← 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

Asstt Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle - 1(1), Rajkot vs. Symbosa Granito Private Limited, Wankaner

ITA 806/RJT/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot08 May 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini. & Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपीलसं./Ita No.806/Rjt/2024 निर्धारणवर्ष / Assessment Year: (2016-17) (Hybrid Hearing) Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Vs. Symbosa Granite Pvt. Limited, Tax, Circle - 1(1), Rajkot Room No. 502,Aaykar Bhavan, Survey No. 125P1/P2,126,131P1/P2/P3, Race Course Road, Village- Matel, Rajkot - 300001 Wankaner- 363621(Gujarat) (Assessee) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Mehul Ranpura, Ld. Ar Respondent By : Shri Sanjay Pungliya, Ld. Cit (Dr) Date Of Hearing : 14/02/2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 08/05/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Bench: Captiond Appeal Filed By The Revenue, Pertaining To Assessment Year (Ay) 2016-17, Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals), Dated 13.08.2024,Which In Turn Arises Out Of An Assessment Order Passed By The Assessing Officer, Under Section 143(3) R.W.S. 263 & 144B Of The Income Tax Act, 1961, Vide Order Dated 31.03.2022.

For Appellant: Shri Mehul Ranpura, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Pungliya, Ld. CIT (DR)
Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 263Section 68

properly verified the genuineness of the new share capital issued and unsecured loans received (ii) no details in respect of 30 sundry creditors pertaining to transportation and having outstanding amount exceeding Rs. 1 lakh was provided and (iii) only a few confirmation were submitted in respect of trade payables

Sri Maharaja Refineries, Erode vs. ACIT, Circle-I, Erode

ITA 1956/CHNY/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai07 May 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.1955 & 1956/Chny/2024 (निर्धारणवर्ष / Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15) Sri Maharaja Refineries, # 128, Bhavani Road, Erode-638 004. Vs The Assistant Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Circle-1, Erode. Pan: Aaffs-8491-N (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) अपीलार्थीकीओरसे / Appellant By प्रत्यर्थीकीओरसे/Respondent By : Mr. S.Sridhar, Advocate (Erode) : Mr. R.Clement Ramesh Kumar, Cit & Ms.Anitha, Addl.Cit सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 19.02.2025 घोषणाकीतारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 07.05.2025 आदेश / Order Per Manu Kumar Giri, Jm: The Captioned Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against Separate Orders Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)(Nfac), Delhi [Cit(A)] Both Dated 07.06.2024 For

For Respondent: Mr. S.Sridhar, Advocate (Erode)
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153(5)Section 40A(2)Section 40A(2)(a)Section 40A(2)(b)Section 92

case was selected for 'complete scrutiny' for the reasons to verify 'Low Net Profit or Loss shown from Large gross Receipts, Large amount of sundry creditors and Large other expenses claimed in P & L account. Therefore, notice u/s 143(2) of the I.T. Act, 1961 was issued

Sri Maharaja Refineries, Erode vs. ACIT, Circle-1, Erode

ITA 1955/CHNY/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai07 May 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.1955 & 1956/Chny/2024 (निर्धारणवर्ष / Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15) Sri Maharaja Refineries, # 128, Bhavani Road, Erode-638 004. Vs The Assistant Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Circle-1, Erode. (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) Pan: Aaffs-8491-N (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) अपीलार्थीकीओरसे / Appellant By : Mr. S.Sridhar, Advocate (Erode) प्रत्यर्थीकीओरसे/Respondent By : Mr. R.Clement Ramesh Kumar, Cit & Ms.Anitha, Addl.Cit सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 19.02.2025 घोषणाकीतारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 07.05.2025 आदेश / Order Per Manu Kumar Giri, Jm: The Captioned Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against Separate Orders Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)(Nfac), Delhi [Cit(A)] Both Dated 07.06.2024 For

For Appellant: Mr. S.Sridhar, Advocate (Erode)For Respondent: Mr. R.Clement Ramesh Kumar
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153(5)Section 40A(2)Section 40A(2)(a)Section 40A(2)(b)Section 92

case was selected for 'complete scrutiny' for the reasons to verify 'Low Net Profit or Loss shown from Large gross Receipts, Large amount of sundry creditors and Large other expenses claimed in P & L account. Therefore, notice u/s 143(2) of the I.T. Act, 1961 was issued

Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1), Vijayawada vs. The Chintalapadu Primary Agricultural Co-Operative Credit Society Limited, Chintalapadu Village

