Sumati Dayal v. CIT

214 ITR 801Supreme Court of India1995#12 most cited

What is Sumati Dayal v. CIT authority for?

The Revenue is entitled to look behind the apparent form of a transaction to discover its true nature, applying the test of human probabilities and surrounding circumstances. If transactions defy logic or are unnatural, they can be treated as bogus, even if supported by some documentation, especially in cases of cash credits or unexplained investments.

1,967

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,368 Indian tax judgments — from 2010 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Sumati Dayal v CIT · Section 68 · human probabilities · genuineness of transaction · true nature of transaction · accommodation entry · bogus capital gains · penny stock · look behind apparent form · preponderance of probability · colourable device · unexplained loans

Also reported as

80 Taxmann 89125 CTR 124

Sections most often in play

Section 68Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 142(1)Section 115BBESection 69CSection 69A
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

price riggingcolourable devicepreponderance of probabilitybogus ltcgpenny stocksection 10(38)entry operatoraddition under section 68addition u/s 68genuineness of the transactionaccommodation entryshare application money

Judgments citing Sumati Dayal v. CIT

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax 15(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Jyoti Switchgears Private Limited, Mumbai

The appeal stands dismissed

ITA 529/MUM/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 May 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Jm & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Adj. Application-RejectedFor Respondent: Chaudhary Arun Kumar Singh-Ld.DR
Section 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148

…1 आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण “एफ” "ायपीठ मुंबई म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “F” BENCH, MUMBAI "ी श""जीत दे,"ाियक सद" एवं "ी मनोज कुमारअ"वाल, लेखा सद" के सम"। BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JM AND SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM आयकरअपील सं./ I.T.A. No.529/Mum/2018 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11) ACIT -15(2)(1) M/s. Jyoti Switchgears Pvt. Ltd. Room No.357, 3rd Floor W-379, MIDC, Rabale बनाम/ Aaykar Bhavan, M.K. Road Navi Mumbai - 400 614. Vs. Mumbai - 400 020. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No. AABCJ-8882-B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) : Assessee by : Adj. Application-Rejected Department by :…

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

…/- per share. 3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld.CIT(A) failed to appreciate that the Income Tax proceedings are governed by preponderance of probability as held by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Sumati Dayal v. CIT [214 ITR 801]. 3. Briefly stated, the facts are that during the course of assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer (AO) on perusal of the details filed noticed that the assessee had raised paid up share capital from Rs.1,00,000/- to Rs.2,82,000/-. During the year, the assessee had issued 18,200 equity shares having face value of Rs.10 on premium and it h…

Chaganlal Pukhraj Parmar, Mumbai vs. ITO 29(1)(2), Mumbai

The appeal stands partly allowed

ITA 5588/MUM/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 May 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Jm & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri Vimal Punmiya-Ld.ARFor Respondent: Awanghi Gimson-Ld. DR
Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 234ASection 271(1)(c)

…1 आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण “सी” "ायपीठ मुंबई म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH, MUMBAI "ी श""जीत दे,"ाियक सद" एवं "ी मनोज कुमारअ"वाल, लेखा सद" के सम"। BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JM AND SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM आयकरअपील सं./ I.T.A. No.5588/Mum/2016 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) Shri Chaganlal Pukhraj Parmar Income tax Officer-29(1)(2) बनाम/ Mahaveer Universe, Maven, 1101 Mumbai. LBS Road, Bhandup(W) Vs. Mumbai-400 078. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No. AGMPP-7757-P (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) : Assessee by : Shri Vimal Punmiya-Ld.AR Department by : Awanghi Gimson-Ld. DR स…

