STAR COTSPIN LIMITED,GANGRAR CHITTORGARH vs. CENTRAL CIRCLE, AJMER, AJMER
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that the assessee had sufficiently discharged its onus of proving the genuineness of the loan transaction by providing documentary evidence and demonstrating repayment. The additions were based on assumptions and lacked cogent evidence.
What were the facts?
The assessee received an unsecured loan of Rs. 50 lakh from M/s Diwakar Commercial Pvt. Ltd. (DCPL), which was treated as an accommodation entry. An additional Rs. 75,000 was added for alleged commission paid for this entry.
What were the issues?
Whether the unsecured loan was a genuine transaction or an accommodation entry, and whether the addition for commission was sustainable.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cases cited in this judgment(2)Show listHide list
Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.
- PCIT v. Ambe Tradecorp Pvt. Ltd.169 citing145 Taxmann.com 27 · 2022 · HC · Read judgment
- (Principal Commissioner of Income-tax v. Bairagra Builders (P.) Ltd.5 citing299 Taxmann 460 · 2024 · HC
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” BENCH, JAIPUR
Before: SMT. ANNAPURNA GUPTA & SHRI NARINDER KUMAR
PER: ANNAPURNA GUPTA, AM
The present appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal), (ld. CIT(A))/National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi under Section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, (hereinafter referred to as “Act”).
It was common ground that the solitary issue in the present appeal pertained to addition made to the income of the assessee on account of unsecured loan taken by it during the year from one M/s Diwakar Asst. Year:2014-15 2 an accommodation entry, the addition being made u/s 68 of the Act in proceeding
The order continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
More judgments on Section 68
- ACIT Central Bilaspur, Bilaspur vs Arun Kumar Agrawal, SaktiITSSA 26/RPR/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Neo Incorporation, Rajkot vs DCIT Circle- 1(2), RajkotITA 471/RJT/2026[2012-2013]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2012-2013
- Bliss Dealtrade Private Limited, Kolkata vs Income Tax Officer - Ward 9(2) Kolkata…ITA 208/KOL/2026[2012-13]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2012-13
- Hemal Paresh Madeka, Rajkot vs Asst.Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 955/RJT/2026[2020-21]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2020-21
- Ajaybhai Dineshbhai Bagdai, Near Central… vs The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(2)(1), New…ITA 74/RJT/2026[2013-14]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2013-14
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Hindustan Coca-Cola Beverages PVT. LTD. vs. The Commissioner, CGST And Cx, Dibrugarh And AnrGauhati · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S Shree Sushruta Health Services Private Limited vs. The Union Of INDIAPatna · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S Rst Batteries vs. Deputy Commissioner CGST Delhi West & Ors.Delhi · 14 Oct 2026
- Dr.Sunil Kumar Padhi vs. The Chief Commissioner, GST And Central Excise, BhubaneswarOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- N.K Fashion Through It Proprietor Mr. Narender Agarwal vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Central Goods And Service Tax, Delhi EastDelhi · 14 Oct 2026