Kale Khan Mohammad Hanif v. CIT

50 ITR 1Supreme Court of India1963#103 most cited

What is Kale Khan Mohammad Hanif v. CIT authority for?

The assessee bears the onus of proving the source and nature of any sum of money or receipt found to have been received by them. If the assessee fails to satisfactorily explain the receipt, the Income-tax Officer is entitled to treat it as taxable income.

581

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,181 Indian tax judgments — from 2009 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Kale Khan Mohammad Hanif v. CIT · Kale Khan 50 ITR 1 · onus of proof assessee · unexplained cash credits · Section 68 addition · source of money explanation · genuineness of transaction · creditworthiness of creditor · unexplained income · taxable receipts · burden of proof cash credits · Section 69A

Sections most often in play

Section 68Section 143(3)Section 115BBESection 69ASection 147Section 142(1)Section 250Section 148

Issues it is cited on

creditworthiness of the creditoronus of proofsource of sourceshare capital and share premiumsurvey under section 133aaddition u/s 68addition under section 68share application moneygenuineness of the transactionsection 69blive linkentry operator

Judgments citing Kale Khan Mohammad Hanif v. CIT

Nitin Nagarji Mehta, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 25(3)(5) Mumbai, Mumbai

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 4821/MUM/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 May 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan

For Appellant: ----- None -----For Respondent: Shri Sunil Shinde, Sr. A.R
Section 144Section 147Section 68

…nnot be satisfactorily explained by the assessee, it is open to the revenue to hold that it is the income of the assessee and no further burden lies on the revenue to show that the income is from any particular source In Kale Khan Mohammad Hanif vs CIT [1963] 50 ITR 1 (SC), one of the questions referred was relating to the burden of ITA Nos.4819 to 4821 & 359/Mum/2023 AYs 2012-13, 14-15 & 17-18 7 Nitin Nagarji Mehta v. ITO proof, of the source of cash credit. It was held that the onus of proving the source of the sum of money found to have been received by the assessee is on him, if he disputes liability for tax,…

Nitin Nagarji Mehta, Mumbai vs. Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 32(2), Mumbai

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 4820/MUM/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 May 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan

For Appellant: ----- None -----For Respondent: Shri Sunil Shinde, Sr. A.R
Section 144Section 147Section 68

…nnot be satisfactorily explained by the assessee, it is open to the revenue to hold that it is the income of the assessee and no further burden lies on the revenue to show that the income is from any particular source In Kale Khan Mohammad Hanif vs CIT [1963] 50 ITR 1 (SC), one of the questions referred was relating to the burden of ITA Nos.4819 to 4821 & 359/Mum/2023 AYs 2012-13, 14-15 & 17-18 7 Nitin Nagarji Mehta v. ITO proof, of the source of cash credit. It was held that the onus of proving the source of the sum of money found to have been received by the assessee is on him, if he disputes liability for tax,…

Nitin Nagarji Mehta, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 25(3)(5), Mumbai

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 4819/MUM/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 May 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan

For Appellant: ----- None -----For Respondent: Shri Sunil Shinde, Sr. A.R
Section 144Section 147Section 68

…nnot be satisfactorily explained by the assessee, it is open to the revenue to hold that it is the income of the assessee and no further burden lies on the revenue to show that the income is from any particular source In Kale Khan Mohammad Hanif vs CIT [1963] 50 ITR 1 (SC), one of the questions referred was relating to the burden of ITA Nos.4819 to 4821 & 359/Mum/2023 AYs 2012-13, 14-15 & 17-18 7 Nitin Nagarji Mehta v. ITO proof, of the source of cash credit. It was held that the onus of proving the source of the sum of money found to have been received by the assessee is on him, if he disputes liability for tax,…

ITO-13(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Sethia Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is allowed

ITA 2739/MUM/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 May 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya, Hon'Ble & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Hon'Bleito-13(2)(1) V. Sethia Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd 701, Central Plaza 147, 1St Floor, Aayakar Bhavan Daftari Road, Malad (East) M. K. Marg, Mumbai Mumbai, Maharashtra -400097 Maharashtra-400020 Pan: Aalcs9354B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented By : Jaiprakash Bairaga & Rupa Nanda Department Represented By : Dr. Kishor Dhule

