How many judgments cite 131 and v. CIT?

32 judgments on BharatTax cite 131 and v. CIT (140 ITR 151), spanning 2014 to 2023.

131 and v. CIT

140 ITR 151High Court1982#3644 most cited

What is 131 and v. CIT authority for?

When an assessee fails to discharge the onus of proving the identity, creditworthiness, and genuineness of a transaction for cash credits, the Assessing Officer is entitled to make additions.

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2014 to 2023.

Also referred to as

Nanak Chandra Laxman Dass v. CIT · 140 ITR 151 · section 68 · cash credit · onus of proof · identity of creditor · creditworthiness of creditor · genuineness of transaction · addition u/s 68 · share application money

Issues it is cited on

section 31 paper company section 251(2)share capital and share premium source of source creditworthiness of the creditor section 251(1)(a)live link admission of additional evidence entry operator share application money addition u/s 68

Judgments citing 131 and v. CIT

ITO, New Delhi vs. M/S. Supreme Placement Services Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 5650/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Mar 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

…he AO did not bring any Finlease Pvt Ltd. • Kale Khan Mohd. Hanif V adverse material to reject the explanations and CIT. • CIT V Lachhman Das Oswal evidences submitted by the appellant except non- • Nanak Chandra Laxman Dass compliance of 131 and V CIT (1982) 140 ITR 151 133(6) (Page 38 – CIT(A) (All.) order). • R Dalmia V CIT (1976) 113  Neither any person has ITR 522 (Del.) given any statement nor • CIT V Debi Prasad has made any allegation Vishwanath Prasad (1968) against these 72 ITR 194 (SC) companies(Page 38 – • CIT V Hero Cycles Pvt Ltd. CIT(A) order) • CIT V Stepwell Industries Ltd  The reasons given by…

ITO, New Delhi vs. M/S Angel Cement Pvt. Ltd., Ghaziabad

ITA 4691/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Mar 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

DCIT Circle-1 vs. Rana Papers Ltd

ITA 2184/DEL/2008[2002-2003]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Nov 2019AY 2002-2003

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Sanjog Kapoor, Sr. DR

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 148Section 68

…07 were served properly on the assessee but no share capital subscriber was produced before Assessing Officer and Ld. CIT(Appeals) ignored this fact, merely filing documents cannot be treated as sufficient evidences to prove genuiness of credit as reported in 140 ITR 151 (All.) and 50 ITR (SC). 3. That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts by deleting the addition of unsecured loans of Rs. 1,18,63,549/-. The Ld. CIT(Appeals) has accepted fresh / additional evidences produced before him and ignored the request of Assessing Officer to examine the same. 4. That order of the Ld. CIT(A) be set aside and that of…

ITO, Ward - 36(1), Kolkata vs. Shri Rakesh Agarwal, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2008/KOL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata19 Dec 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.2008/Kol/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14)

For Appellant: Shri K. Mondal, Sr. DRFor Respondent: None

Section 143(3)Section 57Section 68

…. Where the Assessment Year: 2013-14 Shri Rakesh Agarwal assessee fails to prove to the satisfaction of the Assessing Officer, the source and nature of the amount of cash credits, he is entitled to draw an inference that the receipts are of an income nature (140 ITR 151). It is not the duty of the Assessing Officer to locate the exact source of the cash credits (72 ITR 807 (SC). The burden to locate the source lies upon the assessee and he is required to explain the genuineness of the credit entry. However, in certain circumstances, this onus might shift on the Assessing Officer (98 ITR 337), In 171 ITR 373 (Mad…

Mukund Kumar Mantri, Siliguri vs. I.to.WD - 1(3), Jalpaiguri

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1878/KOL/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata04 Jul 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: : Shri P.M. Jagtapsh & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravia.Y 2007-08

For Appellant: Shri J.M. Thard, Advocate, ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri A. Bhattacharjee, Addl. CIT, ld.DR

Section 143(2)

…ed in cash in their bank accounts to the effect that these were their business receipts despite opportunity was provided and the ITAT found that the creditworthiness the donors have rightly been disbelieved by the AO. In the case of Nanak Chand Laxman vs CIT 140 ITR 151 (All), it is held that production of the creditor is not enough it is also established that the third party is not a man of straw, but a person capable of possessing the amount represented in the Cash Credit. In view of the above discussion, the addition made by the Ld. AO is confirmed.” 17. Before us the ld. AR submits that the assessee availed…

