Shankar Industries v. CIT

114 ITR 689High Court1978#907 most cited

What is Shankar Industries v. CIT authority for?

To explain cash credits in books under Section 68, the assessee must prove the identity of the creditor, their capacity to advance the money, and the genuineness of the transaction. Failure to establish these three elements results in the addition being upheld.

117

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Shankar Industries v CIT · 114 ITR 689 · Section 68 Income Tax Act · cash credits onus of proof · identity capacity genuineness · creditor's creditworthiness · unexplained share capital · burden of proof section 68 · addition under section 68 · unexplained cash credits

Sections most often in play

Section 68Section 143(3)Section 133(6)Section 147Section 69Section 142(1)Section 144Section 143(2)

Issues it is cited on

source of sourcesection 31paper companycreditworthiness of the creditorshare capital and share premiumsection 251(2)section 251(1)(a)onus of prooflive linkadmission of additional evidenceaddition u/s 68entry operator

Judgments citing Shankar Industries v. CIT

ITO, New Delhi vs. M/S. Sintex Consumers Electronics Pvt. Ltd., Delhi

ITA 5736/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Mar 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

…) • AnrajNarainDass V CIT • MoD Creatiosn Pvt Ltd V (1951) 20 ITR 562 (Punj.) Income Tax Officer • A.D. Jayaveerapandia Nadar (2013) 354 ITR 282 V CIT (1964) 54 ITR 401 (Delhi) (Mad.) • CIT V Kamdhenu Steel • Shankar Industries V CIT and Alloys Ltd and (1978) 114 ITR 689 (Cal.) Others 206 taxmann 254 • Oriental Wire Industries P Delhi Ltd. V CIT (1981) 131 ITR 688 • CIT V Gangeshwari (Cal.) Metals Pvt Ltd (2013) 30 • Sikri & Co. Pvt Ltd V CIT taxmann.com 328 (1977) 106 ITR 682 (Cal.) • CIT V Oasis Hospitalities • VeljiDeoraj& Co. V CIT (2011) 333 ITR 119 (1968) 68 ITR 708 (Bom.) (Delhi) • KM Sandhu & Sons Pvt Ltd…

ITO, New Delhi vs. M/S. Supreme Placement Services Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 5650/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Mar 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

…) • AnrajNarainDass V CIT • MoD Creatiosn Pvt Ltd V (1951) 20 ITR 562 (Punj.) Income Tax Officer • A.D. Jayaveerapandia Nadar (2013) 354 ITR 282 V CIT (1964) 54 ITR 401 (Delhi) (Mad.) • CIT V Kamdhenu Steel • Shankar Industries V CIT and Alloys Ltd and (1978) 114 ITR 689 (Cal.) Others 206 taxmann 254 • Oriental Wire Industries P Delhi Ltd. V CIT (1981) 131 ITR 688 • CIT V Gangeshwari (Cal.) Metals Pvt Ltd (2013) 30 • Sikri & Co. Pvt Ltd V CIT taxmann.com 328 (1977) 106 ITR 682 (Cal.) • CIT V Oasis Hospitalities • VeljiDeoraj& Co. V CIT (2011) 333 ITR 119 (1968) 68 ITR 708 (Bom.) (Delhi) • KM Sandhu & Sons Pvt Ltd…

ITO, New Delhi vs. M/S Angel Cement Pvt. Ltd., Ghaziabad

ITA 4691/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Mar 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

…) • AnrajNarainDass V CIT • MoD Creatiosn Pvt Ltd V (1951) 20 ITR 562 (Punj.) Income Tax Officer • A.D. Jayaveerapandia Nadar (2013) 354 ITR 282 V CIT (1964) 54 ITR 401 (Delhi) (Mad.) • CIT V Kamdhenu Steel • Shankar Industries V CIT and Alloys Ltd and (1978) 114 ITR 689 (Cal.) Others 206 taxmann 254 • Oriental Wire Industries P Delhi Ltd. V CIT (1981) 131 ITR 688 • CIT V Gangeshwari (Cal.) Metals Pvt Ltd (2013) 30 • Sikri & Co. Pvt Ltd V CIT taxmann.com 328 (1977) 106 ITR 682 (Cal.) • CIT V Oasis Hospitalities • VeljiDeoraj& Co. V CIT (2011) 333 ITR 119 (1968) 68 ITR 708 (Bom.) (Delhi) • KM Sandhu & Sons Pvt Ltd…

Khetan Twist Net P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO 12(3)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