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 68

…94) 208 ITR 465 (Cal) 15 : • Proof of Identity of the creditors; • Capacity of creditors to advance money; and • Genuineness of transaction Page No. 20 Sethia Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd This Court in the land mark case of Kale Khan Mohammad Hanif v. CIT, [1963] 50 ITR 1 (SC), and, Roshan Di Hatti v. CIT, [1977] 107 ITR (SC), laid down that the onus of proving the source of a sum of money found to have been received by an assessee, is on the assessee. Once the assessee has submitted the documents relating to identity, genuineness of the transaction, and credit-worthiness, then the AO must conduct an inquiry, and cal…

Namokar Builders Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. D.C.I.T., Central Circle -2(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 762/KOL/2022[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata09 May 2024AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am]

Section 131Section 133ASection 143(1)Section 143(3)

…case of “PCIT v/s NRA Iron & Steel (P) Ltd.” reported in [2019] 103 taxmann.com 48(SC) has taken note of the observations made by the Supreme Court in the the land mark case of “Kale Khan Mohammed Hanif v. 10 Namokar Builders Pvt. Ltd., AY 2013-14 CIT”[1963] 50 ITR 1 (SC) and“Roshan Di Hatti v. CIT” [1977] 107 ITR 938 (SC) laying down the proposition that the onus of proving the source of a sum of money found to have been received by an assessee, is on the assessee. Once the assessee has submitted the documents relating to identity, genuineness of the transaction, and credit-worthiness, then the AO must conduct…

ITO, New Delhi vs. Sh. Avtar Singh, Gurgaon

Appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 2592/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 May 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: or during the course of the hearing of the appeal.”

For Respondent: “1. The Ld. CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition of Rs.1,79,84
Section 143(2)Section 144Section 145(3)Section 68

…ined and the business income estimated by him, after rejecting the books of account of the assessee as unreliable. 3. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in not considering the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Kale Khan Mohammed Hanif vs. CIT (1963) 50 ITR 1 (SC), wherein it was held that the ITO having assessed the income of the assessee on percentage basis, was also justified in treating the unexplained cash credit as profit from an undisclosed source. 3 ITO vs. Avtar Singh 4. The appellant craves leave to add, alter or amend any/all of the grounds of appeal before or during the course of the hear…

M/S Satwant Agro Engineers, Bhawanigarh vs. DCIT, Central Circle, Patiala

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 753/CHANDI/2022[AY 2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh03 May 2024

Bench: SHRI. AAKASH DEEP JAIN (Vice President), SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Deepak Anand, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Dharamvir, JCIT, Sr. DR
Section 115BSection 133ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 68Section 69Section 69A

…ounts and the source from where it was derived was not declared, the same was assessable as deemed income u/s 69A of the Act. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the cases of Roshan Di Hatti vs. CIT [1977] 107 ITR 938 (SC) and Kale Khan Mohammad Hanif vs. CIT [1963] 50 ITR 1 (SC) held that the law is well-settled that the onus of proving the source of a sum of money found to have been received by an assessee is on him. Where the nature and source of a receipt, whether it be of money or other properly, cannot be satisfactorily explained by the assessee, it is open to the revenue to hold that it is the income of the asses…

Quest Online, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-49(1), Kolkata.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1046/KOL/2023[2020-21`]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 May 2024

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Rajesh Kumari.T.A. No.1046/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2020-21 Quest Online…………………………………...............................……….……Appellant Block-A, 3Rd Floor, Room No.24, 1, Chandni Chowk Street, Princep Street, Kolkata – 700072. [Pan:Aaafq4820G] Vs. Ito, Ward-49(1),Kolkata.............…..….…..….........……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri S. M. Surana, Advocate & Sunil Surana, Ca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri S. Datta, Cit, Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : May 02, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : May 03, 2024 Order Per Rajesh Kumar: The Present Appeal Filed By The Assessee For The Assessment Year 2020-21Against The Order Dated 08.09.2023 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. The Only Issue Raised In The Various Grounds Of Appeals Is Against The Confirmation Of Addition By Cit(A) Of Rs.14,82,41,932/- As Made By The Assessing Officer U/S 68 Of The Act R.W.S. 115Bbe Of The Act. 3. The Facts In Brief Are That The Assessee Filed Return Of Income On 09.01.2021 Declaring Total Income From Business & Profession At Rs.36,73,790/-. The Case Was Selected For Complete Scrutiny Under Cass & Statutory Notices Were Duly Issued & Served Upon The Assessee. During The Assessment Proceedings, The Various Documents & Evidences Were Called For By The Assessing Officer From The Assessee

