← All Phrases

“creditworthiness of the creditor”

Cash Credits & Unexplained ItemsSection 68Section 68914 judgments

The decision most relied on for creditworthiness of the creditor is CIT v. Orissa Corporation Pvt. Ltd. (159 ITR 78), cited in 897 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on creditworthiness of the creditor

CIT v. Orissa Corporation Pvt. Ltd.
159 ITR 78 · 1986 · Supreme Court
897
citing judgments

When an assessee provides the identity and address of a creditor or investor for a cash credit or share capital under Section 68, the burden shifts to the Department to establish lack of genuineness or creditworthiness, requiring it to conduct further inquiries; mere non-compliance by third parties to summons cannot be the sole basis for an adverse inference against the assessee.

CIT v. Lovely Exports (P) Ltd.
216 CTR 195 · 2008 · Supreme Court
854
citing judgments

If an assessee company receives share application money from alleged bogus shareholders and provides their details to the Assessing Officer, no addition can be made under Section 68 in the company's hands; the Department must proceed against the shareholders by reopening their individual assessments.

Commissioner of Income Tax v. Nova Promoters and Finlease (P) Ltd.
342 ITR 169 · 2012 · High Court
658
citing judgments

To make an addition under Section 68 for unexplained cash credits, the Assessing Officer must conduct proper inquiry into the identity, genuineness, and creditworthiness of the creditor, especially concerning share application money. The assessee's initial discharge of burden by providing necessary details shifts the onus back to the AO for further investigation, including the source of source.

Kale Khan Mohammad Hanif v. CIT
50 ITR 1 · 1963 · Supreme Court
581
citing judgments

The assessee bears the onus of proving the source and nature of any sum of money or receipt found to have been received by them. If the assessee fails to satisfactorily explain the receipt, the Income-tax Officer is entitled to treat it as taxable income.

DCIT v. Rohini Builders
256 ITR 360 · 2002 · High Court
489
citing judgments

An assessee discharges the initial onus under Section 68 for cash credits by providing creditor details like PAN and addresses, proving creditworthiness via banking transactions, and demonstrating genuineness, especially when loans are repaid through cheques.

Roshan Di Hatti v. CIT
107 ITR 938 · 1977 · Supreme Court
477
citing judgments

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.

CIT v. Precision Finance Pvt. Ltd.
208 ITR 465 · 1994 · High Court
427
citing judgments

When an assessee seeks to explain a cash credit under Section 68, they must prove the identity of the creditors, their creditworthiness or capacity to advance money, and the genuineness of the transactions. The burden of proof is not discharged merely by filing confirmatory letters or demonstrating banking channel transactions.

CIT v. Divine Leasing & Finance Ltd.
299 ITR 268 · 2008 · High Court
426
citing judgments

The Assessing Officer cannot add share capital or share premium amounts if the assessee provides the identity and creditworthiness of the subscriber and establishes the genuineness of the transaction. The court may admit additional evidence under Rule 46A, such as the PAN identity of the creditor.

Judgments citing creditworthiness of the creditor

One Point Commercial Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward-6(3), Kolkata

ITA 473/KOL/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 Oct 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarmai.T.A. No. 473/Kol/2019 Assessment Year: 2012-13 One Point Commercial Pvt. Ito, Wad 6(3), Ltd. Kolkata Vs 40/4, Strand Road, 2Nd Floor, Kolkata-700001. (Pan: Acvpj4013F) अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "त् यथ"/ (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri S. K. Tulsiyan, Advocate & MsFor Respondent: Shri Pradip Biswas, Addl. CIT
Section 133(6)Section 143Section 143(3)Section 68

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण "ायपीठ, कोलकाता । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, KOLKATA BEFORE DR. MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

The ACIT., Patan Circle, Patan vs. Shiv Refoils and Cakes, Chansama, Patan

In the result, the Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 1672/AHD/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad15 Oct 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.1672/Ahd/2019 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2014-15 The Acit Shiv Refoils & Cakes बनाम/ Patan Circle, Plot No.2 Gidc Estate V/S. Patan – 384 265 Chanasma, Patan