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is allowed for statistical purpose and cross objection of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 153/VIZ/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam30 Apr 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Balakrishnan S.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.153/Viz/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2020-21) Income Tax Officer Vs. The Chintalapadu Ward-1(1) Primary Agricultural Vijayawada Co-Op Credit Society Ltd. Chintalapadu Village Krishna Dist. [Pan : Aacat7617B] (Appellant) (Respondent) Cross Objection No.17/Viz/2025 Arising Out Of Ita No.153/Viz/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2020-21) The Chintalapadu Primary Vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-1(1) Agricultural Co-Op Credit Vijayawada Society Ltd. Chintalapadu Village Krishna Dist. [Pan : Aacat7617B] (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri Gvn Hari, Ar (Through Hybrid Hearing) रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By: Dr.Aparna Villuri, Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 30/04/2025 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of 30/04/2025 Pronouncement:

For Appellant: Shri GVN Hari, ARFor Respondent: Dr.Aparna Villuri, DR
Section 142(1)Section 80P

Rs.74,23,565/- 80P of the Act. 6. It is clear that the AO has made additions of all the incremental amounts of sundry creditors, investments, loan, advances to members, other liabilities and disallowance of deduction u/s 80P. ITA No.153/Viz/2025 & CO No.17/Viz/2025 The Chintalapadu Primary Agricultural Co-op Credit Society

Up Government Employees Welfare, Lucknow vs. ACIT, NFAC, Delhi

In the result appeals in ITA No

ITA 743/LKW/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow30 Apr 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Sh. Kul Bharat & Sh. Nikhil Choudharyita Nos.743 & 746/Lkw/2024 & Ita No. 30/Lkw/2024 A.Y. 2017-18 U.P. Government Employees Vs. Assessing Officer, Nfac Welfare, Lucknow Pan:Aaatu0957A (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: None Revenue By: Sh. Manu Chaurasia, Cit (Dr) Date Of Hearing: 15.04.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 30.04.2025 O R D E R Per Bench.: These Three Appeals Have Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Orders Passed By The Ld. Cit(A), Nfac On 23.10.2024, 28.10.2024 & 2.01.2024 In The Appeals Preferred Against The Assessment Order Under Section 143(3), The Penalty Order Under Section 271Aac(1) & The Penalty Order Under Section 270A. The Grounds Of Appeal In These Three Appeals Are As Under:-

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. Manu Chaurasia, CIT (DR)
Section 143(3)Section 2(24)(x)Section 234ASection 270ASection 271ASection 36(1)(va)Section 40Section 68

Liabilities of Rs. 53539675/-. 5. That the Learned Commissioner of Income tax (A) erred in law and on facts and add the 10% on Sundry creditors of Rs. 37217518/- on estimates basis. 6. That the Learned Commissioner of Income tax (A) erred in law and on facts ... also brought the same to tax under section 115BBE. iv. The ld. AO noted from the audit report that sundry creditors amounting to Rs. 37,21,75,184/-, including opening credit balances of suppliers that were continuing for past many years and no transactions had occurred in the ledger

Brijbhoomi Sheetalaya India P Ltd, Mainpuri vs. DCIT Central Circle, Farrukhabad

The appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 337/AGR/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Agra25 Apr 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Satbeer Singh Godara, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No. 337/Agr/2018 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2010-11) M/S. Brijbhoomi Sheetalaya Dcit, Circle 2(1), बनाम/ India (P) Ltd. Farrukhabad. Vpo Chirara, Sultanganj Vs. G.T. Road, Mainpuri. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aadcb-7653-A (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : None ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Sh. Shailender Shrivastava – Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 20-02-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 25-04-2025 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1. Aforesaid Appeal By Assessee For Assessment Year (Ay) 2010-11 Arises Out Of An Order Passed By Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Aligarh [Cit(A)] On 24-01-2018 In The Matter Of An Assessment Framed By Ld. Assessing Officer [Ao] U/S. 143(3) Of The Act On 05-02- 2013. At The Time Of Hearing, None Appeared For Assessee. The Ld. Sr. Dr Pleaded For Dismissal Of The Appeal. Upon Perusal Of Caser Records, The Appeal Is Disposed-Off As Under. 2. The Assessee Runs Cold Storage For Potatoes. It Transpired That The Assessee Received Share Capital Of Rs.69.60 Lacs & Unsecured Loans Of Rs.62.95 Lacs From 4 Persons As Tabulated In Para-3 Of The Assessment

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. Shailender Shrivastava – Ld. Sr. DR
Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 68Section 69C

Rs.69.60 Lacs and unsecured loans of Rs.62.95 Lacs from 4 persons as tabulated in para-3 of the assessment order. The assessee had outstanding sundry creditors for Rs.12.80 Lacs also. Upon enquiry, it was found that two creditors did not respond to notices issued u/s 133(6) and accordingly