CIT v. Devi Prasad Vishwanath Prasad

72 ITR 194Supreme Court of India1969#292 most cited

What is CIT v. Devi Prasad Vishwanath Prasad authority for?

If there is an unexplained cash credit, the Assessing Officer can treat it as the assessee's income, even when the income is finalized on an estimation basis, without proving its specific source. The onus then shifts to the assessee to prove that the income represented by the cash credit has already been taxed.

272

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,369 Indian tax judgments — from 2009 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Devi Prasad Vishwanath Prasad · 72 ITR 194 · Section 68 · unexplained cash credit · onus of proof · estimated assessment · source of income · AO burden of proof · assessee's burden · income finalized on estimation · addition u/s 68

Sections most often in play

Section 68Section 143(3)Section 115BBESection 69ASection 145(3)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 143(2)

Issues it is cited on

section 106section 66creditworthiness of the creditoronus of proofpaper companysection 31source of sourcesection 251(2)share capital and share premiumrejection of books of accountaddition u/s 68section 145(3)

Judgments citing CIT v. Devi Prasad Vishwanath Prasad

RG Technologis Private Limited, New Delhi vs. ACIT Circle 20(2), Delhi

In the result only ground pressed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2030/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Feb 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Naveen Chandraassessment Year: 2014-15

Section 144Section 145(3)Section 68

…ther case of Banwari Lal BanshiDhar (229 ITR 229) (1998) has laid down that when G.P. rate is applied, that takes care of everything and there is no need of any further addition. 7.4.3 Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Devi Prasad VishwaNath Prasad (1969)(72 ITR 194) held as under: "When there is unexplained cash credit, and income is finalized by AO on estimation basis, it is open for ITO to hold that it is income of the assessee. No further burden lies on the ITO to show that the income is from a particularsource. It is for the assessee to prove that even if cash credit represents income, it is income from…

Sri Bijesh Kumar Sahu, Mayurbhanj vs. ITO, Ward-2, Baripada

In the result, appeal of the assesee is partly allowed

ITA 480/CTK/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack23 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: the AO that it was out of sale proceeds of the business and withdrawal from bank accounts but the Id.AO disbelieved the same and added the amount which is not in accordance with law liable to be deleted. 4) That other ground or grounds of appeal if any will be urged at the time of hearing of appeal.

Section 143(3)Section 144Section 69A

…cash deposited in the bank which were out of the sales made which has already offered for tax. 11. With regard to the reliance placed by the ld. Sr. DR on the decision of the Hon’ble supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Devi Prasad Vishwanath Prasad (1969) 72 ITR 194 (SC), it is seen that in that case 6 there were cash credit in the shape of loan which was unexplained and separate addition was made through the income was already estimated as there was no direct relationship between cash credit and income estimated. However, in the instant case, there were cash deposits in the bank account and assesee has clai…

Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Coimbatore vs. Ms Viswa and Devji Diamonds Pvt Ltd, Coimbatore

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue stands dismissed

ITA 327/CHNY/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai10 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Hon’Ble Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.327/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-2018. The Deputy Commissioner Viswa & Devji Diamonds Pvt Ltd, Of Income Tax, Vs. New No.16,Old No.239, Corporate Circle 1, T.V.Swamy Road (East) Coimbatore R.S. Puram, Coimbatore 641 002. Pan: Aaccv 4942M

For Appellant: Shri Nilay Baran Som, IRS, CITFor Respondent: Shri N. Arjun Raj, Advocate
Section 143(3)

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘’ए’, "ायपीठ,चे"ई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI माननीय "ी मनु कुमार िग"र, "ाियक सद" एवं माननीय "ी एस.आर. रघुनाथा, लेखा सद" के सम" BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND HON’BLE SHRI S.R. RAGHUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.327/CHNY/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-2018. The Deputy Commissioner Viswa and Devji Diamonds Pvt Ltd, of Income tax, Vs. New No.16,Old No.239, Corporate Circle 1, T.V.Swamy Road (East) Coimbatore R.S. Puram, Coimbatore 641 002. PAN: AACCV 4942M (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/App…