Jasamrit Constructions P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO 6(3)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1091/MUM/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Feb 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Joginer Singh & Shri Rajesh Kumarm/S. Jasamrit Constructions Income Tax Officer-6(3)(2) Private Ltd. Room No. 503, 5Th Floor Flat No. 901, Building 'B' Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Ashok Tower, Near Itc Hotel Mumbai 400020 Parel, Mumbai 400017 Pan – Aabcj8295L Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Vijay MehtaFor Respondent: Shri Aarju Goradia

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 68

…dan Vanijya Niyojan Ltd. 263 ITR 623 (Cal) xxv. CIT vs. Bhagwati Jewels Ltd. 201 ITR 461 (Del) xxvi. CIT vs. Prateek Finance and Investment Co. Ltd. 215 ITR 272 (Del) xxvii. Shankar Industries vs. CIT 114 ITR 689 (Cal) xxviii. Nanak Chandra Laxman Das vs. CIT 140 ITR 151(All) xxix. Hari Chand Virender Paul vs. CIT 140 ITR 148 (P&H) xxx. CIT vs. Biju Patnaik 160 ITR 674 (SC) xxxi. Income Tax Officer vs. Skyjet Aviation (P) Ltd. 71 ITD 95 (Ahd) xxxii. CIT vs. Precision Finance Pvt. Ltd. 208 465 (Cal) xxxiii. Orient Wire Industries (P) Ltd. 131 ITR 688 (Cal) xxxiv. CIT vs. Korlay Trading Co. Ltd. 232 ITR 820 (Cal) x…

Shri Krishna Charitable Trust, New Delhi vs. JCIT, Ghaziabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2878/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Feb 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. N. K. Sainiita No. 2878/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Sh. Krishna Charitable Trust, Vs Jcit, C/O-M/S Rra Taxindia, D-28, Range-2, South Extension, Part-I, Ghaziabad New Delhi-110049 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aagts8457F Assessee By : Dr. Rakesh Gupta & Sh. Somil Agarwal, Advs. Revenue By : Sh. Anil Sharma, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 02.11.2016 Date Of Pronouncement : 01.02.2017 Order This Is An Appeal By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 19.02.2015 Of Ld. Cit(A), Muzaffarnagar.

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh Gupta &For Respondent: Sh. Anil Sharma, Sr. DR

Section 12ASection 68

…ion is issued 4 Krishna Charitable Trust to concerned AO for remedial action. In view of the fact the loan are not genuine.” 5. The reliance was placed on the following case laws: " Sumati Dayal Vs CIT 214 ITR 801 (SC) " Nanak Chand Laaxman Das Vs CIT (1983) 140 ITR 151 (Alld.) " Anraj Narain Das Vs CIT (1951) 20 ITR 562 (Punj.) " A.D. Jayveerapandia Nadar Vs CIT (1964) 54 ITR 401 (Mad.) " CIT Vs V. K. Mahim (1995) 213 ITR 820 (Ker.) " Shankar Industries Vs CIT (1978) 114 ITR 689 (Cal.) " Cochin State Power & Light Corporation Ltd. Vs State of Kerala AIR 1965 SC 1688, 1691 " Vinod Krishna Kaul Vs Union of India…

Imtiyaz Amirullah Khan, Mumbai vs. ITO 17(2)(4), Mumbai

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is allowed on the aforesaid terms

ITA 2018/MUM/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Aug 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 2018/Mum/2016 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Imtiyaz Amirullah Khan Ito-17(2)(4), Gr. Floor, R. No. 1A, Mumbai बनाम/ Near Municiple Market, Ch-011, Vs. Gate No. 6, Sewree Cross Road, Wadala, Mumbai-400 031 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Azpk 9500 G (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant By : Shri Shekhar Gupta ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Dr. Suman Ratnam Darsi सुनवाई क" तार"ख / : 04.8.2016 Date Of Hearing घोषणा क" तार"ख / : 26.8.2016 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Sanjay Arora, A. M.: This Is An Appeal By The Assessee Directed Against The Order By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-32, Mumbai (‘Cit(A)’ For Short) Dated 18.2.2016, Dismissing The Assessee’S Appeal Contesting Its Assessment U/S.143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act’ Hereinafter) For The Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2010- 11 Vide Order Dated 20.3.2013. 2. The Sole Issue Arising In The Instant Case Is The Extent Of Income Liable To Be Brought To Tax Against Undisclosed Cash Deposits In The Assessee’S Bank Account With Icici Bank, Bandra Kurla Complex, Mumbai (Account Number 087401500061).