Mangilal Jain, Darjeeling vs. ITO, Ward - 3(3), Darjeeling

Appeal is allowed

ITA 729/KOL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 May 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S.S, Godaraassessment Year:2014-15 Mangilal Jain Income Tax Officer, बनाम / C/O Advocate Pradip Ward-3(3), Nr. Lal V/S. Lakhotia, 2Nd Floor, Metro Kothi, Darjeeling Plaza, Sf Road, Siliguri-734005 [Pan No.Afkpj 4178 D] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent Shri Dhiraj Lakhotia, A.R अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri C.J. Singh, Jcit-Sr-Dr ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 05-03-2019 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 15-05-2019 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement आदेश /O R D E R This Assessee’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2014-15 Arises Against The Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)-Siliguri’S Order Dated 22.03.2018 Passed In Case No.69/Cit(A)/Slg/2016-17, Involving Proceedings U/S. 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961; In Short ‘The Act’. Heard Both The Parties. Case File Perused. 2. The Assessee’S Sole Substantive Grievance Raised In The Instant Appeal Seeks To Reverse Both The Lower Authorities Findings Treating His Short Term Capital Loss (Stcl) Arising From Sale Of Shares After Payment Of Security Transaction Tax (Stt), Amounting To ₹1,92,320/- As Bogus Unexplained Cash Credits. The Cit(A)’S Detailed Discussion To This Effect Reads As Under:- “4. Decision :- I Have Perused The Assessment Order, The Grounds Of Appeal & The Submissions Made By The Ld.. A/R On Behalf Of The Appellant. My Observations & Findings Are As Under :- 4.1. The Present Appeal Emanates After Disallowing Rs. 11,92,320/- Arising Out Of Shares Transaction & Treated The Same As Bogus. In This Case The Assessee Purchased 32000 Shares Of Global Infratech & Finance Ltd. Through Eureka Stock & Shares Broking Services Limited @ Rs. 77.37 Per Share Aggregating To Rs. 24,79,714/- On 11.02.2014 & Further Sold The

Section 131Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 69

…evidence, but, in the sphere, the decision of the final fact finding authority is made conclusive by law. " 4.7 The above ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court has been reiterated and applied by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Sumati Dayal V CIT 214 ITR 801 (S.C). It is essential on the part of the AO to look into the real nature of transaction and what happens in the real word and contextualize the same to such transactions in the real market situation. It is pertinent to state here, the wisdom of Hon'ble Supreme Court in CIT V Arvinda Raju (TN) (1979) 120 ITR 46 (S.C) wherein it was held that- "On…

M/S. Ganpati Polymers Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of Assessee dismissed

ITA 2078/DEL/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 May 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri N.S. Saini

For Appellant: Shri R.K. Kapoor, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Amit Katosh, Sr. D.R
Section 68

…show that assessee failed to prove creditworthiness and genuineness of the transaction in the matter. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Durga Prasad More 82 ITR 11 ITA.No.2078/Del./2014 M/s. Ganpati Polymers Ltd., New Delhi. 540 (SC) and Sumati Dayal 214 ITR 801 (SC) have held that “Courts and Tribunals have to judge the evidence before them by applying the test of human probabilities.” If the said test is applied in this matter, it is clearly established that assessee has failed to prove creditworthiness of the Investors and genuineness of the transaction in the matter. It is difficult to believe that t…

Kamal Singh Kundalia, Siliguri vs. I.T.O., Ward - 1(4), Siliguri

Appeal is allowed

ITA 2359/KOL/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata08 May 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Sainiassessment Year :2014-15 Kamal Sinigh Kundalia V/S. Income Tax Officer, C/O Pradip Lakhotia, 2Nd Ward-1(4), Aayakar Floor, Metro Plaza, Sf Bhawana, Matigara, Road, Siliguri-734005 Siliguri-734010 [Pan No.Akupk 1029 R] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Shri Dhiraj Lakhotia, Ar अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri Robin Choudhury, Addl-Cit-Dr ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 07-02-2019 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 08-05-2019 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S.Godara:- This Assessee’S Appeal Arises Against The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-Siliguri’S Order Dated 29.08.2017 Passed In Case No.49/Cit(A)/Slg/2016-17, Involving Proceedings U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961; In Short ‘The Act’. Heard Both The Parties. The Assessee’S Detailed Paper Book Comprising Of Bank Statement (For The Period Of 01.04.2011 To 31.03.2012), Share Certificate In This Taxpayer’S Name Dated 31.12.2011, Allotment Letter Of 15,000 Shares Of Cressanda Solutions After Due Approval Of Hon'Ble Bombay High Court Dated 21.02.2013, Show-Cause Notice, Demat Account With The Broker Firm & Contract Notes Etc.; Stands Perused.