Dibakar Swain, Chhoti Nikirai, Kendrapara vs. ITO, Ward Kendrapada, Kendrapada

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands partly allowed

ITA 562/CTK/2024[2017-2018]Status: HeardITAT Cuttack09 Jan 2025AY 2017-2018

Bench: Before Shri George Mathanmember & Manish Agarwal Manish Agarwalassessment Year : 2017-18 Dibakar Dibakar Swain, Swain, Vs. Ito, Ward, Chakargunathpur, Chakargunathpur, Chhoti Chhoti Kendrapara. Nikirai, Kendrapara Nikirai, Kendrapara Pan/Gir No. No.Bbnxps 2582 N (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : Shri S.K.Sarangi, Ca Revenue By : Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr Dr : Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr Dr Date Of Hearing : 09/01/20 2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 09/01/20 025 O R D E R Per Bench This Is An This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld Cit(A), Cit(A), Cit(A), Nfac, Nfac, Nfac, Delhi Delhi Delhi Dated Dated Dated 17.8.2023 17.8.2023 17.8.2023 In In In Appeal Appeal Appeal No.Cit(A),Cuttack/10899/2019 No.Cit(A),Cuttack/10899/2019-20 For The Assessment Year Essment Year 2017-18. 2. Shri S.K.Sarangi S.K.Sarangi Ld Ar Appeared For The Assessee & Shri The Assessee & Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr. , Sr. Dr Appeared For The Revenue.

For Appellant: Shri S.K.Sarangi, CAFor Respondent: Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr DR
Section 145(3)Section 250Section 69A

…s in line with similar line of business. With regard to ld AR’s argument that once books of accounts were rejected, no further addition could be made, ld Sr DR relied on the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs Devi Prasad Vishwanath (1969) 72 ITR 194 (SC) and requested that the assessee should explain the source of cash deposit during the demonetization period and since the assessee has failed to do so, the Assessing Officer has rightly P a g e 4 | 7 Assessment Year : 2017-18 made the addition and the order of the ld CIT(A) confirming such addition be upheld. 10. We have considered the riva…

Yuwam Education Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur vs. DCIT, Circle-6, Jaipur

ITA 1029/JPR/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur20 Dec 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member), SHRI NARINDER KUMAR (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Sh. P. C. Parwal, CAFor Respondent: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT-Sr. DR
Section 115BSection 143(2)Section 143(3)

…x x x SVS Oil Mills vs. ACIT, Non Corporate Circle-6(1), Chennai [2020] 113 taxmann.com 388 (Madras)/[2020] 269 taxman 508 (Madras)/(2019) 418 ITR 442 (Madras) [26.03.2019] x x x x The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Devi Prasad Vishwanath [1969] 72 ITR 194 (SC) [01.08.1968] has held as under:- x x x x As per the headnotes "Section 145 of the Income-tax Act. 1961 (Corresponding to section 13 of the Indian Income tax Act, 1922] Method of accounting System of accounting Assessment year 1946-47 Whether where there is an unexplained cash credit it is open to ITO to hold that it is income of assessee and…

Yogesh Ginning Mill, Prop. Yogesh Chand Gupta, Govindgarh vs. ACIT, Circle I, Alwar

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 540/JPR/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur12 Dec 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: This Tribunal Which Were Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeal)- 4, Jaipur [ For Short Cit(A) ] Passed On Dates & F For The Assessment Years Mentioned As Tabulated Here In Below, In Turn Those Orders Were Arises Because The Assessee Has Yogesh Ginning Mill Vs. Acit

For Appellant: Shri Paridhi Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Gajendra Singh (Addl.CIT) a
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 250Section 68

…h credits as unexplained. Even though the assessing authority has rejected the books of accounts of the appellant, the addition under section 68 can be made. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Income-tax v. Devi Prasad Vishwanath [1969] 72 ITR 194 (SC)(01-08-1968) has held as under:- "There is nothing in law which prevents the Income-tax Officer in an appropriate case in taxing both the cash credit, the source and nature of which is not satisfactorily explained. and the business income estimated by him under section 13 of the Income-tax Act, after rejecting the books of account of the asse…

Yogesh Ginning Mill, Prop. Yogesh Chand Gupta, Govindgarh vs. ACIT, Alwar

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 1045/JPR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur12 Dec 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: This Tribunal Which Were Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeal)- 4, Jaipur [ For Short Cit(A) ] Passed On Dates & F For The Assessment Years Mentioned As Tabulated Here In Below, In Turn Those Orders Were Arises Because The Assessee Has Yogesh Ginning Mill Vs. Acit