Section 115BSection 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 68

…sessing Officer CIT v. Precision Finance Pvt. Ltd. (1994) 208 ITR 465 (Cal) : Proof of Identity of the creditors; Capacity of creditors to advance money; and Genuineness of transaction This Court in the land mark case of Kale Khan Mohammad Hanif v. CIT [1963] 50 ITR 1 (SC) and, Roshan Di Hatti v. CIT [1977] 107 ITR 938 (SC) laid down that the onus of proving the source of a sum of money found to have been received by an assessee, is on the assessee. Once the assessee has submitted the documents relating to identity, genuineness of the transaction, and credit-worthiness, then the AO must conduct an inquiry, and ca…

The Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(1)(1), Ahmedabad vs. Shri Sanjay Kishanlal Bishnoi, Ahmedabad

ITA 297/AHD/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad10 Apr 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar & Ms. Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Sh. Umedsingh Bhati & Sh. Abhimanyu SinghFor Respondent: Sh. Subhendu Das, CIT, DR
Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 253(3)Section 69C

…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 assessee as unreliable. This was so decided in Kale Khan Mohammad Hanif v. Commissioner of Income-tax [1963] 50 ITR 1 (SC). Whether in a given case the Income-tax Officer may tax the cash credit entered in the books of account of the business, and at the same time estimate the profit must, however, depend upon the facts of each case.” Thus, this contention of the assessee lacks merit and stood rejected. 9. The appeal of the Revenue for assessment year 2014-15 is p…

The Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(1)(1), Ahmedabad vs. Shri Sanjay Kishanlal Bishnoi, Ahmedabad

ITA 296/AHD/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad10 Apr 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar & Ms. Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Sh. Umedsingh Bhati & Sh. Abhimanyu SinghFor Respondent: Sh. Subhendu Das, CIT, DR
Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 253(3)Section 69C

…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 assessee as unreliable. This was so decided in Kale Khan Mohammad Hanif v. Commissioner of Income-tax [1963] 50 ITR 1 (SC). Whether in a given case the Income-tax Officer may tax the cash credit entered in the books of account of the business, and at the same time estimate the profit must, however, depend upon the facts of each case.” Thus, this contention of the assessee lacks merit and stood rejected. 9. The appeal of the Revenue for assessment year 2014-15 is p…

Spectrum Foods Limited, Jaipur vs. Income Tax Officer, Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 38/JPR/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur08 Apr 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Sh. S. L. Poddar, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Anup Singh (Addl. CIT)
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…OF INDIA Sumati Dayal v. Commissioner of Income-tax. 6. [2007] 161 Taxman 169 (SC) SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Commissioner of Income- tax v. P. Mohanakala. 7. [1977] 107 ITR 938 (SC) SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Roshan Di Hatti v. Commissioner of Income-tax. 8. [1963] 50 ITR 1 (SC) SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Kale Khan Mohammad Hanif v. Commissioner of Income-tax. 9. [2013] 29 taxmann.com 291 (Delhi) HIGH COURT OF DELHI Commissioner of Income-tax, Delhi-V N.R. Portfolio (P.) Ltd. 10. A. Govindarajulu Mudaliar v. CIT [1958] 34 ITR 802 (SC). 11. CIT v. Nova Promoters Finlease (P.) Ltd. [2012] 18 taxmann.com 217/206 Taxman 207/34…

Ravikumar Kamleshbhai Shah, Ahmedabad vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward -5(2)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 497/AHD/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad03 Apr 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI WASEEM AHMED (Accountant Member), MS. MADHUMITA ROY (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri M. S. Chhajed, A.RFor Respondent: Shri C. Dharninath V. S., Sr. D.R
Section 115BSection 133(6)Section 145Section 68