Section 143(3)Section 68

…ce of evidence, but, in the sphere, the decision of the final fact finding authority is made conclusive by law.” The above ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court has been reiterated and applied by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Sumati Dayal V CIT 214 ITR 801 (SC). Perusal of fact shows that the price of share of M/s Cresaanda Solution Pvt. Ltd. in 2011-12 was Rs.10/- and after that it was substantially increased. Now, as on date September 2017 it has come to the price of Rs.2.71/- per share. As on date the credence of Cresanda Solution Ltd. is that its face value of share remains Rs.1/- average equit…

Sri Udit Kumar Dugar, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward - 36(4), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 799/KOL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 May 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am]

Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148

…test it on the test of human probability and cited decisions of Hon’ble Apex Court, High Courts and Tribunal in following cases: i) CIT Vs. P. Mohankala 291 ITR 278 (SC), ii) CIT Vs. Durga Prasad More (1971) 82 ITR 540 (SC), iii) Sumati Dayal Vs. CIT (1995) 214 ITR 801 (SC), iv) Das & sons Vs. CIT (2003) 264 ITR 435 (Delhi), v) Smt. Phoolwati Devi 314 ITR (AT) 1 (Del.), vi) CIT Vs. N R. Portfolio Pvt. Ltd. dated 22.11.2013(Del.), vii) Chuhar Mal Vs. CIT (1988) 172 ITR 250, viii) M/s. Mont Blane Properties & Industries Pvt. Ltd. , ITA No. 614/Bom/1987, ix) Wi Chadha Vs. CIT (IT) in ITA No. 3088 & 3107/Del/2005 x…

P.S.Construction, Mumbai vs. DCIT- CC - 1(3), Mumbai

In the result, both appeals filed by the assessee are

ITA 3229/MUM/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 May 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri G. Manjunatha & Shri Ravish Sood

…se purchases in light of various evidences. 8. The Ld. CIT(A), after considering the submissions of the assessee and also by relied upon plethora of judicial precedents, including the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Sumati Dayal (1995) 214 ITR 801(SC) held that the assessee has failed to prove the identity, creditworthiness and genuineness of unsecured loans taken from concerns of Bhanwarlal Jain and thus, the AO has rightly made additions towards unsecured loans u/s 68 of the Act. The Ld. CIT(A) has discussed the issue extensively in his order in 15 M/s Pabal Housing Pvt. Ltd & Ors. l…

P.S.Construction, Mumbai vs. DCIT-CC- 1(3), Mumbai

In the result, both appeals filed by the assessee are

ITA 3228/MUM/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 May 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri G. Manjunatha & Shri Ravish Sood

…se purchases in light of various evidences. 8. The Ld. CIT(A), after considering the submissions of the assessee and also by relied upon plethora of judicial precedents, including the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Sumati Dayal (1995) 214 ITR 801(SC) held that the assessee has failed to prove the identity, creditworthiness and genuineness of unsecured loans taken from concerns of Bhanwarlal Jain and thus, the AO has rightly made additions towards unsecured loans u/s 68 of the Act. The Ld. CIT(A) has discussed the issue extensively in his order in 15 M/s Pabal Housing Pvt. Ltd & Ors. l…

P.S.Construction, Mumbai vs. DCIT- CC- 1(3), Mumbai

In the result, both appeals filed by the assessee are

ITA 3227/MUM/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 May 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri G. Manjunatha & Shri Ravish Sood