For Appellant: Shri Paridhi Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Gajendra Singh (Addl.CIT) a
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 250Section 68

…h credits as unexplained. Even though the assessing authority has rejected the books of accounts of the appellant, the addition under section 68 can be made. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Income-tax v. Devi Prasad Vishwanath [1969] 72 ITR 194 (SC)(01-08-1968) has held as under:- "There is nothing in law which prevents the Income-tax Officer in an appropriate case in taxing both the cash credit, the source and nature of which is not satisfactorily explained. and the business income estimated by him under section 13 of the Income-tax Act, after rejecting the books of account of the asse…

Mohan Lal Ashok Kumar Saraf, Jaipur vs. DCIT Cen Cir 1, Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed as indicated hereinabove

ITA 879/JPR/2024[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur28 Nov 2024AY 2017-2018
For Appellant: Shri Ankit Totuka, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Alka Gautam, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 68

…ltimately credited to profit & loss account) and on the other hand amounts received from above parties has also been added u/s. 68 of the Act. 6.21 This view has been held by the Hon 'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs Devi Prasad Vishwnath Prasad (1969) 72 ITR 194 (SC) that "It is for the assessee to prove that even if the cash credit represents income, it is income from a source, which has already been taxed". The assessee has already 59 MOHAN LAL ASHOK KUMAR SARRAF VS DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1 JAIPUR offered the sales for taxation hence the onus has been discharged by it and the same income cannot be taxed…

ACIT, Central Circle-2, Jaipur vs. Chandra Mohan Badaya, Jaipur

In the result the four appeals filed by the assessee stands

ITA 464/JPR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur27 Nov 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Him In The Case Of The Assessee For All These Four Assessment Year.

For Appellant: Shri S. L. GuptaFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Malik (CIT-DR)
Section 143Section 69

…ry for the department to locate its exact source (CIT v. M.Ganapathi Mudaliar [1964] 53 ITR 623 (SC)/A. Govindarajulu Mudaliar v. CIT [1958] 34 ITR 807 (SC)). Further source can also not be presumed (Commissioner of Income-tax v. Devi Prasad Vishwanath [1969] 72 ITR 194 (SC)) In the assessment order both cash loan received and cash loan given by the appellant have been added to the income of the appellant. In the present appeal order, in principle, the taxation is upheld on account of unexplained cash loan given as unexplained investment and accordingly the source cash loan is not required to be added/taxed (eve…

ACIT, Central Circle-2, Jaipur vs. Chandra Mohan Badaya, Jaipur

In the result the four appeals filed by the assessee stands

ITA 463/JPR/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur27 Nov 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Him In The Case Of The Assessee For All These Four Assessment Year.

For Appellant: Shri S. L. GuptaFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Malik (CIT-DR)
Section 143Section 69

…ry for the department to locate its exact source (CIT v. M.Ganapathi Mudaliar [1964] 53 ITR 623 (SC)/A. Govindarajulu Mudaliar v. CIT [1958] 34 ITR 807 (SC)). Further source can also not be presumed (Commissioner of Income-tax v. Devi Prasad Vishwanath [1969] 72 ITR 194 (SC)) In the assessment order both cash loan received and cash loan given by the appellant have been added to the income of the appellant. In the present appeal order, in principle, the taxation is upheld on account of unexplained cash loan given as unexplained investment and accordingly the source cash loan is not required to be added/taxed (eve…

ACIT, Central Circle-2, Jaipur vs. Chandra Mohan Badaya, Jaipur

In the result the four appeals filed by the assessee stands

ITA 462/JPR/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur27 Nov 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Him In The Case Of The Assessee For All These Four Assessment Year.

For Appellant: Shri S. L. GuptaFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Malik (CIT-DR)
Section 143Section 69

…ry for the department to locate its exact source (CIT v. M.Ganapathi Mudaliar [1964] 53 ITR 623 (SC)/A. Govindarajulu Mudaliar v. CIT [1958] 34 ITR 807 (SC)). Further source can also not be presumed (Commissioner of Income-tax v. Devi Prasad Vishwanath [1969] 72 ITR 194 (SC)) In the assessment order both cash loan received and cash loan given by the appellant have been added to the income of the appellant. In the present appeal order, in principle, the taxation is upheld on account of unexplained cash loan given as unexplained investment and accordingly the source cash loan is not required to be added/taxed (eve…

ACIT, CC-2, Jaipur, Income Tax Department vs. Chandra Mohan Badaya, Jaipur

In the result the four appeals filed by the assessee stands

ITA 427/JPR/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur27 Nov 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Him In The Case Of The Assessee For All These Four Assessment Year.