ITA 3031/MUM/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Nov 2020AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2007-08

For Appellant: Smt. Arati Vissanji, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sunil Deshpande, DR
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 148

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “H” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY (JUDICIAL MEMBER) AND SHRI N.K. PRADHAN (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) Assessment Year: 2007-08 Khetan Twist Net Pvt. Ltd., The Income Tax Officer-12(3)(2), Room No. 147A, 1st Floor, Aayakar B-204, Hetal Arch, Opp: Natraj Vs. Market, S.V. Road, Malad (West), Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai-400064. Mumbai-400020. PAN No. AABCK4794N Appellant Respondent Assessee by : Smt. Arati Vissanji, AR Revenue by : Shri Sunil Deshpande, DR : 05/11/2020 Date of Hearing Date of pronouncement : 23/11/2020 ORDER PER N.K. PRADHAN, A.M. This is an appeal filed…

Mr.Hitendra Chunilal Shah, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 19(1)(5), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 4602/MUM/2018[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Sept 2020AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2007-08

For Appellant: Shri Nishit Gandhi (AR)For Respondent: Shri Bhoopathi (DR)
Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 68

…icates that the AO has not made even elementary enquiry to verify the claim of the assessee. After the assessee has adduced evidence to establish prima-facie the above, the onus shifts to the department is amply clarified by the decision in Shankar Ind v CIT 114 ITR 689; Prakash Textile v CIT 121 ITR 890; CIT v United 187 ITR 596; Rajshree v CIT 256 ITR 331; Ashokpal v CIT 220 ITR 452; 454; CIT v Metachem 245 ITR 160; CIT v Shree Gopal 204 ITR 285. In the instant case, the assessee has adduced evidence to establish prima-facie the loan of Rs.5,00,000/-. The onus shifted to the department. The AO, instead of maki…

ITO, New Delhi vs. M/S. Jay Shiva Earthmovers & Construction Pvt. Ltd, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3995/DEL/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Feb 2020AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishii.T.A. No. 3995/Del/2010 Ay: 2006-07 Ito, Ward 4(2), Vs. Jay Shiva Earthmovers & Construction Pvt. Ltd., Room No. 413A, Bu-60, Sfs Flats, Outer C.R. Building, Ring Road, Pitampura, I.P. Estate, Delhi – 85 New Delhi (Pan: Aabcj1414D) (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. Satyajeet Goel, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. R.K. Gupta, Addl. CIT(DR)
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “D”, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No. 3995/DEL/2010 AY: 2006-07 ITO, WARD 4(2), VS. JAY SHIVA EARTHMOVERS & CONSTRUCTION PVT. LTD., ROOM NO. 413A, BU-60, SFS FLATS, OUTER C.R. BUILDING, RING ROAD, PITAMPURA, I.P. ESTATE, DELHI – 85 NEW DELHI (PAN: AABCJ1414D) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) Assessee by : Sh. Satyajeet Goel, Adv. Department by : Sh. R.K. Gupta, Addl. CIT(DR) ORDER PER H.S. SIDHU, JM Revenue has filed the present appeal against the impugned order dated 30.6.2010 passed by the Ld…

ACIT, Circle-1, Burdwan vs. M/S. Bardhaman Dharmaraj Paper Mill Pvt. Ltd., Burdwan

ITA 910/KOL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 Jan 2020AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Sainiassessment Year : 2015-16

Section 143(3)Section 68

…this primary onus, that onus shifts to the Department. Merely establishing the identity of the creditor is ne sufficient. This is the ratio in a large number of decision held by various courts in the following case including Shankar Industries Vs. CIT (1978) 114 ITR 689 (Cal); C. Kant & Co. Vs. CIT, (1980) 126 ITR 63 (Cal); Prakash Textile Agency Vs. CIT, (1980) 121 ITR 890 (Cal); Oriental wire Industries P. Ltd. Vs. CIT, (1981) 131 ITR 688 (Cal); CIT Vs. United Commercial & Industries Co. (P) Ltd., (1991) 187 ITR 596, 599 (Cal); M.A. UnneeriKutti Vs. CIT, (1992) 198 ITR 147,150 (Ker), Special Leave Petition dis…

M/S. Bardhaman Dharmaraj Paper Mill Pvt. Ltd., Burdwan vs. ACIT, Circle-2, Burdwan

ITA 1187/KOL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 Jan 2020AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Sainiassessment Year : 2015-16