…se purchases in light of various evidences. 8. The Ld. CIT(A), after considering the submissions of the assessee and also by relied upon plethora of judicial precedents, including the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Sumati Dayal (1995) 214 ITR 801(SC) held that the assessee has failed to prove the identity, creditworthiness and genuineness of unsecured loans taken from concerns of Bhanwarlal Jain and thus, the AO has rightly made additions towards unsecured loans u/s 68 of the Act. The Ld. CIT(A) has discussed the issue extensively in his order in 15 M/s Pabal Housing Pvt. Ltd & Ors. l…

P.S.Construction, Mumbai vs. DCIT -CC -1(3), Mumbai

In the result, both appeals filed by the assessee are

ITA 3226/MUM/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 May 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri G. Manjunatha & Shri Ravish Sood

…se purchases in light of various evidences. 8. The Ld. CIT(A), after considering the submissions of the assessee and also by relied upon plethora of judicial precedents, including the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Sumati Dayal (1995) 214 ITR 801(SC) held that the assessee has failed to prove the identity, creditworthiness and genuineness of unsecured loans taken from concerns of Bhanwarlal Jain and thus, the AO has rightly made additions towards unsecured loans u/s 68 of the Act. The Ld. CIT(A) has discussed the issue extensively in his order in 15 M/s Pabal Housing Pvt. Ltd & Ors. l…

Rajendra P. Jain, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(3), Mumbai

The appeal stands partly allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 298/MUM/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 May 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri Vimal Punmiya- Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Awungshi Gimson - Ld. CIT DR
Section 132(1)Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 153ASection 234ASection 274

…the assessee which was proved by overwhelming corroborative and circumstantial evidences gathered by the investigation wing during search proceedings. Reliance was placed, inter-alia, on the observation of Hon’ble Apex Court rendered in Sumati Dayal Vs. CIT [214 ITR 801] to support these observations / conclusions. It was also observed that the retraction was made by the assessee after a lapse of nearly 10 months and too, without any valid basis and the same was merely an afterthought and tutored statement. The provisions of section 132(4A) raising rebuttable presumption against the assessee were also noted in t…

Rajendra P. Jain, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(3), Mumbai

The appeal stands partly allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 297/MUM/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 May 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri Vimal Punmiya- Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Awungshi Gimson - Ld. CIT DR
Section 132(1)Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 153ASection 234ASection 274

…the assessee which was proved by overwhelming corroborative and circumstantial evidences gathered by the investigation wing during search proceedings. Reliance was placed, inter-alia, on the observation of Hon’ble Apex Court rendered in Sumati Dayal Vs. CIT [214 ITR 801] to support these observations / conclusions. It was also observed that the retraction was made by the assessee after a lapse of nearly 10 months and too, without any valid basis and the same was merely an afterthought and tutored statement. The provisions of section 132(4A) raising rebuttable presumption against the assessee were also noted in t…

Rajendra P. Jain, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(3), Mumbai

The appeal stands partly allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 296/MUM/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 May 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri Vimal Punmiya- Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Awungshi Gimson - Ld. CIT DR
Section 132(1)Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 153ASection 234ASection 274

…the assessee which was proved by overwhelming corroborative and circumstantial evidences gathered by the investigation wing during search proceedings. Reliance was placed, inter-alia, on the observation of Hon’ble Apex Court rendered in Sumati Dayal Vs. CIT [214 ITR 801] to support these observations / conclusions. It was also observed that the retraction was made by the assessee after a lapse of nearly 10 months and too, without any valid basis and the same was merely an afterthought and tutored statement. The provisions of section 132(4A) raising rebuttable presumption against the assessee were also noted in t…

Poonam Skyline Construction, Mumbai vs. DCIT -CC- 1(3), Mumbai

In the result, both appeals filed by the assessee are

ITA 2694/MUM/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 May 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri G. Manjunatha & Shri Ravish Sood

…se purchases in light of various evidences. 8. The Ld. CIT(A), after considering the submissions of the assessee and also by relied upon plethora of judicial precedents, including the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Sumati Dayal (1995) 214 ITR 801(SC) held that the assessee has failed to prove the identity, creditworthiness and genuineness of unsecured loans taken from concerns of Bhanwarlal Jain and thus, the AO has rightly made additions towards unsecured loans u/s 68 of the Act. The Ld. CIT(A) has discussed the issue extensively in his order in 15 M/s Pabal Housing Pvt. Ltd & Ors. l…