For Appellant: Shri Manish J. Shah & Rushin Patel, ARsFor Respondent: Shri Prithviraj Meena, CIT-DR
Section 144Section 68

credited in their books. The assessee must prove the identity of the creditor, the genuineness of the transaction, and the creditworthiness of the creditor. In the present case, the AO added the capital introduced by the partners under section 68 of the Act, arguing that their failure to file income

DCIT Circle -2(1), Hyderabad vs. Gireesh Infrastructure Pvt Ltd, Hyderabad

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 499/HYD/2022[2013-14]Status: HeardITAT Hyderabad15 Oct 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Manjunatha, G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No. 499/Hyd/2022 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2013-14) Dy. Cit Vs. Gireesh Infrastructure Circle 2(1) Private Limited Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan: Aadcg3003H (Appellant) (Respondent) राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: Shri Ashish Kumar Shukla, Dr िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri P Murali Mohan Rao, Ca सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 15/10/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 15/10/2024 आदेश/Order

For Appellant: Shri P Murali Mohan Rao, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ashish Kumar Shukla, DR
Section 68

deleting the addition of Rs.3,81,71,598/- made u/s 68 of the I.T. Act, 1961, though the genuineness of the transactions and creditworthiness of the creditors were not proved. The learned DR further submitted that the Assessing Officer has brought out clear fact to the fact that ... before the date of payment to the appellant company and from the above, it is undisputed fact that the appellant could not establish creditworthiness of the creditors. The learned CIT (A) Page 3 of 7 ITA 499 of 2022 Gireesh Infrastructure P Ltd without appreciating relevant facts simply deleted

Sarika Tyagi, Ghazibad vs. DCIT, Central Circle, Ghazaibad

Accordingly, Ground No. 2 raised by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1414/DEL/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Oct 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumardcit, Vs. Sushil Tyagi, Central Circle, A-2, Ganpati Ghaziabad Apartments, Civil Lines, New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Aejpt6739A Dcit, Vs. Yogender Singh, Central Circle, J-6A, Sector-23, Ghaziabad Sanjay Nagar, Ghaziabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Bgcos8548E Yogender Singh, Vs. Dcit, J-6A, Sector-23, Central Circle, Sanjay Nagar, Ghaziabad Ghaziabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Bgcos8548E Naveen Tyagi, Vs. Dcit, G-302, Vvip Central Circle, Addresses, Raj Nagar Ghaziabad Extention, Ghaziabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Admpt6420A Sarika Tyagi, Vs. Dcit, H-100, Patel Nagar,- Central Circle, 3, Ghaziabad Ghaziabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Afapt5986P Assessee By : Shri Rajeev Khandelwal, Ca Shri Gagan Khandelwal, Adv Shri Jaind Jaiswal, Adv Revenue By: Ms. Sapna Bhatia, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 23/08/2024 Date Of Pronouncement /10/2024

For Appellant: Shri Rajeev Khandelwal, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Sapna Bhatia, CIT DR
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 68

discharged if he furnishes the documentary evidences proving the i) identity of the creditors ii) genuineness of the transaction and iii) the creditworthiness of the creditor. In the present case, the identity of the loan creditor is established as it is existing income tax assessee. The genuineness of the transaction ... wherein it has been held that where the necessary documents are furnished by the assessee to prove the identity, genuineness of transaction and creditworthiness of the creditor, the AO cannot make the addition without making inquiries :- -CIT vs. Laxman Industrial Resources Pvt. Ltd. [2017] 397 ITR 106 -CIT Vs. Rakam

Yogender Singh, Ghaziabad vs. DCIT, Central Circle, Ghaziabad

Accordingly, Ground No. 2 raised by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1413/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Oct 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumardcit, Vs. Sushil Tyagi, Central Circle, A-2, Ganpati Ghaziabad Apartments, Civil Lines, New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Aejpt6739A Dcit, Vs. Yogender Singh, Central Circle, J-6A, Sector-23, Ghaziabad Sanjay Nagar, Ghaziabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Bgcos8548E Yogender Singh, Vs. Dcit, J-6A, Sector-23, Central Circle, Sanjay Nagar, Ghaziabad Ghaziabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Bgcos8548E Naveen Tyagi, Vs. Dcit, G-302, Vvip Central Circle, Addresses, Raj Nagar Ghaziabad Extention, Ghaziabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Admpt6420A Sarika Tyagi, Vs. Dcit, H-100, Patel Nagar,- Central Circle, 3, Ghaziabad Ghaziabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Afapt5986P Assessee By : Shri Rajeev Khandelwal, Ca Shri Gagan Khandelwal, Adv Shri Jaind Jaiswal, Adv Revenue By: Ms. Sapna Bhatia, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 23/08/2024 Date Of Pronouncement /10/2024

