Commissioner of Income Tax v. Dolphin Canpack Ltd.

283 ITR 190High Court2006#2887 most cited

What is Commissioner of Income Tax v. Dolphin Canpack Ltd. authority for?

An addition under Section 68 for unexplained cash credits like share capital or share application money is not sustainable if the assessee proves the identity of the shareholders and the genuineness of the transaction, often by providing particulars, bank accounts, PAN details, and proof of receipt by cheque. The assessee is generally not required to prove the source of the source of funds.

41

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,314 Indian tax judgments — from 2011 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Commissioner of Income Tax v. Dolphin Canpack Ltd. · Dolphin Canpack · Section 68 · cash credit · share capital · share application money · genuineness of transaction · identity of shareholder · creditworthiness of creditor · source of source · burden of proof

Sections most often in play

Section 131Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 250Section 68Section 80G(2)(a)

Issues it is cited on

section 5(2)(b)section 5(2)source of sourcecreditworthiness of the creditorshare capital and share premiumshare application moneysection 250(4)borrowed satisfactionadmission of additional evidenceaddition under section 68tangible materialgenuineness of the transaction

Judgments citing Commissioner of Income Tax v. Dolphin Canpack Ltd.

CIT vs. Oasis Hospitalities Pvt Ltd

ITA - 2093 / 2010HC Delhi31 Jan 2011
Section 68

…the Explanation offered is not satisfactory then, the provisions of Section 68 may be invoked. 8. The Court also referred to the earlier Division Bench judgment in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Dolphin Canpack Ltd. [(2006) 283 ITR 190] and quoted the following observation: “. . . credit entry relates to the issue of share capital, the ITO is also entitled to examine whether the alleged shareholders do in fact exist or not. Such an inquiry was conducted by the AO in the present case. In the course of the said inquiry, the assessed had disclosed to the AO not only the n…