Poonam Skyline Construction, Mumbai vs. DCIT- CC- 1(3), Mumbai

In the result, both appeals filed by the assessee are

ITA 2693/MUM/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 May 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri G. Manjunatha & Shri Ravish Sood

…se purchases in light of various evidences. 8. The Ld. CIT(A), after considering the submissions of the assessee and also by relied upon plethora of judicial precedents, including the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Sumati Dayal (1995) 214 ITR 801(SC) held that the assessee has failed to prove the identity, creditworthiness and genuineness of unsecured loans taken from concerns of Bhanwarlal Jain and thus, the AO has rightly made additions towards unsecured loans u/s 68 of the Act. The Ld. CIT(A) has discussed the issue extensively in his order in 15 M/s Pabal Housing Pvt. Ltd & Ors. l…

Pabal Housing Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT- CC- 1(3), Mumbai

In the result, both appeals filed by the assessee are

ITA 2689/MUM/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 May 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri G. Manjunatha & Shri Ravish Sood

…se purchases in light of various evidences. 8. The Ld. CIT(A), after considering the submissions of the assessee and also by relied upon plethora of judicial precedents, including the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Sumati Dayal (1995) 214 ITR 801(SC) held that the assessee has failed to prove the identity, creditworthiness and genuineness of unsecured loans taken from concerns of Bhanwarlal Jain and thus, the AO has rightly made additions towards unsecured loans u/s 68 of the Act. The Ld. CIT(A) has discussed the issue extensively in his order in 15 M/s Pabal Housing Pvt. Ltd & Ors. l…

Pabal Housing Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT- CC- 1(3), Mumbai

In the result, both appeals filed by the assessee are

ITA 2688/MUM/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 May 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri G. Manjunatha & Shri Ravish Sood

…se purchases in light of various evidences. 8. The Ld. CIT(A), after considering the submissions of the assessee and also by relied upon plethora of judicial precedents, including the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Sumati Dayal (1995) 214 ITR 801(SC) held that the assessee has failed to prove the identity, creditworthiness and genuineness of unsecured loans taken from concerns of Bhanwarlal Jain and thus, the AO has rightly made additions towards unsecured loans u/s 68 of the Act. The Ld. CIT(A) has discussed the issue extensively in his order in 15 M/s Pabal Housing Pvt. Ltd & Ors. l…

Pabal Housing Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT- CC - 1(3), Mumbai

In the result, both appeals filed by the assessee are

ITA 2687/MUM/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 May 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri G. Manjunatha & Shri Ravish Sood

…se purchases in light of various evidences. 8. The Ld. CIT(A), after considering the submissions of the assessee and also by relied upon plethora of judicial precedents, including the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Sumati Dayal (1995) 214 ITR 801(SC) held that the assessee has failed to prove the identity, creditworthiness and genuineness of unsecured loans taken from concerns of Bhanwarlal Jain and thus, the AO has rightly made additions towards unsecured loans u/s 68 of the Act. The Ld. CIT(A) has discussed the issue extensively in his order in 15 M/s Pabal Housing Pvt. Ltd & Ors. l…

Jinesh Kumar Jain, HUF, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward - 35(2), Kolkata

ITA 1605/KOL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Apr 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Sainiassessment Year :2014-15

Section 143(3)Section 68

…operators. He takes us to assessment order indicating the assessee to have allegedly invested his money in Cressanda Solutions Ltd. not having any sound financial position or business activity so as to justify the LTCG in issue. Case law Sumati Dayal vs. CIT 214 ITR 801 (SC) and CIT vs. Durga Prasad More (1971) 82 ITR (SC) is quoted in support to plead that both the lower authorities have made it clear in their respective order(s) about the assessee having acted in collusion with various entity operators for the purpose of bogus LTCG in issue. 4. We have given our thoughtful consideration to rival contentions.…