…sh credit, the source and nature of which is not satisfactorily explained, and the business income estimated by him after rejecting the Asstt. Year- 2017-18 4 books of account of the assessee as unreliable. In the case of Kale Khan Mohammad Hanif v. CIT[1963] 50 ITR 1 (SC). Hon'ble Supreme Court held that “it cannot be said that the taxing authorities were preclude from treating the amounts of the credit entries as income from undisclosed sources simply because the I entries appear in the books of a business whose income they had previously computed on a percentage basis".” 6. Aggrieved assessee preferred an appe…

DCIT-19(1), Income Tax vs. Pavan Kumar B Chandan (E-Filed), Mumbai

Appeals are dismissed

ITA 2594/MUM/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Mar 2024AY 2014-15
For Appellant: Shri Shashank MehtaFor Respondent: Shri H. M. Bhatt (Sr. DR)
Section 10(38)Section 68

…to add the said sum represented by such credit entry as income of the assessee. Therefore, prima facie onus is always on the assessee to prove the genuineness of such credit appearing in its books. In land mark cases like Kale Khan Mohammad Hanif v CIT[1963] 50 ITR 1 (SC), Hatti v CIT [1977] 107 ITR 938 (SC) it has been held that the law is well settled that the onus of proving the source of a sum of money found to have been received by an assessee, is on him. Where the nature and source thereof cannot be explained satisfactorily, it is open to the Assessing Officer to hold that it is the income of the appellant…

Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Corporate Circle-1, Coimbatore vs. Ms Dar Paradise Pvt. Ltd., Coimbatore

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1106/CHNY/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Mar 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 1106/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Deputy Commissioner Of M/S. Dar Paradise Pvt. Ltd., Income Tax, V. 599, Raja Street, Corporate Circle -1, Coimbatore – 641 001. Coimbatore. [Pan: Aafcd-3066-P] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri. R. Clement Ramesh Kumar, Cit ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri. N. Arjun Raj, Ca सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 05.03.2024 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 21.03.2024

For Appellant: Shri. R. Clement Ramesh Kumar, CITFor Respondent: Shri. N. Arjun Raj, CA
Section 115JSection 131Section 133(6)Section 142(1)

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘सी’ "यायपीठ, चे"ई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘C’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी वी दुगा" राव, "याियक सद"य एवं "ी मंजुनाथा. जी, लेखा सद"य के सम" BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANJUNATHA. G, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.: 1106/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Deputy Commissioner of M/s. DAR Paradise Pvt. Ltd., Income Tax, v. 599, Raja Street, Corporate Circle -1, Coimbatore – 641 001. Coimbatore. [PAN: AAFCD-3066-P] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant by : Shri. R. Clement Ramesh Kumar, CIT ""यथ" क" ओ…

Soubhik Exports Limited., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir-8(2), Kolkata / N E-Assessment Centre, Delhi.

ITA 1243/KOL/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata19 Mar 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg, Hon’Ble & Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri P.K. Singh, A/RFor Respondent: Shri Rakesh Kumar Das, CIT, D/R
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 14ASection 250Section 68

…ticed in the documents of alleged cash creditor. However, we feel it necessary to go through the financials of each of the cash creditors in light of the ratio laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the land mark case of Kale Khan Mohammed Hanif v. CIT [1963] 50 ITR 1 (SC) and Roshan Di Hatti v. CIT [1977] 107 13 I.T.A. No. 1242 & 1243/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2012-13 & 2018-19 Soubhik Exports Limited ITR 938 (SC) laying down the proposition that the onus of proving the source of a sum of money found to have been received by an assessee, is on the assessee. Once the assessee has submitted the documents relating…

Soubhik Exports Limited., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir-8(2), Kolkata.

ITA 1242/KOL/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata19 Mar 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg, Hon’Ble & Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri P.K. Singh, A/RFor Respondent: Shri Rakesh Kumar Das, CIT, D/R
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 14ASection 250Section 68

…ticed in the documents of alleged cash creditor. However, we feel it necessary to go through the financials of each of the cash creditors in light of the ratio laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the land mark case of Kale Khan Mohammed Hanif v. CIT [1963] 50 ITR 1 (SC) and Roshan Di Hatti v. CIT [1977] 107 13 I.T.A. No. 1242 & 1243/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2012-13 & 2018-19 Soubhik Exports Limited ITR 938 (SC) laying down the proposition that the onus of proving the source of a sum of money found to have been received by an assessee, is on the assessee. Once the assessee has submitted the documents relating…