For Appellant: Shri S. L. GuptaFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Malik (CIT-DR)
Section 143Section 69

…ry for the department to locate its exact source (CIT v. M.Ganapathi Mudaliar [1964] 53 ITR 623 (SC)/A. Govindarajulu Mudaliar v. CIT [1958] 34 ITR 807 (SC)). Further source can also not be presumed (Commissioner of Income-tax v. Devi Prasad Vishwanath [1969] 72 ITR 194 (SC)) In the assessment order both cash loan received and cash loan given by the appellant have been added to the income of the appellant. In the present appeal order, in principle, the taxation is upheld on account of unexplained cash loan given as unexplained investment and accordingly the source cash loan is not required to be added/taxed (eve…

Chandra Mohan Badaya, Jaipur vs. DCIT, Central Circle-2, Jaipur

In the result the four appeals filed by the assessee stands

ITA 423/JPR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur27 Nov 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Him In The Case Of The Assessee For All These Four Assessment Year.

For Appellant: Shri S. L. GuptaFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Malik (CIT-DR)
Section 143Section 69

…ry for the department to locate its exact source (CIT v. M.Ganapathi Mudaliar [1964] 53 ITR 623 (SC)/A. Govindarajulu Mudaliar v. CIT [1958] 34 ITR 807 (SC)). Further source can also not be presumed (Commissioner of Income-tax v. Devi Prasad Vishwanath [1969] 72 ITR 194 (SC)) In the assessment order both cash loan received and cash loan given by the appellant have been added to the income of the appellant. In the present appeal order, in principle, the taxation is upheld on account of unexplained cash loan given as unexplained investment and accordingly the source cash loan is not required to be added/taxed (eve…

Swaroop Narain Shiv Narain, Jaipur, Rajasthan vs. ACIT, Central Circle - 3, Jaipur, Rajasthan

ITA 517/JPR/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur17 Oct 2024AY 2018-19
For Appellant: Shri Rajeev Sogani, CAFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 115BSection 127Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 69Section 69B

…1963] 50 ITR 1 (SC)[08-02-1963]] Unexplained stock cannot be presumed to be business income. If the assesse claims so, the assesse is required to prove the same. [Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Income-tax v. Devi Prasad Vishwanath [1969] 72 ITR 194 (SC)[01-08-1968] Once it was found by Assessing Officer that there was excess stock, in absence of explanation by assessee, conclusion was inescapable that excess stock, if any, was from undisclosed sources Further once assessee's explanation, if any, had not been accepted, resultant position was that there was excess stock undisclosed in books of…

Balhanuman Commodeal Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-5(4), Kolkata

ITA 116/KOL/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 Oct 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rakesh Mishraassessment Year: 2012-13

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Vineet Kumar, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR
Section 131Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAKESH MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2012-13 Balhanuman Commodeal Pvt. I.T.O., Ward-5(4), Kolkata, Ltd., Aaykar Bhawan, P-7, 7, Red Cross Place, 4th Floor, Vs Chowringhee Square, Kolkata - 700001 Kolkata - 700069 (PAN: AAECB5704H) (Appellant) (Respondent) Present for: Appellant by : None Respondent by : Shri Vineet Kumar, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 08.07.2024 Date of Pronouncement : 03.10.2024 O R D E R PER RAKESH MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: This appeal filed by the assessee is against t…

Dinesh Kumar Soni, Jaipur vs. DCIT Cen Cir 1 Jaipur, Jaipur

In the result appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 863/JPR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur27 Sept 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Pawan Kumar Garg (C.A.)For Respondent: Smt. Monisha Choudhary (Addl.CIT) a
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 44ASection 68Section 69C

…ncome by making such computation as he considers appropriate in the given situation. Further, the issue in appeal is specifically held in favour of Revenue by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Income-tax v. Devi Prasad Vishwanath [1969] 72 ITR 194 (SC)(01- 08-1968] and by Hon'ble Allahabad High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income-tax-l v. G.S. Tiwari & Co. [2014] 41 taxmann.com 17 (Allahabad)/[2014] 220 Taxman 111 (Allahabad) (Mag.)/[2013] 357 ITR 651 (Allahabad) [30-05-2013]. Respectfully following the judgements of honourable Supreme Court and judgements as referred above which ha…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 1, Puducherry vs. Muthu Gold House, Puducherry