For Appellant: Shri Rajeev Khandelwal, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Sapna Bhatia, CIT DR
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 68

discharged if he furnishes the documentary evidences proving the i) identity of the creditors ii) genuineness of the transaction and iii) the creditworthiness of the creditor. In the present case, the identity of the loan creditor is established as it is existing income tax assessee. The genuineness of the transaction ... wherein it has been held that where the necessary documents are furnished by the assessee to prove the identity, genuineness of transaction and creditworthiness of the creditor, the AO cannot make the addition without making inquiries :- -CIT vs. Laxman Industrial Resources Pvt. Ltd. [2017] 397 ITR 106 -CIT Vs. Rakam

Naveen Tyagi, Ghaziabad vs. DCIT, Central Circle, Ghaziabad

Accordingly, Ground No. 2 raised by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1412/DEL/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Oct 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumardcit, Vs. Sushil Tyagi, Central Circle, A-2, Ganpati Ghaziabad Apartments, Civil Lines, New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Aejpt6739A Dcit, Vs. Yogender Singh, Central Circle, J-6A, Sector-23, Ghaziabad Sanjay Nagar, Ghaziabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Bgcos8548E Yogender Singh, Vs. Dcit, J-6A, Sector-23, Central Circle, Sanjay Nagar, Ghaziabad Ghaziabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Bgcos8548E Naveen Tyagi, Vs. Dcit, G-302, Vvip Central Circle, Addresses, Raj Nagar Ghaziabad Extention, Ghaziabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Admpt6420A Sarika Tyagi, Vs. Dcit, H-100, Patel Nagar,- Central Circle, 3, Ghaziabad Ghaziabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Afapt5986P Assessee By : Shri Rajeev Khandelwal, Ca Shri Gagan Khandelwal, Adv Shri Jaind Jaiswal, Adv Revenue By: Ms. Sapna Bhatia, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 23/08/2024 Date Of Pronouncement /10/2024

For Appellant: Shri Rajeev Khandelwal, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Sapna Bhatia, CIT DR
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 68

discharged if he furnishes the documentary evidences proving the i) identity of the creditors ii) genuineness of the transaction and iii) the creditworthiness of the creditor. In the present case, the identity of the loan creditor is established as it is existing income tax assessee. The genuineness of the transaction ... wherein it has been held that where the necessary documents are furnished by the assessee to prove the identity, genuineness of transaction and creditworthiness of the creditor, the AO cannot make the addition without making inquiries :- -CIT vs. Laxman Industrial Resources Pvt. Ltd. [2017] 397 ITR 106 -CIT Vs. Rakam

DCIT Central Circle, Ghaziabad vs. Yogender Singh, Ghaziabad

Accordingly, Ground No. 2 raised by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1387/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Oct 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumardcit, Vs. Sushil Tyagi, Central Circle, A-2, Ganpati Ghaziabad Apartments, Civil Lines, New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Aejpt6739A Dcit, Vs. Yogender Singh, Central Circle, J-6A, Sector-23, Ghaziabad Sanjay Nagar, Ghaziabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Bgcos8548E Yogender Singh, Vs. Dcit, J-6A, Sector-23, Central Circle, Sanjay Nagar, Ghaziabad Ghaziabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Bgcos8548E Naveen Tyagi, Vs. Dcit, G-302, Vvip Central Circle, Addresses, Raj Nagar Ghaziabad Extention, Ghaziabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Admpt6420A Sarika Tyagi, Vs. Dcit, H-100, Patel Nagar,- Central Circle, 3, Ghaziabad Ghaziabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Afapt5986P Assessee By : Shri Rajeev Khandelwal, Ca Shri Gagan Khandelwal, Adv Shri Jaind Jaiswal, Adv Revenue By: Ms. Sapna Bhatia, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 23/08/2024 Date Of Pronouncement /10/2024

