← 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

Asian Hotels (North) Limited, New Delhi vs. Pr, CIT, Delhi-1, New Delhi

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

ITA 654/DEL/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Nov 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sudhir Pareek, Judicialmember M/S. Asian Hotels (North) Limited, Vs. Pr.Cit, 1A, Hotel Hyatt Regency, Delhi – 1. Bhikaji Cama Place, New Delhi – 110 066. (Pan: Aaaca0125H) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Abhishek Jain, Ca Revenue By : Shri Javed Akhtar, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 17.09.2024 Date Of Order : 26.11.2024 O R D E R Per S. Rifaur Rahman, Am : 1. This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld. Principal Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Delhi-1 (Hereinafter Referred To ‘Ld. Pcit’) Dated 31.03.2021 For Assessment Year 2016-17. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are, Assessee Filed Its Return Of Income On 29.09.2016 Declaring A Loss Of Rs.32,48,76,393/-. The Case Was Selected For Complete Scrutiny Under Cass. The Assessment Was Completed Under Section 143 (3)

For Appellant: Shri Abhishek Jain, CAFor Respondent: Shri Javed Akhtar, CIT DR
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 41(1)Section 438

assessment order was believed to be erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of revenue as per observations given hereunder: i. Large increase in Sundry creditors and reduction in business income as compared to preceding year : During the assessment proceedings, this issue was raised by the then A.O. However, the genuineness ... creditworthiness of the sundry creditors was not verified at the time of assessment proceedings. No proper examination was made to identify the veracity of showing large increase in sundry creditors. ii. Gross total income is less than the value of foreign remittance sent : During the assessment proceedings, this issue

Maideen Pitchai Rawther Peer Mohammed, Chennai vs. ACIT, Ncc-5, Chennai

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

ITA 1993/CHNY/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai13 Nov 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1993/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2014-15 Maideen Pitchai Rawther Peer Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of Mohammed, New No. 55, Old No. 16, Income Tax, Perianna Meistry Street, Periamet, Non Corporate Circle - 5, Chennai 600 003. Chennai. [Pan: Aajpp4740R] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri K. Meenatchi Sundaram, C.A. ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. R. Anita, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 11.11.2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 13.11.2024 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 28.06.2024 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre [Nfac], Delhi For The Assessment Year 2014-15. 2. Ground Nos. 1(I) To (Iv) Raised By The Assessee In Challenging The Action Of The Ld. Cit(A) In Confirming The Addition Made Under Section 41(1) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” In Short].

For Appellant: Shri K. Meenatchi Sundaram, C.AFor Respondent: Ms. R. Anita, Addl. CIT
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 41(1)

written off the amount in his accounts, the liability ceased to exist. As there was cessation of liability, the same cannot be part of sundry creditors of the assessee. Therefore, AO has rightly made the addition of Rs.59,42,446/- u/s.41(1) as cessation of liability. Therefore the Assessing Officer

Deputy Commisioner of Income Tax, Chennai vs. Anbu Infratech Private Ltd, Karichipalayam

ITA 1128/CHNY/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai06 Nov 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Vice- & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.No.1128/Chny/2024 (निर्धारणवर्ष / Assessment Year: 2018-19) The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs Anbu Infratech Pvt. Ltd., Income Tax, 3/74, Pappampalayam, Central Circle-2(1), Nallipalayam, Chennai. Karichipalayam – 637 201. (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) Pan:Aajca-6772-H (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) अपीलार्थीकीओरसे / Appellant By : Mr. R.Clement Ramesh Kumar, Cit प्रत्यर्थीकी ओरसे/Respondent By : Mr. M.V.Prasad, Fca & Mr.Rajendra Kumar, Irs (Retd) सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 28.08.2024 घोषणाकीतारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 06. 11.2024 आदेश / Order Per Mahavir Singh, Vp: This Appeal By The Revenue Is Arising Out Of The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Chennai In Order No.Itba/Apl/S/250/2023-24/1061245710(1) Dated 21.02.2024. The Assessment Was Framed By The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle 2(1), Chennai For The Assessment Year 2018-19 U/S.153C Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter The 'Act') Vide Order Dated 28.09.2021. 2.

For Appellant: Mr. R.Clement Ramesh KumarFor Respondent: Mr. M.V.Prasad, FCA &
Section 153CSection 69C

concerns are not appearing in the loose sheets seized. The Director of the assessee company confirmed in his statement that the closing balance of sundry creditors Rs.87,04,632/- vide page No. 14 is the actual sundry creditors as on 31.03.2018 since the settlement made with Shri Paranthaman was outside ... books of account, it was proposed to introduce fictitious sundry creditors under various names listed in page numbers bearing 11, 12 & 13. It is natural that since the payments are made outside the books of account name of Shri Paranthaman and his concerns did not appear in page 14 (actual