← All Phrases

“sundry creditors”

Cash Credits & Unexplained ItemsSection 68Section 681,806 judgments

The decision most relied on for sundry creditors is CIT v. Shri Vardhman Overseas Ltd. (343 ITR 408), cited in 76 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on sundry creditors

CIT v. Shri Vardhman Overseas Ltd.
343 ITR 408 · 2012 · High Court
76
citing judgments

An addition under Section 68 cannot be made for genuine sundry creditors or trade payables merely carried forward from previous assessment years if there is no fresh credit in the relevant assessment year. Section 41(1) does not apply to acknowledged outstanding liabilities without actual remission or cessation.

CIT v. Pancham Dass Jain
205 CTR 444 · 2006 · High Court
55
citing judgments

Section 68 of the Income-tax Act is not attracted to amounts representing purchases made on credit or outstanding trade creditors, especially when the genuineness of the purchases is accepted by the department.

CIT v. Prameshwar Bohra
301 ITR 404 · 2008 · High Court
47
citing judgments

An amount already credited in the books of account in an earlier assessment year cannot be added again as an unexplained cash credit under Section 68 of the Income-tax Act in a subsequent assessment year.

CIT v. Nitin S. Garg
208 Taxmann 16 · 2012 · High Court
47
citing judgments

A trading liability acknowledged and continued to be shown in the balance sheet cannot be treated as cessation of liability under Section 41(1) merely because it remained outstanding for several years, unless the assessee has written it off in its books. The Assessing Officer must prove that the assessee obtained a benefit.

CIT v. Bhogilal Ramjibhai Atara
43 Taxmann.com 55 · 2014 · High Court
43
citing judgments

Section 41(1) of the Income Tax Act applies only where there is remission or cessation of a trading liability during the previous year relevant to the assessment year, and not merely because the assessee cannot provide confirmations for sundry creditors.

CIT v. Padamchand Ramgopal
76 ITR 719 · 1970 · Supreme Court
40
citing judgments

Minor irregularities in books of account cannot be the sole basis for rejection of the books or for making an estimated trading addition, especially when the assessee has provided explanations for discrepancies. The case distinguishes itself by focusing on receipts not brought into account rather than expenses claimed.

CIT v. Sita Devi Juneja
325 ITR 593 · 2010 · High Court
39
citing judgments

A liability cannot be presumed to have ceased to exist merely because it has been outstanding for several years. Without a bilateral act between the assessee and the creditor indicating cessation, additions under section 41(1) are not permissible.

CIT v. Best Wood Industries and Saw Mills
11 Taxmann.com 278 · 2011 · High Court
38
citing judgments

Once an assessment is reopened for a valid reason under Section 148(2), the Assessing Officer can bring to tax any escaped income that comes to their notice during the reassessment, even if it was not the original basis for reopening.

Judgments citing sundry creditors

Income Tax Officer, Non-Corporate Ward 19(4), Chennai vs. Parvathy Ayyavu, Chennai

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

ITA 1352/CHNY/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai14 May 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 1352/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2013-14 The Income Tax Officer, Vs. Parvathy Ayyavu, 35/17, 11Th Avenue, Ashok Nagar, Non Corporate Ward 19(4), Chennai. Chennai 600 083. [Pan:Afgpa2173P] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri P. Krishna Kumar, Jcit ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : None सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 06.05.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 14.05.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Dated 31.01.2024 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)/ National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi For The Assessment Year 2013-14. 2. We Note That This Appeal Was Filed On 07.05.2024 & After Scrutiny; The Registry Fixed The Appeal For Hearing On 29.07.2024. Accordingly, A Notice Dated 12.06.2024 Issued To The Respondent-

For Appellant: Shri P. Krishna Kumar, JCITFor Respondent: None
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

were issued. According to the Assessing officer, the assessee was represented by Chartered Accountant, but, could not furnish sufficient proof/evidence towards sundry creditors, loans & advances, inspite of 4 I.T.A. No.1352/Chny/24 many opportunities given, thereby, the Assessing Officer determined the total income of the assessee at ₹.8,76,17,173/-, inter ... alia, making addition on account of advances, unsecured loans, sundry creditors, advertisement charges, rent and legal expenses vide his order dated 31.03.2016 passed under section 143(3) of the Act. Aggrieved by the order of the Assessing Officer, the assessee preferred an appeal before