For Appellant: Shri Rajeev Khandelwal, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Sapna Bhatia, CIT DR
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 68

discharged if he furnishes the documentary evidences proving the i) identity of the creditors ii) genuineness of the transaction and iii) the creditworthiness of the creditor. In the present case, the identity of the loan creditor is established as it is existing income tax assessee. The genuineness of the transaction ... wherein it has been held that where the necessary documents are furnished by the assessee to prove the identity, genuineness of transaction and creditworthiness of the creditor, the AO cannot make the addition without making inquiries :- -CIT vs. Laxman Industrial Resources Pvt. Ltd. [2017] 397 ITR 106 -CIT Vs. Rakam

DCIT, Central Circle, Ghaziabad vs. Sushil Tyagi, Delhi

Accordingly, Ground No. 2 raised by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1386/DEL/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Oct 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumardcit, Vs. Sushil Tyagi, Central Circle, A-2, Ganpati Ghaziabad Apartments, Civil Lines, New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Aejpt6739A Dcit, Vs. Yogender Singh, Central Circle, J-6A, Sector-23, Ghaziabad Sanjay Nagar, Ghaziabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Bgcos8548E Yogender Singh, Vs. Dcit, J-6A, Sector-23, Central Circle, Sanjay Nagar, Ghaziabad Ghaziabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Bgcos8548E Naveen Tyagi, Vs. Dcit, G-302, Vvip Central Circle, Addresses, Raj Nagar Ghaziabad Extention, Ghaziabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Admpt6420A Sarika Tyagi, Vs. Dcit, H-100, Patel Nagar,- Central Circle, 3, Ghaziabad Ghaziabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Afapt5986P Assessee By : Shri Rajeev Khandelwal, Ca Shri Gagan Khandelwal, Adv Shri Jaind Jaiswal, Adv Revenue By: Ms. Sapna Bhatia, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 23/08/2024 Date Of Pronouncement /10/2024

For Appellant: Shri Rajeev Khandelwal, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Sapna Bhatia, CIT DR
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 68

discharged if he furnishes the documentary evidences proving the i) identity of the creditors ii) genuineness of the transaction and iii) the creditworthiness of the creditor. In the present case, the identity of the loan creditor is established as it is existing income tax assessee. The genuineness of the transaction ... wherein it has been held that where the necessary documents are furnished by the assessee to prove the identity, genuineness of transaction and creditworthiness of the creditor, the AO cannot make the addition without making inquiries :- -CIT vs. Laxman Industrial Resources Pvt. Ltd. [2017] 397 ITR 106 -CIT Vs. Rakam

DCIT, Circle-20(1), New Delhi vs. Pragyawan Technologies Private Limited, Delhi

ITA 88/DEL/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Oct 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Anubhav Sharmaassessment Year: 2016-17 Dcit, Vs Pragyawan Technologies Private Circle-20(1), Limited, Flat No.02, 2Nd Floor, New Delhi. Plot No.70A/31, Guru Nanakpura, Laxmi Nagar, Delhi – 110 092. Pan: Aagcp1209D

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Singla, CAFor Respondent: Shri Mandeep Pawar, Sr. DR
Section 131(1)(d)Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 68

Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) was justified in holding that the identity and creditworthiness of the creditors as well as the genuineness of the loan transactions were established, and in directing that the AOs of the creditor companies

Navnita Dealcomm Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward - 6(3), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1369/KOL/2024[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata09 Oct 2024AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar&Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey]

Section 131Section 143(1)Section 68

enquiry was done and the Ld. CIT(A) has simply affirmed the finding of the AO by holding that no identity and creditworthiness of the creditors could not be proved by the assessee by ignoring all the evidences placed before 4 I.T.A. No.1369/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Navnita Dealcom ... returned un-served or no body complied with them is of little significance to prove the genuineness of the transactions and identity and creditworthiness of the creditors. The relevant portion of the decision is extracted below: “We find considerable force of the submissions of the learned Counsel for the appellant

Ace Cabs Limited, Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle-1(2), Delhi, C R Building

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 443/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Oct 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Hon’Ble & Shri S.Rifaur Rahmanace Cabs Limited, Vs. Acit, Circle 1 (2), 562, Silver Oak Lane, Delhi. M.G. Road, Ghitorni, Delhi – 110 030. (Pan : Aaica4494R) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Gaurav Jain, Advocate Ms. Bharti Sharma, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Kanv Bali, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 23.07.2024 Date Of Order : 04.10.2024 Order Per S.Rifaur Rahman,Am: 1. This Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), New Delhi [“Ld. Cit(A)”, For Short]/ National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac) Dated 12.12.2023 For The Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. The Assessee Submitted An Application Under Rule 29 Of The Itat Rules For Admitting The Additional Evidences & The Contents Thereof Are Reproduced Below:-

