PCIT v. Krishna Devi

126 Taxmann.com 80High Court2021#346 most cited

What is PCIT v. Krishna Devi authority for?

The genuineness of share transactions, particularly those generating long-term capital gains, cannot be rejected solely based on general investigation reports, third-party statements, or a mere increase in share price, when the assessee provides comprehensive documentary evidence, without the Revenue bringing substantial evidence to the contrary.

249

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,005 Indian tax judgments — from 2021 to 2026.

Also referred to as

PCIT v. Krishna Devi · Section 10(38) · Section 68 · Section 143(3) · long term capital gains · bogus share transactions · penny stock · documentary evidence · genuineness of transactions · investigation report · third party information · preponderance of probability

Sections most often in play

Section 10(38)Section 68Section 143(3)Section 147Section 69CSection 133(6)Section 148Section 131

Issues it is cited on

price riggingbogus ltcgpreponderance of probabilitysection 142(2)bogus long term capital gainpenny stocksection 10(38)third party informationentry operatorperiod of holdinglong term capital gainslive link

Judgments citing PCIT v. Krishna Devi

DCIT, Bangalore vs. M/S Cisco Systems Bv - India Branch, Bangalore

In the result appeal filed by revenue stands partly allowed and appeal filed by assessee stands allowed

ITA 309/BANG/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Aug 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Br Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillaiit(It)A No.309/Bang/2016 Assessment Year : 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Rajan Vora, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Kumar, CIT (DR)
Section 1O

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘C’ BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI BR BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER IT(IT)A No.309/Bang/2016 Assessment Year : 2011-12 The Dy. Commissioner of M/s CISCO Systems BV- Income-Tax (IT), India Branch, Circle-1(1), Brigade South Parade, Bengaluru. Vs. No.10, Mahatma Gandhi Road, Bengaluru-560 001. PAN – AACCC 4836 D APPELLANT RESPONDENT IT(IT)A No.426/Bang/2016 Assessment Year : 2011-12 M/s CISCO Systems BV- The Dy. Commissioner of India Branch, Income-Tax (IT), Brigade South Parade, Circle-1(1), No.10, Mahatma Gandhi Vs. Bengaluru. Road, Benga…

Shri Jitendra Virwani, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle - 1(3), Bangalore

In the result, the appeals by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 1217/BANG/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Jul 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.

For Appellant: Shri S. Ramasubramaniam, CAFor Respondent: Shri K.R. Narayana, Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 6(1)(a)Section 6(1)(c)

…the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in CIT Vs Bhanwarlal Sharma 214 Taxmann 132 wherein it was held that," Yet, this question do not cross the realm of suspicion to enter the sphere of proof, let alone the arena of convincing evidence". 83. In PCIT Vs Krishnadevi 431 ITR 361 the Hon'ble Delhi High Court held that the reliance of any material without further corroborative on the basis of cogent material cannot justify the conclusion the transaction is bogus, sham etc. It was held that the AO must dig deep into the issue. It was held that the court has to decide an issue on the basis of evidence and proof and not on su…

Shri Jitendra Virwani, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle - 1(3), Bangalore

In the result, the appeals by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 1216/BANG/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Jul 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.

For Appellant: Shri S. Ramasubramaniam, CAFor Respondent: Shri K.R. Narayana, Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 6(1)(a)Section 6(1)(c)

…the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in CIT Vs Bhanwarlal Sharma 214 Taxmann 132 wherein it was held that," Yet, this question do not cross the realm of suspicion to enter the sphere of proof, let alone the arena of convincing evidence". 83. In PCIT Vs Krishnadevi 431 ITR 361 the Hon'ble Delhi High Court held that the reliance of any material without further corroborative on the basis of cogent material cannot justify the conclusion the transaction is bogus, sham etc. It was held that the AO must dig deep into the issue. It was held that the court has to decide an issue on the basis of evidence and proof and not on su…

Shri Jitendra Virwani, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle - 1(3), Bangalore

In the result, the appeals by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 1215/BANG/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Jul 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.

For Appellant: Shri S. Ramasubramaniam, CAFor Respondent: Shri K.R. Narayana, Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 6(1)(a)Section 6(1)(c)

…the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in CIT Vs Bhanwarlal Sharma 214 Taxmann 132 wherein it was held that," Yet, this question do not cross the realm of suspicion to enter the sphere of proof, let alone the arena of convincing evidence". 83. In PCIT Vs Krishnadevi 431 ITR 361 the Hon'ble Delhi High Court held that the reliance of any material without further corroborative on the basis of cogent material cannot justify the conclusion the transaction is bogus, sham etc. It was held that the AO must dig deep into the issue. It was held that the court has to decide an issue on the basis of evidence and proof and not on su…

Shri Jitendra Virwani, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle - 1(3), Bangalore

In the result, the appeals by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 1214/BANG/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Jul 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.

