Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 16 (0.54 seconds)
Documents citing P.K. Sethi vs Commissioner Of Income-Tax on 26 July, 2006

Jindal International , Panipat vs Assessee

In this regard, ld. Counsel has relied on the decision of Gauhati ITA No. 5346/D/2012 9 High Court in the case of P.K. Sethi vs. CIT (2006) 286 ITR 318, 322, 323 (Gauhati). The Hon'ble High Court at page 322, inter-alia, observed that out of the three requirements, the first two questions, namely, the identity of the assessee and credit worthiness of the creditors have been established and even the Tribunal had no doubt about the same. Therefore, the entire question before the Hon'ble High Court was regarding genuineness of the transaction. However, in the present case, the AO is disputing the credit worthiness of the lenders per se and, therefore, this decision is not applicable to the facts of the case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Delhi Cites 8 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Sajjan Kumar Agarwala, Siliguri vs Assessee on 19 March, 2007

9. At the time of hearing before us, the learned representatives of the parties made submissions in line with their respective written submission filed before us. We have carefully considered their submissions and gone through the material placed before us. It is undisputed fact that all the loan creditors, except two, appeared in person before the A.O. in response to notice u/s. 131 of the Act and they have duly confirmed the transaction. In respect of other loan creditors, viz., Sri Sumit Kr. Agarwal & Amit Kr. Agarwal, they could not appear themselves in response to 131 notice because of their absence from the town at the relevant. Copies of I.T. Returns for three consecutive assessment years, i.e. A.Ys. 2001-02 to 2003-04, statement of accounts, balance sheets and confirmation of loan of each of the 9 (nine) loan creditors were furnished before the A.O. The A.O. doubted the creditworthiness of these loan creditors because, according to him, the opening cash and bank balance of the creditors did not permit for advancing loan to the assessee. Further, the loan creditors received gift from 20 distant relatives allegedly to cover up the loan given to the assessee, who did not have any bank account and they brought cash to purchase bankers cheque in favour of the loan creditors. He thus concluded that the loan creditors did not have any creditworthiness to give loans to the assessee. We, however, observe from the appellate order that the returns of income of each of the nine loan creditors for assessment years 2001-02 to 2003-04 and tax paid for such assessments have been accepted by the department. Therefore, in our considered opinion, once the returned income of the loan creditors, wherein the gifts received by them have been shown, has been accepted by the department, we fail to understand how in that situation the transaction of the loan creditor with the assessee can be said to be non-genuine and assessee's income from undisclosed sources. It has been held by Hon'ble Gauhati High Court in the case of P.K. Sethi vs. CIT [286 ITR 318 (Gau)] that when all the creditors were income-tax assesses before the same ITO and the latter having accepted the genuineness of loan transactions in the case of the creditors, the cash credits could not be treated as non-genuine in the hands of the assessee. As stated above, in the case before us, all the nine loan creditors are assessed to tax and their return of income for assessment years 2001-02 to 2003-04 have been accepted by the department. Further, the department could not bring on record any conclusive evidence to establish the doubt of the A.O. that assessee's own money has 11 routed through the loan creditors. Therefore, the action of the A.O. in rejecting the loan transaction in its entirety was not justified.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Kolkata Cites 12 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Mishra Infrastructures Pvt. Ltd.,, ... vs Assessee on 29 March, 2012

33. Referring to the decision of Hon'ble Gauhati High Court in the case of Sri P.K. Sethi Vs. CIT reported in 286 ITR 319 (Gau) he submitted that when all the creditors are Income tax assessees' before the same ITO and the latter having accepted the genuineness of the loan transactions in the case of the creditors, the cash credits could not be treated as non-genuine in the hands of the assessee.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Pune Cites 11 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Apex Therm Packaging Pvt.Ltd.,, Surat vs Department Of Income Tax on 23 April, 2014

and also the judgement of Hon'ble High Court of Gauhati rendered in the case of P.K. Sethi vs. CIT reported at (2006) 286 ITR 318 (Gau). In support of the contention that the creditors are income-tax assessees and the transactions were accepted as genuine in the cases of creditors. Thus, no inference could be drawn that these are fake transactions. Further, the ld.counsel for the assessee relied on the judgement(s) of Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court rendered in the case of CIT vs. Apex Them Packaging (P.)
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Ahmedabad Cites 10 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1   2 Next