Shankar Ghosh v. ITO

13 ITD 440Income Tax Appellate Tribunal1985#13381 most cited
7

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2020 to 2025.

Sections most often in play

Section 1961Section 133(6) of the Income-tax ActSection 142(1) of the Income-tax ActSection 143(2) of the Income-tax ActSection 143(3) of the Income-tax ActSection 68 of the Income-tax Act

Issues it is cited on

genuineness of the transactionsection 133(6)undisclosed incomepersoncompanybusinessdocument

Judgments citing Shankar Ghosh v. ITO

ANSHUMAN AUTO IMPEX PRIVATE LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 2(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal is dismissed

ITA 4152/DEL/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Oct 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Naveen Chandraassessment Year: 2016-17 Vs. Income Tax Officer, Anshuman Auto Impex Pvt. Ltd., Ward-2(1), 2126/59, Laxmi Bhawan, New Delhi Naiwala, Karol Bagh, New Delhi Pan: Aaaca0872H (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By None Department By Sh. Manish Gupta, Sr. Dr

Section 147Section 148

…urts is clearly applicable in this case. 6.2.3 Further, It has been held that merely proving the identity of the creditor does not discharge the onus of the assessee, if the capacity or credit-worthiness has not been established in Shankar Ghosh v. ITO [1985] 13 ITD 440 (Cal.), the assessee failed to prove the financial capacity of the person from whom he had allegedly taken the loan. The loan amount was rightly held to be the assessee's own undisclosed income. Further, merely because a transaction has taken place by cheque/Banking channel is not sufficient to discharge the burden. The appellant has to prove the…

THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -CENTRAL -1 vs. JAGUAR BUILDCON PVT. LTD.

ITA/530/2023HC Delhi03 Mar 2025

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHWANT VARMA,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH VAIDYANATHAN SHANKAR

Section 133(1)(d)Section 133(6)Section 68

…6. It has been held that merely proving the identity of the investors does not discharge the onus of the assessee, if the capacity or creditworthiness has not been established. In Shankar Ghosh v. CIT [Shankar Ghosh v. CIT, 1985 Tax Pub (DT) 1012 : (1985) 13 ITD 440 : (1985) 23 TTJ 20] , the assessee failed to prove the financial capacity of the person from whom he had allegedly taken the loan. The loan amount was rightly held to be the assessee's own undisclosed income. xxx xxx xxx 12. On the issue of unexplained credit entries/share capital, we have examined the following judgments: 12.…

THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -CENTRAL -1 vs. JAGUAR BUILDCON PVT. LTD.

ITA/531/2023HC Delhi03 Mar 2025

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH VAIDYANATHAN SHANKAR,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHWANT VARMA

Section 133(1)(d)Section 133(6)Section 68

…6. It has been held that merely proving the identity of the investors does not discharge the onus of the assessee, if the capacity or creditworthiness has not been established. In Shankar Ghosh v. CIT [Shankar Ghosh v. CIT, 1985 Tax Pub (DT) 1012 : (1985) 13 ITD 440 : (1985) 23 TTJ 20] , the assessee failed to prove the financial capacity of the person from whom he had allegedly taken the loan. The loan amount was rightly held to be the assessee's own undisclosed income. xxx xxx xxx 12. On the issue of unexplained credit entries/share capital, we have examined the following judgments: 12.…

PR. COMMISSIONER OFLNCOME TAX DELHI - 5 vs. MRS. ROWENA SHARMA

ITA/1220/2018HC Delhi11 Feb 2025

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH VAIDYANATHAN SHANKAR,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHWANT VARMA

Section 68Section 69Section 69ASection 80

…6. It has been held that merely proving the identity of the investors does not discharge the onus of the assessee, if the capacity or creditworthiness has not been established. In Shankar Ghosh v. CIT [Shankar Ghosh v. CIT, 1985 Tax Pub (DT) 1012 : (1985) 13 ITD 440 : (1985) 23 TTJ 20] , the assessee failed to prove the financial capacity of the person from whom he had allegedly taken the loan. The loan amount was rightly held to be the assessee's own undisclosed income. xxxx xxxx xxxx 12. On the issue of unexplained credit entries/share capital, we have examined the following judgments:…

HERITAGE HOSPITALS LTD,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-11(1), NEW DELHI

ITA 4090/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Oct 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Anand Kumar Pandey, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sandeep Kumar Mishra, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 68

…epartment is required to undertake further exercise." It has been held that merely proving the identity of the investors does not discharge the onus of the assessee, if the capacity or credit-worthiness has not been established. In Shankar Ghosh v. ITO [1985] 13 ITD 440 (Cal.), the assessee failed to prove the financial capacity of the person from whom he had allegedly taken the loan. The loan amount was rightly held to be the assessee's own undisclosed income. 8.4 Reliance was also placed on the decision of CIT v. Kamdhenu Steel & Alloys Limited [2012] 19 taxmann.com 26/206 Taxaman 254 [2014] 361 ITR 220 (Delhi…

SAMARTH LIFESTYLE RETAILING PVT. LTD.,JAIPUR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-6, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 621/JPR/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur17 Oct 2024AY 2011-12
For Appellant: Shri P. C. Parwal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Nargas, Addl. CIT
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, जयपुर न्यायपीठ, जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,'A' JAIPUR श्री संदीप गोसाई, न्यायिक सदस्य एवं श्री राठौड कमलेश जयंतभाई, लेखा सदस्य के समक्ष BEFORE: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM आयकर अपील सं./ITA No. 621/JP/2024 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year : 2011-12 Samarth Lifestyle Retailing Private Limited, 601, 6th Floor, Ganga Heights SB-154, Lal Kothi Tonk Road, Jaipur बनाम Vs. DCIT, Circle-06, Jaipur स्थायी लेखा सं./ जीआईआर सं./PAN/GIR No.: AAACV 7598 M अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent निर्धारिती की ओर से / Assessee by : Shri P.…

ITO, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. PRIMELAND REAL ESTATES PVT. LTD, NEW DELHI

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1365/DEL/2009[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Jan 2020AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Prashant Maharishiasstt. Year: 2005-06

For Appellant: Shri Tarandeep Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Nidhi Srivastava, CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)Section 68

…epartment is required to undertake further exercise." It has been held that merely proving the identity of the investors does not discharge the onus of the assessee, if the capacity or credit-worthiness has not been established. In Shankar Ghosh v. ITO [1985] 13 ITD 440 (Cal.), the assessee failed to prove the financial capacity of the person from whom he had allegedly taken the loan. The loan amount was rightly held to be the assessee's own undisclosed income. 8.4 Reliance was also placed on the decision of CIT v. Kamdhenu Steel & Alloys Limited [2012] 19 taxmann.com 26/206 Taxaman 254 [2014] 361 ITR 220 (Delhi)…

Shankar Ghosh v. ITO (13 ITD 440) — Cited in 7 Judgments | BharatTax