← 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

Sachin Bansal, Ludhiana vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-7, Ludhiana

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

ITA 569/CHANDI/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh20 Jan 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, AM आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No. 569/CHD/2024 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year : 2018-19 Mr. Sachin Bansal, Prop. M/s Sachin Traders B-I- 993, ST. No. 2 Deep Nagar Ludhiana-141001 बनाम The ITO Ward-7(1), Ludhiana स्थायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: AEPPB0574H अपीलार्थी/Appellant प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent निर्धारिती की ओर से/Assessee by : None राजस्व की ओर से / Revenue by : Dr. Ranjeet Kaur, Sr. DR सुनवाई की तारीख /Date of Hearing : 30/12/2024 उदघोषणा की तारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 20/0

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Dr. Ranjeet Kaur, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)

29/01/2024 pertaining to Assessment Year 2018-19, wherein the assessee has challenged the sustenance of addition of Rs. 8,95,884/- in respect of sundry creditors. 2. At the outset, it is noted that there is a delay in filing the present appeal. After considering the material available ... vide order dt. 2 03/02/2021 wherein the AO brought to tax an amount of Rs. 8,95,884/- being the amount of sundry creditors. It was observed by the AO that there are three sundry creditors namely Darshan Lal, Sneh Lata and Vijay Pan Store totaling

Altiux Innovations Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. DCIT., Circle- 1(1), Hyderabad

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1008/HYD/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad16 Jan 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Manjunatha, G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.1006 To 1008/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2020-21) Altiux Innovations (P) Ltd Vs. Dy. Commissioner Of Hyderabad Income Tax, Circle 1(1) Pan: Aalca9069R Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri Sai Sarikonda, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri B Bala Krishna, Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 09/01/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 16/01/2025 आदेश/Order

For Appellant: Shri Sai Sarikonda, CAFor Respondent: : Shri B Bala Krishna, DR
Section 144Section 270ASection 271ASection 32Section 68

training of individuals, companies, business organizations and any other types of customers in the aforesaid fields. 3.2 The assessee has submitted list of Sundry Creditors liabilities, Statement of intangible assets, working of depreciation, Fixed asset Chart and computation of income and has not submitted any supporting documentary evidences in support ... fixing the compliance date to submit the details in supporting on or before 10.08.2022”. 7. Thus, it is clear that except the list of sundry creditors, statement on intangible assets, working of depreciation, the assessee has not filed any supporting documentary evidence in respect of the loan claimed to have

Altiux Innovations Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. DCIT., Circle-1(1), Hyderabad

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1007/HYD/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad16 Jan 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Manjunatha, G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.1006 To 1008/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2020-21) Altiux Innovations (P) Ltd Vs. Dy. Commissioner Of Hyderabad Income Tax, Circle 1(1) Pan: Aalca9069R Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri Sai Sarikonda, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri B Bala Krishna, Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 09/01/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 16/01/2025 आदेश/Order

For Appellant: Shri Sai Sarikonda, CAFor Respondent: : Shri B Bala Krishna, DR
Section 144Section 270ASection 271ASection 32Section 68

training of individuals, companies, business organizations and any other types of customers in the aforesaid fields. 3.2 The assessee has submitted list of Sundry Creditors liabilities, Statement of intangible assets, working of depreciation, Fixed asset Chart and computation of income and has not submitted any supporting documentary evidences in support ... fixing the compliance date to submit the details in supporting on or before 10.08.2022”. 7. Thus, it is clear that except the list of sundry creditors, statement on intangible assets, working of depreciation, the assessee has not filed any supporting documentary evidence in respect of the loan claimed to have

Altiux Innovations Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. DCIT., Circle-1 (1), Hyderabad

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1006/HYD/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad16 Jan 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Manjunatha, G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.1006 To 1008/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2020-21) Altiux Innovations (P) Ltd Vs. Dy. Commissioner Of Hyderabad Income Tax, Circle 1(1) Pan: Aalca9069R Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri Sai Sarikonda, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri B Bala Krishna, Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 09/01/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 16/01/2025 आदेश/Order

For Appellant: Shri Sai Sarikonda, CAFor Respondent: : Shri B Bala Krishna, DR
Section 144Section 270ASection 271ASection 32Section 68

training of individuals, companies, business organizations and any other types of customers in the aforesaid fields. 3.2 The assessee has submitted list of Sundry Creditors liabilities, Statement of intangible assets, working of depreciation, Fixed asset Chart and computation of income and has not submitted any supporting documentary evidences in support ... fixing the compliance date to submit the details in supporting on or before 10.08.2022”. 7. Thus, it is clear that except the list of sundry creditors, statement on intangible assets, working of depreciation, the assessee has not filed any supporting documentary evidence in respect of the loan claimed to have