The Delhi High Court dismissed the Revenue's appeal against the ITAT's order deleting an addition of Rs.5,20 crores under Section 68, finding the assessee had discharged the burden of proving identity and genuineness of transactions.
The appeal is dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
$~4
PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-7..... Appellant Through: Mr. Rahul Chaudhary, Senior Standing Counsel.
versus
RANCURE INVESTMENT PVT. LTD. ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Avinash Chaurasia, Advocate.
CORAM: JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH
O R D E R % 01.09.2017
the ITAT of the materials placed on record. It has been concurrently held that the Assessee has discharged its burden of proving the identity and creditworthiness of the creditors and the genuineness of the transactions.
S. MURALIDHAR, J.
PRATHIBA M. SINGH, J.
SEPTEMBER 01, 2017 dk
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the ITAT erred in holding that the addition of Rs.5,20 crores made under Section 68 should be deleted?
Whether the order of the ITAT suffers from perversity warranting interference?
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-7
Rancure Investment Pvt. Ltd.
Suralidar
Prathiba M. Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