Section 143(3)Section 68

…this primary onus, that onus shifts to the Department. Merely establishing the identity of the creditor is ne sufficient. This is the ratio in a large number of decision held by various courts in the following case including Shankar Industries Vs. CIT (1978) 114 ITR 689 (Cal); C. Kant & Co. Vs. CIT, (1980) 126 ITR 63 (Cal); Prakash Textile Agency Vs. CIT, (1980) 121 ITR 890 (Cal); Oriental wire Industries P. Ltd. Vs. CIT, (1981) 131 ITR 688 (Cal); CIT Vs. United Commercial & Industries Co. (P) Ltd., (1991) 187 ITR 596, 599 (Cal); M.A. UnneeriKutti Vs. CIT, (1992) 198 ITR 147,150 (Ker), Special Leave Petition dis…

Sri.Phinu Thomas, Trivandrum vs. The ITO, WD-3, Trivandrum

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 316/COCH/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin26 Nov 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm Assessment Year: 2010-11

Section 131Section 143(2)

…sence of the sources of the parties to make the said purchase of gold from the assessee, it cannot be said that the assessee has discharged the onus cast upon him. As held by the Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. Kerala Road Lines Corporation (162 ITR 669), the burden is on the assessee to support the entries made in the books of accounts, and the revenue has no onus to disprove, until the assessee has submitted satisfactory explanation for credit entries. It was held that when, apart from the entries in the books of the assessee, the only other evidence was the statement by the assessee himself…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle 6(2), Mumbai vs. Shri Sarvajit Patel, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 879/MUM/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Oct 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2009-10

For Appellant: Mr. Malav P. Sheth, ARFor Respondent: Ms. Vidisha Kalra, CIT(DR)
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 68

…ty of the creditor, (ii) the capacity of the creditor to advance money; and (iii) the genuineness of transaction. After the assessee has adduced evidence to establish prima facie the aforesaid, the onus shifts to the Department as held in Shankar Ind v. CIT 114 ITR 689; Prakash Textile v. CIT 121 ITR 890; CIT v. United 187 ITR 596; Rajshree v. CIT 256 ITR 331; Ashokpal v. CIT 220 ITR 452, 454; CIT v. Metachem 245 ITR 160; CIT v. Shree Gopal 204 ITR 285; MOD Creations P. Ltd. v. ITO 354 ITR 282. In the instant case, the AO has not done even preliminary inquiry to disprove the contentions of the assessee. The AO…

Shri Puneet Jain, Meerut vs. ITO, Meerut

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 1569/DEL/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Sept 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Shri K. Sampat, AdvFor Respondent: Smt. Suleka Verma, CIT-DR
Section 131Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 271(1)(c)Section 44A

…superfluous and being devoid of merit deserve to be completely ignored. 12. Submissions made on Ground No. 2 on Page 7 regarding fundamental principle governing cash credits has been postulated way back by the Calcutta High Court in Shankar Industries (1978) 114 ITR 689. The principle is that the onus is primo facie on the assessee to show the identity, credit- worthiness and genuineness of the transaction. Once that is discharged, the assessee has proved the needful unless it is reverted back to the assessee with material by the Assessing Officer. That position remains unaltered notwithstanding the later observ…

ACIT 33(2), Mumbai vs. J.K. Industries, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3361/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Sept 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2012-13 Dcit/Acit-33(2), Room M/S J.K. Industries F1-Gyan No. 608, 6Th Floor, Bldg. C- Darshan, S.V.P. Road, Kandivali Vs. 12, Pratyakshakar Bhavan, (W), Mumbai-400067. Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (E), Mumbai- 400051. Pan No. Aaafj0696B Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. Nishit Gandhi, ARFor Respondent: Ms. Harkamal Sohi Sandhu, DR
Section 143(3)Section 44ASection 68

…ty-wise and (ii) copy of accounts of Iron Traders-Punjab in the books of the assessee. It is well-settled that after the assessee has adduced evidence, the onus shifts to the Department for addition u/s 68 of the Act. It has been held so in Shankar Ind v. CIT 114 ITR 689; Prakash Textile v. CIT 121 ITR 890; CIT v. United 187 ITR 596; Rajshree v. CIT 256 ITR 331; Ashokpal v. CIT 220 ITR 452, 454; CIT v. Metachem 245 ITR 160; CIT v. Shree Gopal 204 ITR 285. In the instant case, the AO has failed to discharge the onus shifted to him. He has made the addition on surmises. Therefore, we confirm the order of the CIT(A)…

