How many judgments are there on Section 11A?

BharatTax indexes 96 ITAT, High Court and Supreme Court judgments that turn on Section 11A of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

Section 11A of the Income Tax Act

Q: What is the leading case on Section 11A of the Income Tax Act?

Hastimal v. CIT (49 ITR 273) is the decision most relied on for Section 11A, cited in 57 judgments. An assessee's duty regarding the creditworthiness of a creditor is limited to the transactions between them, and they are not required to investigate the ultimate source of the creditor's funds. If the genuineness of the transaction and the creditworthiness are established, no addition under Section 68 is permissible.

Q: Which cases are most cited on Section 11A?

Hastimal v. CIT (49 ITR 273) — 57 citing judgments; CIT (Exemption) v. Shiv Kumar Sumitra Devi Smarak Shikshan Sansthan (113 Taxmann.com 334) — 9 citing judgments.

The decision most relied on for Section 11A is Hastimal v. CIT (49 ITR 273), cited in 57 of the 96 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 11A

Hastimal v. CIT

49 ITR 273 · 1963 · High Court

citing judgments

An assessee's duty regarding the creditworthiness of a creditor is limited to the transactions between them, and they are not required to investigate the ultimate source of the creditor's funds. If the genuineness of the transaction and the creditworthiness are established, no addition under Section 68 is permissible.

CIT (Exemption) v. Shiv Kumar Sumitra Devi Smarak Shikshan Sansthan

113 Taxmann.com 334 · 2000 · High Court

citing judgments

Judgments on Section 11A

The Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-3 vs. Dlf Utilities Ltd

ITA/31/2016HC Delhi18 Jan 2016

Bench: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU

Section 11ASection 78Section 78(1)

M/S Gujarat Industries vs. Commr.of Central Excise-I, Ahmedabad

C.A. No.-005784-005788 - 2007Supreme Court14 Dec 2015

Section 11ASection 2

M/S Gujarat Industries vs. Commr.of Central Excise-I, Ahmedabad

C.A. No.-005784-005788 - 2007Supreme Court14 Dec 2015

Section 11ASection 2

M/S. Purolator India Ltd vs. Commnr. of Central Excise, Delhi-III

Appeal is disposed of accordingly

C.A. No.-001959-001959 - 2006Supreme Court25 Aug 2015

Section 11ASection 11A(1)Section 38ASection 4

M/S. Purolator India Ltd vs. Commnr. of Central Excise, Delhi-III

Appeal is disposed of accordingly

C.A. No.-001959-001959 - 2006Supreme Court25 Aug 2015

Section 11ASection 11A(1)Section 38ASection 4

Bench: 2 Judges

Section 11Section 11ASection 248Section 3Section 4(3)(a)Section 6

Shabina Abraham vs. Collector of Central Excise & Customs

C.A. No.-005802-005802 - 2005Supreme Court29 Jul 2015

Section 11Section 11ASection 4(3)(a)

Shabina Abraham vs. Collector of Central Excise & Customs

C.A. No.-005802-005802 - 2005Supreme Court29 Jul 2015

Section 11Section 11ASection 4(3)(a)

M/S. Coastal Paper Ltd vs. Commnr. of Central Excise, Visakhapatnam

C.A. No.-004908-004908 - 2005Supreme Court21 Jul 2015

M/S. Coastal Paper Ltd vs. Commnr. of Central Excise, Visakhapatnam

C.A. No.-004908-004908 - 2005Supreme Court21 Jul 2015

Mis. Dharampal Satyapal Ltd vs. Deputy Commissioner of Central Excise, Gauhati & Ors

The appeals are dismissed

CIVIL APPEAL No. 4458/2015Supreme Court14 May 2015

Bench: Sending Communication Did Not Result In Any Prejudice G To Assessee & It May Not Be Feasible To Direct The Department To Take Fresh Action After Issuing Notice As That Would Be A Mere Formality. Natural Justice - Concept & Doctrine Of - Explaired & Discussed. H 437