For Appellant: Shri Gaurav Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Kanv Bali, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)

have reached to the conclusion that the assessee has discharged the primary onus which lay upon it. The identity of the creditor, the creditworthiness of the creditor and genuineness of the transaction have been proved by the assessee. In CIT v. Bedi

Shankar Traders & Distributors Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-5(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 199/KOL/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 Oct 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A. No. 199/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Shankar Traders & Income Tax Officer, Ward-5(1), Distributors Pvt. Ltd. Vs Aaykar Bhawan, A-Block, 1St Floor, Mercantile P-7, Chowringhee Square, Building, 9, Lal Bazar Street, Kolkata-700, West Bengal Kolkata-700001, [Pan: Aadcs8907L] West Bengal अपीलार्थी/ (Appellant) प्रत्‍यर्थी/ (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Manish Tiwari, ARFor Respondent: Shri Susanta Saha, DR
Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 14ASection 68

bank account, we find that the assessee is required to discharge its primary onus by first placing the evidence to prove the identity & creditworthiness of cash creditors/ share applicant and genuineness of the transactions. Before us, the ld. Counsel for the assessee has submitted detailed paper book containing various documents

Balhanuman Commodeal Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-5(4), Kolkata

ITA 116/KOL/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 Oct 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rakesh Mishraassessment Year: 2012-13

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Vineet Kumar, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR
Section 131Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250Section 68

credited in the books of the assessee, the onus lies on the assessee to prove three criteria: (i) Identity of the creditors, (ii) Creditworthiness of the creditors and (iii) Genuineness of the transaction. As per the provisions of the section 68 of the I. T. Act, the onus ... established. If the identity of the creditors had not been established, consequently the question of establishment of genuineness of the transactions or the creditworthiness of the creditors did not arise. It is not for the ITO to find out by making investigation from the bank accounts unless the assessee proved

The ACIT, Central Circle-3, Vadodara vs. M/S. Aikya Chemicals Pvt. Ltd., Vadodara

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are hereby dismissed

ITA 160/AHD/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad01 Oct 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble, Judical Member & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaआयकर अपील (एसएस) सं./I.T (Ss).A. No. 81/Ahd/2021 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2014-15) बनाम/ Asstt. Commissioner Of M/S. Cube Mines & Income-Tax Minerals Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Central Circle-3, Vadodara 11/C Ground Floor, Jaishri Narayan Co-Operative Hsg. Society, Subhanpura, Gorwa, Vadodara, Gujarat 390015 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaccc5761D (Appellant) .. (Respondent) & आयकर अपील (एसएस) सं./I.T (Ss).A. No. 82/Ahd/2021 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2014-15) & आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 159/Ahd/2021 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2015-16) बनाम/ Asstt. Commissioner Of M/S. Iolite Cube Income-Tax Inframaterial Ltd. Vs. Central Circle-3, Vadodara 1, Chandamani Nagar, Vidhya Vihar School Lane, Subhanpura, Vadodara, "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aacci5944A (Appellant) .. (Respondent) &

For Appellant: Shri Jigar Adhiyaru, A.RFor Respondent: Shri H. Phani Raju, CIT. DR
Section 132Section 153A

form of these loans. 13. It is thus found that the assessee had discharged its onus to establish the identity and creditworthiness of the creditor and the genuineness of the transaction. The capacity of BVPL to advance the loan was also duly substantiated. The co-ordinate Bench of this Tribunal

The ACIT, Central Circle-3, Vadodara vs. M/S. Iolite Cube Inframaterial Ltd., Vadodara