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 593/CHNY/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai04 Sept 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey, Hon’Ble & Shri S. R. Raghunatha, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.: 593/Chny/2024 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Muthu Gold House, Assistant Commissioner Of V. 222, Jawaharlal Nehru Street, Income Tax, Puducherry – 605 001. Circle -1, [Pan: Aaafm-8022-M] Puducherry. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ"क"ओरसे/Appellant By : Shri. N. Arjunraj, Advocate ""यथ"क"ओरसे/Respondent By : Shri. R. Vikneswaran, Jcit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 05.06.2024 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 04.09.2024 आदेश /O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri. N. Arjunraj, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. R. Vikneswaran, JCIT
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 44ASection 68

…register and cashbook. Further, the sales have been part of sale for the year and stand offered to tax as against the observation of the AO. Reliance is placed on the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs Devi Prasad Vishwnath Prasad (1969) 72 ITR 194 (SC) where in it is held that "It is for the assessee to prove that even if the cash credit represents income, it is income from a source, which has already been taxed". The assessee has already offered the sales for taxation hence the onus has been discharged by it and the same income cannot be taxed again. 8.8 In view of the above discussion, I…

Shenbagam Hospitals Private Limited, Madurai vs. ACIT Corp. Circle 2, Madurai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 836/CHNY/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai14 Aug 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.836/Chny/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2017 -2018) Shenbagam Hospitals Private Limited, Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of 15A, North Cross, Income Tax, 3Rd Street, Corporate Circle 2, Anna Nagar, Madurai. Madurai 625 020. [Pan: Aahcs 1403M] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri P.M. Kathir, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent By : Ms Gouthami Manivasagam, Irs, Jcit सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 12.08.2024 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 14.08.2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per Manu Kumar Giri ()

For Appellant: Shri P.M. Kathir, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms Gouthami Manivasagam, IRS, JCIT
Section 115JSection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 44ASection 68

…ice ultimately credited to profit 8: loss account) and on the other hand amounts received from above parties has also been added u/s 68 of the Act. This view has been held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Devi Prasad Vishwnath Prasad (1969) 72 ITR 194(SC) that "It is for the assessee to prove that even if the cash credit represents income, it is income from as source, which has already been taxed." The assessee has already offered the sales for taxation hence the onus has been discharged by it and the same income cannot be taxed again." 14. The ld. DR, has relied upon the decision of ITAT, Hyde…

Winsher Vinimay Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward - 9(2), Kolkata

ITA 1393/KOL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata06 Aug 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Rakesh Mishraassessment Year: 2012-13

For Appellant: N o n eFor Respondent: Shri Bibekananda Madhu, JCIT, Sr. DR
Section 131Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 68

…fficer relied upon the following judicial pronouncements for the applicability of section 68 and for the inference that the receipts are of assessable nature: i. Govindarajulu Mudaliar Vs. CIT [1958] 34 ITR 807 ii. CIT Vs. Davi Prasad Vishwanath Prasad [1969] 72 ITR 194 (SC) iii. Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Independent Media (P.) Ltd. [2012] 25 taxmann.com 276 (Delhi). Accordingly, in the light of the facts of the case and the exposition of the legal position with regard to the identity and creditworthiness of the subscriber companies and the genuineness of the transactions, the assessing officer was of the op…

ACIT, Ncrb, Statue Circle vs. Balvir Singh Tomar, Adarsh Nagar

ITA 283/JPR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur16 Jul 2024AY 2017-18
For Appellant: Sh. G. M. Mehta, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Anil Dhaka, CIT
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 68

…a good explanation, convert good proof into no proof". Further the income which is already included in the business income has been added. u/s 68 as unexplained cash deposit. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs Devi Prasad Vishwnath Prasad (1969) 72 ITR 194 (SC) held that "It is for the assessee to prove that even if the cash credit represents income, it is income from a source, which has already been taxed". The assessee has already offered the sales & practice income for taxation which has been accepted in assessment order and the same income cannot be taxed again when deposited in bank. Further, t…