ITO v. Neelkanth CIT

239 ITR 77High Court1999#4829 most cited

What is ITO v. Neelkanth CIT authority for?

When the nature and source of a sum of money received by an assessee cannot be explained satisfactorily, the revenue can treat it as the assessee's income. Merely providing the identity of the creditor is insufficient if their creditworthiness is not proven.

24

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2025.

Also referred to as

ITO v Neelkanth CIT · section 68 · addition u/s 68 · unexplained cash credit · source of sum · nature and source · creditworthiness of creditor · onus on assessee · identity of creditor

Issues it is cited on

Judgments citing ITO v. Neelkanth CIT

M/S Manish Finlease (P) Ltd, Patna vs. ITO, Ward-2(1), Patna

ITA 25/PAT/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Patna09 Aug 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2010-2011 Manish Finlease Pvt Ltd., Vs. Ito, Ward 2(1), Patna Chandi House Exhibition Road, Patna Pan/Gir No.Aaccm 6252 B (Appellant) .. ( Respondent) Assessee By : Shri A.K.Rastogi & Rakesh Kumar, Ars Revenue By : Shri Indrajeet Singh, Dr Date Of Hearing : 20/06/ 2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 09/08/ 2019 O R D E R Per Bench This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Cit(A)-1, Patna Dated 27.9.2018 For The Assessment Year 2010-2011. 2. The Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Delayed By 51 Days. The Assessee Has Filed Application For Condonation Of Delay Stating The Reasons For Not Filing The Appeal In Time Before The Tribunal. After Hearing The Submissions Of The Parties, We Are Satisfied That The Assessee Had A Bonafide Reason For Not Filing The Appeal In Time. Therefore, We Condone The Delay & Proceed To Decide The Appeal Of The Assessee On Merits.

For Appellant: Shri A.K.Rastogi & Rakesh Kumar, ARsFor Respondent: Shri Indrajeet Singh, DR
Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148(1)Section 68

…f the income- tax file number of the creditors is not enough to prove the genuineness of the cash credit. The creditor should be identified. There should be creditworthiness_ There should be a genuine transaction. In K.M. Sadhukhan& Sons P. Ltd Vs. CIT (1999) 239 ITR 77 (Cal), it has been held that the burden lies on the assessee to prove the genuineness of loan. The Hon'ble High Court has held that the initial burden is on the assessee to prove the identity of the creditor, the capacity of the creditor to advance the loan and the genuineness of the transaction. In CIT Vs. Precision Finance P. Ltd (1994) 208 ITR…

Kajal Kumar Roy, Hooghly vs. ITO, Ward - 1(4), Hooghly

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1568/KOL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 Dec 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri P.M. Jagtap] I.T.A. No. 1568/Kol/2017 Assessment Year : 2011-12 Shri Kajal Kumar Roy.............................…………………………………………Appellant C/O. S.N. Ghosh & Associates, Advocates, “Seven Brothers”, Lodge, Buroshibtala, Chinsurah, Hooghly – 712 105 [Pan : Adgprs 8137 G] Income Tax Officer...................……………………………………………….......Respondent Ward 1(4), Hooghly Aayakar Bhawan, G.T. Road Khadina More, Chinsurah, Hooghly – 712 101 Appearances By: Shri Somnath Ghosh, Advocate Appearing On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri Satyajit Mondal, Addl. Cit Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : October 31, 2017 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : December 22, 2017 Order This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Cit (Appeals) – 6, Kolkata Dated 20.04.2017 & The Solitary Issue Involved Therein Relates To The Addition Of Rs. 13,03,000/- Made By The A.O. & Confirmed By The Ld. Cit (A) On Account Of Loans Taken By The Assessee From Four Parties By Treating The Same As Unexplained Cash Credits Under Section 68. 2. The Assessee In The Present Case Is An Individual Who Is Engaged In The Business Of Trading Of Potatos. The Return Of Income For The Year Under Consideration Was Filed By Him On 25.09.2011 Declaring A Total Income Of Rs. 10,92,457/- Including Agricultural Income Of Rs.

Section 131Section 68

…of the income tax file number of the creditors is not enough to prove the genuineness of the cash credit. The creditor should be identified. There should be creditworthiness. There should be a genuine transaction. In K.M. Sadhukhan & Sons P. Ltd vs CIT (1999) 239 ITR 77 (Cal), it has been held that the burden lies on the assessee to prove the genuineness of loan. The Hon’ble High Court has held that the initial burden is on the assessee to prove the identity of the 12 I.T.A. No. 1568/Kol/2017 A.Y. 2011-12 Kajal Kumar Roy creditor, the capacity of the creditor to advance the loan and the genuineness of the tran…