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are hereby dismissed

ITA 159/AHD/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad01 Oct 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble, Judical Member & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaआयकर अपील (एसएस) सं./I.T (Ss).A. No. 81/Ahd/2021 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2014-15) बनाम/ Asstt. Commissioner Of M/S. Cube Mines & Income-Tax Minerals Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Central Circle-3, Vadodara 11/C Ground Floor, Jaishri Narayan Co-Operative Hsg. Society, Subhanpura, Gorwa, Vadodara, Gujarat 390015 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaccc5761D (Appellant) .. (Respondent) & आयकर अपील (एसएस) सं./I.T (Ss).A. No. 82/Ahd/2021 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2014-15) & आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 159/Ahd/2021 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2015-16) बनाम/ Asstt. Commissioner Of M/S. Iolite Cube Income-Tax Inframaterial Ltd. Vs. Central Circle-3, Vadodara 1, Chandamani Nagar, Vidhya Vihar School Lane, Subhanpura, Vadodara, "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aacci5944A (Appellant) .. (Respondent) &

For Appellant: Shri Jigar Adhiyaru, A.RFor Respondent: Shri H. Phani Raju, CIT. DR
Section 132Section 153A

form of these loans. 13. It is thus found that the assessee had discharged its onus to establish the identity and creditworthiness of the creditor and the genuineness of the transaction. The capacity of BVPL to advance the loan was also duly substantiated. The co-ordinate Bench of this Tribunal

Income Tax Officer, Mumbai Ayakar Bhawan Churchgate vs. Varsha Corporation Limited, Malad (West)

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

ITA 348/MUM/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Oct 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal & Shri Gagan Goyalito, R. No. 227, Aayakar Bhavan, M. K. Road, Mumbai Maharashtra - 400 020. ..... Appellant Vs. M/S. Varsha Corporation Ltd. 13, Adarsh Society, Varsha Ramachandra Lane Extn. Malad (West), Mumbai- 400 064. Pan No.Aabcv2293E ..... Respondent

For Appellant: Ms. Rajeshwari Menon, Ld. DRFor Respondent: Shri Mahesh Rajora, Ld.AR
Section 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 250

identity of the creditors had not been established, consequently the question of establishment of the genuineness of the transactions or the creditworthiness of the creditors did not and could not arise. The Tribunal did not apply its mind to the facts of this particular case and proceeded on the footing

Babu Lal Sharma, Jaipur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Jaipur

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 179/JPR/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur30 Sept 2024AY 2018-19
For Appellant: Shri S.R. Sharma, CA &
Section 115BSection 132(1)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 153CSection 250Section 68

Noorjehan, 103 Taxman 382 (SC), we find that the primary onus on the assessee to prove the identity and creditworthiness of the creditors as well as the genuineness of the transactions stood proved and neither the Id. AO nor LD. CIT (A) have controverted and or gave negative finding regarding

Babu Lal Sharma, Jaipur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Jaipur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 178/JPR/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur30 Sept 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri S.R. Sharma, CA &For Respondent: Shri Ajey Malik, CIT-DR
Section 115BSection 132(1)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 153CSection 250Section 68

Noorjehan, 103 Taxman 382 (SC), we find that the primary onus on the assessee to prove the identity and creditworthiness of the creditors as well as the genuineness of the transactions stood proved and neither the ld. AO nor LD. CIT (A) have controverted and or gave negative finding regarding

Dalas Biotech Limited, Bhiwadi vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Alwar

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed with no orders as to cost

ITA 147/JPR/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur30 Sept 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Tiwari, Adv (Physical)For Respondent: Shri Anup Singh, Addl. CIT-DR
Section 131Section 143(3)Section 40Section 68

above principle, one should examine as to what the authorities below found vis-a-vis the genuineness of the transactions and the creditworthiness of their creditors. (i) The fact that there was sufficient balance available with the creditors when cheques have been issued to the assessee-company was established ... event, the revenue still had a doubt with regard to the genuineness of the transactions in issue or as regards the creditworthiness of the creditors, it would have had to discharge the onus which had shifted on to it. A bald assertion by the Assessing Officer that the credits were

Prakash Govindbhai Patel, Ahmedabad vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-6(1)(1), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 163/AHD/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 Sept 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri R.N. Dsouza, CIT D.R. & Shri Rignesh
Section 143(1)Section 144Section 148Section 69A

Pune) (TM) held that it is part of the duty of the assessee to furnish evidence regarding the creditworthiness of the creditors. 13. Accordingly, looking into the instant facts where the assessee has made huge cash deposits in his bank account which are not commensurate with the income declared

creditworthiness of the creditor — 914 case laws | BharatTax