clearlaw logo
  • Home
  • About Us
  • Pricing
  • Blog
Login Get Started for Free
  1. Blog » Unexplained Credits and Judicial Scrutiny: DCIT vs. Priytam Plaschem P. Ltd., ITA No. 6038/DEL/2019

Unexplained Credits and Judicial Scrutiny: DCIT vs. Priytam Plaschem P. Ltd., ITA No. 6038/DEL/2019

Team Clearlaw  Team Clearlaw
Aug 14, 2024
Income Tax

DCIT vs. Priytam Plaschem: A Case Study on Unexplained Credits

Case Overview

The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal dismissed an appeal by the DCIT against Priytam Plaschem Pvt. Ltd., concerning unexplained credits for share capital and share premium, underlining the judicial approach to assessing such matters.

Background

The case originated from an addition of Rs. 3,00,00,000 made by the Assessing Officer regarding unexplained credits which the CIT(A) deleted, prompting an appeal by the DCIT.

Legal Proceedings

During the proceedings, it was noted that the credits were received as share capital from Mekastar Finlease Ltd., which the CIT(A) had earlier considered genuine based on similar transactions upheld by the ITAT and the High Court. The Revenue challenged this on various grounds, but the ITAT, relying on substantial precedents, dismissed the appeal, upholding the deletion of the addition.

Implications of the Decision

This case highlights the crucial role of detailed documentation and the proper application of legal precedents in tax disputes concerning the genuineness of financial transactions. It also underscores the principle that the assessee need not prove the source of the source once the immediate source is established as credible.

Order pronounced in the open court on March 16, 2023.

Unexplained Credits and Judicial Scrutiny: DCIT vs. Priytam Plaschem P. Ltd., ITA No. 6038/DEL/2019

Team Clearlaw

Manage the increasing number of hearings effortlessly by leveraging the legal AI revolution We are India's Leading revolutionary AI-powered legal platform where you can get enough insights into top cases and judgements.

Categories

  • Income Tax

Recent Post’s

  • Inder Parstah Charitable Trust vs CIT (E), Chandigarh: Registration Denial Under Section 12AA and 80G
  • Babu Lal, Faridabad vs. ITO Ward-1(2), Faridabad: Case Filed for 2010-11 Assessment Year – Appeal Withdrawn Under Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme
  • Ram Kumar Dhiamn vs. ITO Ward-26(4), New Delhi: Case Filed for 2015-16 Assessment Year – Appeal Withdrawn Due to Duplicate Filing
  • Saju Kozhikkadan Paul vs. ITO Ward-53(5), New Delhi: Case Filed for 2015-16 Assessment Year – Appeal Dismissed Due to Invalid Return
  • Naresh Kumar Jain vs. ITO Ward-47(4), New Delhi: Case Filed for 2011-12 Assessment Year – Appeal Withdrawn Under Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme

Manage the increasing number of hearings effortlessly by leveraging the legal AI revolution We are India's Leading revolutionary AI-powered legal platform where you can get enough insights into top cases and judgements.

Research Platform
clearlaw footer logo

Manage the increasing number of hearings effortlessly by leveraging the legal AI revolution We are India's Leading revolutionary AI-powered legal platform.

Quick Links

  • About Us
  • Signup
  • Blog
  • Pricing

Search By

  • Appelent
  • Judge Name
  • Lawyer Name
  • Respondent

Legal

  • Terms and Conditions
  • Privacy Policy
  • Refund Policy

Contact Us

  • Clearlaw
  • 9876543210
  • B-78 Noida Sector 60

Copyright © Clearlaw All Rights Reserved.

Terms and Conditions | Privacy Policy | Refund Policy