 115BSection 133(6)Section 68

…More, 82 ITR 540(SC) VI. CIT Vs P. Mohnakala, 291 ITR 278 (SC) VII. VIII. CIT Vs Sumati Daval, 214, ITR 801 (SC) ITO Vs Diza Holdings Pvt. Ltd. 255 ITR 573 (Kerla) IX. CIT Vs. Precision Finance Pvt. Ltd. (Cal.) 208 ITR 465 X. V.I.S.P Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT (MP) 265 ITR 202 XI. Further, the case law of DIT (Exemption) Vs. Keshav Social and Charitable Foundation (2005) 146 Taxman 569 (Delhi) quoted in CIT (A) order pertained to even prior to insertion of sec.ll5BBC of the IT Act, 1961 in the Statute by the Finance Act 2006 w.e.f. 01/04/2007 . 2. Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case the Ld. CIT (A) has…

ACIT, Circle-2, Jalpaiguri vs. M/S Road (India)Internation, Uttar Dinajpur

In the result, the appeal of revenue is dismissed

ITA 1591/KOL/2012[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 Nov 2015AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri M. Balaganesh, Am]

For Appellant: Shri D. Naskar, JCITFor Respondent: N o n e
Section 143(3)Section 68

…ility shown in the accounts is found to be bogus and there is no plausible and reasonable explanation from the assessee, the amount can certainly be added towards income of the assessee." 2 M/s. Road (India) International AY 2004-05 VISP Pvt Ltd. vs CIT(MP) 265 ITR 202);” 4. Briefly stated facts are that the assessee derives income from civil construction. The AO during the course of assessment proceedings noticed from the books of account of the assessee that it is unable to produce the complete bills and vouchers in respect to fuel expenses and there is disproportionate growth in fuel expenses from Rs.3,03,93…