← 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

Lazerr India, Chennai vs. ITO, Non-Corporate Ward-1(1), Chennai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee for AY 2016-17 is partly

ITA 193/CHNY/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Aug 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.192 & 193/Chny/2024 निर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Years: 2015-16 & 2016-17 M/S.Lazerr India, 9, Old No.6, Vyasar Street, T. Nagar, Chennai-600 017. [Pan: Aabfl 4079 K] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) अपीलार्थी की ओर से / Appellant By प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से / Respondent By सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : The Ito, Ncw-1(1), Chennai. (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) : Shri Hari Babu, Ca : Shri P. Sajit Kumar, Jcit : 03.07.2024 : 21.08.2024 आदेश / Order Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: These Are Appeals Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)/Nfac, (Hereinafter In Short "The Ld.Cit(A)"), Delhi, Both Dated 05.12.2023 For Assessment Years (Hereinafter In Short "Ay”) 2015-16 & 2016-17. 2. At The Outset, The Ld.Ar Of The Assessee Submits That The Assessee Doesn'T Press Ground Nos.11-13 For Ay 2016-17, Which Is Regarding The Claim Of Loss During The Floods. Therefore, The Same Stands Dismissed. :: 2 ::

Section 147Section 40Section 40b

partners of M/s.Lazerr India have brought in additional funds besides capital account as well as current account balances. These amounts have been shown under sundry creditors for loans for the reason that these may be withdrawn based on the funds availability in the firm. The details of amounts received from ... partners which have been shown under sundry creditors are as shown below: Mrs. Suha Kandaswamy – Rs.18,54,759.30/- Mr. P K Venkatesh - Rs.41,17,495.72/- Mr. P K Gayethri – Rs.4,74,612.00/- Interest on capital claimed in the Profit & Loss Account of Rs.6,75,823/- includes interest paid