ITO 16(1)(5), Mumbai vs. Realstone Entertainment P.Ltd, Mumbai

ITA 1271/MUM/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jul 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2009-10 Income Tax Officer- M/S Realstone 16(1)(5), Room No. Vs. Entertainment Pvt. Ltd. A- 439, 4Th Floor, Aayakar 601, Crystal Palace, Link Bhavan M.K. Road, Road, Malad (W), Mumbai- Mumbai-400020. 400064. Pan No. Aaccr8558F Appellant Respondent C.O. No. 201/Mum/2018 (Ita No. 1271/Mum/2017) Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/S Realstone Income Tax Officer- Entertainment Pvt. Ltd. C/O Vs. 16(1)(5), Room No. 439, Ajay Daga& Co. Cas, 401-A, 4Th Floor, Aayakarbhavan Pearl Arcade, Opp P K M.K. Road, Mumbai- Jewellers, Dawoodbaug 400020. Lane, Off J P Road, Andheri (W), Mumbai-400058. Pan No. Aaccr8558F Appellant Respondent Revenue By : Mr. Chaitanya Anjaria & Mr. Sachidanand Debe, Drs Assessee By : Mr. R.C. Jain, Ar Last Date Of Hearing : 03/05/2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 24/07/2019

For Appellant: Mr. R.C. Jain, ARFor Respondent: Mr. Chaitanya Anjaria &
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 68

…e creditor to advance money; and (iii) the genuineness of transaction. It is also well settled that after the assessee has adduced evidence to establish prima facie the aforesaid, the onus shifts to the department. It is has been held so in Shankar Ind v. CIT 114 ITR 689; Prakash Textile v. CIT 121 ITR 890 ; CIT v. United 187 ITR 596; Rajshree v. CIT 256 ITR 331; Ashokpal v. CIT 220 ITR 452, 454; CIT v. Metachem 245 ITR 160; CIT v. Shree Gopal 204 ITR 285; MOD Creations P. Ltd. v. ITO 354 ITR 282. As mentioned earlier at para 6, the assessee filed before the AO the relevant details and supporting documents with r…

Shri Rayjibhai Ramanbhai Solanki, Vadodara vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(3)(2), Vadodara

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1202/AHD/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad17 Jul 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Pradipkumar Kediaआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1202/Ahd/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2011-12

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Ms.Apoorva Bharadwaj, Sr.DR
Section 144Section 147Section 148

…IT [1995] 214 ITR 801 (SC), it was held that if the explanation offered by the assessee about the nature and source of the credits in his books of accounts is not satisfactory, the amount can be treated as income of the assessee. In C.Kant & Co. vs CIT [1980] 126 ITR 63 (Cal), it was held that in case of cash credit entry, it is necessary for the assessee to prove not only the identity of the creditor but also to prove capacity of the creditor to advance the money and genuineness of the transaction. Hon'ble Calcutta High Court, in the case of S.K. Bothra & Sons, HUF vs ITO [2011] 203 Taxman 436 (Kol), it was held…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax-4(2)(2), Mumbai vs. M/S.Jamini Nidustries Private Limited, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 5516/MUM/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Jul 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2014-15

For Appellant: Mr. Bhupendra Shah, ARFor Respondent: Mr. Rajeev K. Gubgotra, DR
Section 143(3)

…the capacity of the creditor to advance money; and (iii) the genuineness of transaction. 11 M/s Jamini Industries After the assessee has adduced evidence to establish prima facie the aforesaid, the onus shifts to the Department as held in Shankar Ind v. CIT 114 ITR 689; Prakash Textile v. CIT 121 ITR 890; CIT v. United 187 ITR 596; Rajshree v. CIT 256 ITR 331; Ashokpal v. CIT 220 ITR 452, 454; CIT v. Metachem 245 ITR 160; CIT v. Shree Gopal 204 ITR 285; MOD Creations P. Ltd. v. ITO 354 ITR 282. In the instant case, in response to the show cause notice dated 23.12.2016, the AR of the assessee filed a written sub…

Prayag Polytech Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addl. CIT, Special Range- 7, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 6015/DEL/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Jun 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri B.R.R. Kumarassessment Year: 2014-15

For Appellant: Sh. Ved Jain, Adv. & Sh. Ashish Goel, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Surender Pal, Sr. DR
Section 127(1)Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 68