Dr. C Usha, Palakkad vs. ITO Ward-3, Palakkad

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is partly allowed and partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 657/COCH/2022[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin15 Mar 2024AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Dr. Seethalakshmidr. C. Usha Income Tax Officer Modern Hospital Ward -3, Palakkad Guruvayur Road, Koottanad Vs. Palakkad 679533 [Pan:Aafpu8363H] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri K.V. Venkitaraman, CAFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R
Section 143(3)

…ow the source from where the receipt representing income may have been earned, which is squarely on the assessee. The law in the matter is trite, for which one may refer to CIT v. Joseph John [1968] 67 ITR 74 (SC); Kalekhan Mohammed Hanif (Seth) v. CIT [1963] 50 ITR 1(SC); CIT v. Ganapathi Mudaliar(M.) [1964] 53 ITR 623 (SC); CIT v. Deviprasad Vishwanathprasad [1969] 72 ITR 194 (SC) 6 Dr. C. UshaModern Hospital v. Income Tax Officer In Sum 4. The assessee admittedly not maintaining any record, or otherwise leading any evidence in respect of agricultural income, returned on estimate basis, the Revenue, on verific…

DCIT, Central Circle-19, New Delhi vs. Sh. Subramaniam Ashok Kumar, Tamil Nadu

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and the appeal & the Cross objection of the assessee is dismissed as infructuous

ITA 2739/DEL/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Mar 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Sh. C. N. Prasaddr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Harshit Srivastava, CA &For Respondent: Sh. Amit Shukla, Sr. DR
Section 36(1)(iii)Section 68

…assessee to prove by cogent and credible evidence, that the investments made in share capital are genuine borrowings, since the facts are exclusively within the assesses knowledge.  The Hon’ble Delhi High Court in CIT v. Oasis Hospitalities Pvt. Ltd. [1963] 50 ITR 1 (SC) [1977] 107 ITR (SC), held that: The initial onus is upon the assessee to establish three things necessary to obviate the mischief of Section 68. Those are: (i) identity of the investors; (ii) their creditworthiness / investments; and (iii) genuineness of the transaction. Only when, these three ingredients are established prima facie, the depart…

Subramaniam Ashok Kumar, Tamil Nadu vs. ACIT, Centyral Circle-31, Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and the appeal & the Cross objection of the assessee is dismissed as infructuous

ITA 2488/DEL/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Mar 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Sh. C. N. Prasaddr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Harshit Srivastava, CA &For Respondent: Sh. Amit Shukla, Sr. DR
Section 36(1)(iii)Section 68

…assessee to prove by cogent and credible evidence, that the investments made in share capital are genuine borrowings, since the facts are exclusively within the assesses knowledge.  The Hon’ble Delhi High Court in CIT v. Oasis Hospitalities Pvt. Ltd. [1963] 50 ITR 1 (SC) [1977] 107 ITR (SC), held that: The initial onus is upon the assessee to establish three things necessary to obviate the mischief of Section 68. Those are: (i) identity of the investors; (ii) their creditworthiness / investments; and (iii) genuineness of the transaction. Only when, these three ingredients are established prima facie, the depart…

Digambar Rajaram Lonari, Mudhol, Bagalkot vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Bijapur

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 178/BANG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Feb 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2017-18

For Appellant: Smt. Preethi S. Patel, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh R. Ghale, Standing Counsel
Section 69A

…amined by the AO. Accordingly, the AO after relying on the judgement of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of A. Govindrajulu Mudiliar vs CIT, (1958) 34 ITR 807, 810 (SC), Roshan Di Hatti vs. CIT (1977) 107 ITR 938 (SC), Kale khan Mohammad Hanif vs. CIT (1963) 50 ITR 1 ( SC), CIT vs. Devi Prasad Vishwanath Prasad, (1969) 72 ITR 194 (SC) and Cit vs. M. Ganpathi Mudaliar (1964) 53 ITR 623 (SC), Smt. Shrilekha Banerjee and Others Vs. Cit Bihar & Orissa, reported in 19464 AIR 697, dated 27/03/1963 & completed the assessment and made addition u/s. 69A of Rs.16,63,000 and assessed income at Rs.31,93,840. Against this, t…