For Appellant: Shri Shekhar GuptaFor Respondent: Dr. Suman Ratnam Darsi

Section 143(3)Section 68

…by the A.O. who, relying on the decisions in the case of Roshan Di Hatti vs. CIT [1977] 107 ITR 938 (SC); CIT vs. M. Ganapathi Mudaliar [1964] 53 ITR 623 (SC); Kale Khan Mohammad Hanif vs. CIT [1963] 50 ITR 1 (SC); and Nanak Chandra Laxman Das vs. CIT [1983] 140 ITR 151 (All), treated the entire cash deposited (Rs. 88.45 lacs) as income assessable u/s. 68 of the Act. However, as the assessee had already disclosed the turnover of Rs.15.62 lacs, credit for the same was allowed and only the excess turnover of Rs.72,82,890/- (Rs.88,45,200 – Rs.15,62,310) added as income from other sources. 3.2 In appeal, the assess…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Manish Agarwal, New Delhi

In the result ground NO. 7 of the appeal of the revenue is allowed

ITA 2963/DEL/2011[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Jun 2016AY 2001-02

Bench: Shri I.C.Sudhir & Shri Prashant Maharishiacit, Manish Agarwal, Central Circle-11, Room No.364, K-2/11, Vs. E-2, Ara Centre, Jhandewalan Extn., Model Town, New Delhi New Delhi Pan:Aaepa0068J (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. Vinod Kr. Bindal, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Paramita B. Biswas, CIT DR

Section 153A

…n be made towards income from undisclosed sources (See CIT v. Orissa Corporation (P.) Ltd. [1986] 159 ITR 78 (SC), Yadu Hari Dalmia v. CIT [1980] 126 ITR 48 (Delhi), J. S. Parkar v. V. B. Palekar [1974] 94 ITR 616 (Bom), Nanak Chandra Laxman Das v. CIT [1983] 140 ITR 151 (All)). Likewise, creditworthiness of the donor would depend upon the income and earning of the donor and whether and did he have necessary funds. Rarely one finds a poor man giving gifts to a rich and powerful, out of natural love and affection. Page 10 of 10 10. In the present appeal, we are considering whether the order passed by the Tribunal…

M/S. Rajsadan Overseas Sales(P)Ltd, Siliguri vs. DCIT, Circle-2, Siliguri

In the result, appeal of assessee is dismissed

ITA 1076/KOL/2012[2008-2009]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata17 Sept 2015AY 2008-2009

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri M. Balaganesh, Am]

For Appellant: Shri Subhas Agarwal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Amitabha Choudhury, Addl. CIT

Section 143(3)Section 68

…fied. It has been held in various judgements that the assessee must prove identity of credits, capacity of creditor to advance money and genuineness of transaction e.g. as in Shankar Industries Vs. CIT (Cal) 114 ITR 689, Nanak Chandra Laxman Das Vs. CIT (Cal) 140 ITR 151, Hari Chand Virender Paul Vs. CIT (P&H) 140 ITR 148, CIT Vs. Biju Patnaik (SC) 160 ITR 674, ITO Vs. Sky jet Aviation (P) Ltd. (ITAT, Ahd- TM) 71 ITD 95, CIT Vs. Precision Finance P. Ltd. (Cal) 208 ITR 465, Oriental Wire Industries (P) Ltd. Vs. CIT (Cal) 131 ITR 688, Malabar Agricultural Co. Ltd. Vs. CIT (Ker) 229 ITR 548, Roshan De Hatti Vs. CIT…

Pawan Kumar Aggarwal vs. Income Tax Officer

The appeal is disposed of

ITA - 137 / 2003HC Delhi27 Nov 2014

Section 260ASection 5Section 5(1)(ii)Section 64

…ncome Tax, Orissa Vs. Orissa Corporation (P) Ltd., [1986]159ITR78(SC), Yadu Hari Dalmia Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi (Central), [1980]126ITR48(Delhi), J. S. Parkay v. V. B. Palekar, [1974]94ITR616(Bom), Nanak C hand Laxman Ds Vs. C.I.T, (1983) 140 ITR 151 (All)]. Likewise, creditworthiness of the donor would depend upon the income and earning of the donor and whether and did he have necessary funds. Rarely one finds a poor man giving gifts to a rich and powerful, out of natural love and affection. 10. In the present appeal, we are considering whether the order passed by the Tribunal is perv…

Pawan Kumar Aggarwal vs. Income Tax Officer

The appeal is disposed of

ITA/137/2003HC Delhi27 Nov 2014

Section 260ASection 5Section 5(1)(ii)Section 64