…and also placed reliance on the judgment of Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of Papneja Traders vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (2012) 20 taxmann.com 752 and CIT vs. Precision Finance Ltd. (1994) 208 ITR 465 (Cal.) and Shanker Industries vs. CIT (1978) 114 ITR 689 (Cal.). The CIT(A) after recording the above facts as stated in the assessment order has upheld the addition stating that none of the arguments submitted by the Ld. AR of the appellant have proved the capacity of the creditor and genuineness of the transaction. On going through the paper book we note that the assessee has taken a loan of Rs.50,00…

Addl. CIT, Special Range- 7, New Delhi vs. Prayag Polytech Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5970/DEL/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Jun 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri B.R.R. Kumarassessment Year: 2014-15

For Appellant: Sh. Ved Jain, Adv. & Sh. Ashish Goel, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Surender Pal, Sr. DR
Section 127(1)Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 68

…and also placed reliance on the judgment of Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of Papneja Traders vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (2012) 20 taxmann.com 752 and CIT vs. Precision Finance Ltd. (1994) 208 ITR 465 (Cal.) and Shanker Industries vs. CIT (1978) 114 ITR 689 (Cal.). The CIT(A) after recording the above facts as stated in the assessment order has upheld the addition stating that none of the arguments submitted by the Ld. AR of the appellant have proved the capacity of the creditor and genuineness of the transaction. On going through the paper book we note that the assessee has taken a loan of Rs.50,00…

ITO 12(1)(4), Mumbai vs. Consultshah Financial Services P.Ltd, Mumbai

ITA 6893/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 May 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sandeed Gosain () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2011-12 Income Tax Officer- M/S Consultshah 12(1)(4), Room No. 145A, Vs. Financial Services Pvt. Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Ltd., 426, 4Th Floor, Road, Churchgate, Sujata Niketan, Rani Sati Mumbai-400020. Road, Malad East, Mumbai-400097. Pan No. Aadcc3362K Appellant Respondent Revenue By : Mr. Abi Rama Kartikiyen, Dr Assessee By : Dr. Prayag Jha & Mr. Prateek Jha, Ars Date Of Hearing : 21/02/2019 Date Of Pronouncement: 16/05/2019

For Appellant: Dr. Prayag Jha & Mr. Prateek Jha, ARsFor Respondent: Mr. Abi Rama Kartikiyen, DR
Section 143(3)Section 68

…r to advance money ; and iii. the genuineness of the transaction. M/s Consultshah Financial Services 8 After the assessee has adduced evidence to establish prima facie the aforesaid, the onus shifts to the department as held in the case of Shankar Ind v. CIT 114 ITR 689; Prakash Textile v. CIT 121 ITR 890; CIT v. United 187 ITR 596; Rajshree v. CIT 256 ITR 331; Ashokpal v. CIT 220 ITR 452, 454; CIT v. Metachem 245 ITR 160; CIT v. Shree Gopal 204 ITR 285. We find that in the instant case, the assessee has adduced evidence to establish prima facie the aforesaid. The onus shifted to the department. The AO has not m…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Kota vs. M/S. Agrasen Agro Industries Private Limited, Kota

ITA 1205/JPR/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur27 Mar 2019AY 2011-12
Section 143(3)Section 153Section 153ASection 68

…ade out a case that the amount standing in their name or in credit did not belong to lender but belong to the assessee, which was prima facie case made out department in both the judgments relied upon by the Ld. AO. (ix) Shanker Industries V. Addl CIT (1978) 114 ITR 689 (Cal.): While placing reliance upon the aforesaid judgment, Ld. AO has tried to substantiate its action under Section-68 of the Act. However, Ld. AO failed to discharge its onus, as laid down by the Hon’ble Court in this judgment. The relevant para from the aforesaid judgment is reproduced below: “We would like to observe that the law on this po…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Kota vs. M/S. Agrasen Agro Industries Private Limited, Kota

ITA 1188/JPR/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur27 Mar 2019AY 2010-11
Section 143(3)Section 153Section 153ASection 68

…ade out a case that the amount standing in their name or in credit did not belong to lender but belong to the assessee, which was prima facie case made out department in both the judgments relied upon by the Ld. AO. (ix) Shanker Industries V. Addl CIT (1978) 114 ITR 689 (Cal.): While placing reliance upon the aforesaid judgment, Ld. AO has tried to substantiate its action under Section-68 of the Act. However, Ld. AO failed to discharge its onus, as laid down by the Hon’ble Court in this judgment. The relevant para from the aforesaid judgment is reproduced below: “We would like to observe that the law on this po…