For Appellant: Shri S. Ramasubramaniam, CAFor Respondent: Shri K.R. Narayana, Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 6(1)(a)Section 6(1)(c)

…the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in CIT Vs Bhanwarlal Sharma 214 Taxmann 132 wherein it was held that," Yet, this question do not cross the realm of suspicion to enter the sphere of proof, let alone the arena of convincing evidence". 83. In PCIT Vs Krishnadevi 431 ITR 361 the Hon'ble Delhi High Court held that the reliance of any material without further corroborative on the basis of cogent material cannot justify the conclusion the transaction is bogus, sham etc. It was held that the AO must dig deep into the issue. It was held that the court has to decide an issue on the basis of evidence and proof and not on su…

Shri Jitendra Virwani, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle - 1(3), Bangalore

In the result, the appeals by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 1213/BANG/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Jul 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.

For Appellant: Shri S. Ramasubramaniam, CAFor Respondent: Shri K.R. Narayana, Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 6(1)(a)Section 6(1)(c)

…the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in CIT Vs Bhanwarlal Sharma 214 Taxmann 132 wherein it was held that," Yet, this question do not cross the realm of suspicion to enter the sphere of proof, let alone the arena of convincing evidence". 83. In PCIT Vs Krishnadevi 431 ITR 361 the Hon'ble Delhi High Court held that the reliance of any material without further corroborative on the basis of cogent material cannot justify the conclusion the transaction is bogus, sham etc. It was held that the AO must dig deep into the issue. It was held that the court has to decide an issue on the basis of evidence and proof and not on su…

Shri. Jitendra Virwani, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle - 1(3), Bangalore

In the result, the appeals by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 1212/BANG/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Jul 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.

For Appellant: Shri S. Ramasubramaniam, CAFor Respondent: Shri K.R. Narayana, Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 6(1)(a)Section 6(1)(c)

…the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in CIT Vs Bhanwarlal Sharma 214 Taxmann 132 wherein it was held that," Yet, this question do not cross the realm of suspicion to enter the sphere of proof, let alone the arena of convincing evidence". 83. In PCIT Vs Krishnadevi 431 ITR 361 the Hon'ble Delhi High Court held that the reliance of any material without further corroborative on the basis of cogent material cannot justify the conclusion the transaction is bogus, sham etc. It was held that the AO must dig deep into the issue. It was held that the court has to decide an issue on the basis of evidence and proof and not on su…

Shri Jitendra Virwani, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle - 1(3), Bangalore

In the result, the appeals by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 1211/BANG/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Jul 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.

For Appellant: Shri S. Ramasubramaniam, CAFor Respondent: Shri K.R. Narayana, Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 6(1)(a)Section 6(1)(c)

…the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in CIT Vs Bhanwarlal Sharma 214 Taxmann 132 wherein it was held that," Yet, this question do not cross the realm of suspicion to enter the sphere of proof, let alone the arena of convincing evidence". 83. In PCIT Vs Krishnadevi 431 ITR 361 the Hon'ble Delhi High Court held that the reliance of any material without further corroborative on the basis of cogent material cannot justify the conclusion the transaction is bogus, sham etc. It was held that the AO must dig deep into the issue. It was held that the court has to decide an issue on the basis of evidence and proof and not on su…

Mukesh Mittal, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-41(1), New Delhi

ITA 761/DEL/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Mar 2021AY 2014-15
Section 10(38)Section 11(1)Section 11(4)Section 11BSection 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 19

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘E’: NEW DELHI (Through Video Conferencing) BEFORE, SHRI N.K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER SA No.152/Del/2020 (ASSESSMENT YEAR 2014-15) Sh. Mukesh Mittal, Income tax Officer, 138, Deepali Enclave, Ward-41(1), Pitampura, Vs. New Delhi. New Delhi- 110 034 PAN –AJGPM 2125D (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Sh. Gautam Jain, Adv. Sh. Lalit Mohan, CA Respondent by Ms. Rakhi Vimal, Sr. DR 06.01.2021 Date of Hearing Date of Pronouncement 26.03.2021 ORDER PER SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JM: The present appeal is pref…