← All Phrases

“summons under section 131”

Search & SeizureSection 131Section 131379 judgments

The decision most relied on for summons under section 131 is CIT v. Orissa Corporation Pvt. Ltd. (159 ITR 78), cited in 897 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on summons under section 131

CIT v. Orissa Corporation Pvt. Ltd.
159 ITR 78 · 1986 · Supreme Court
897
citing judgments

When an assessee provides the identity and address of a creditor or investor for a cash credit or share capital under Section 68, the burden shifts to the Department to establish lack of genuineness or creditworthiness, requiring it to conduct further inquiries; mere non-compliance by third parties to summons cannot be the sole basis for an adverse inference against the assessee.

CIT v. Creative World Telefilms Ltd.
333 ITR 100 · 2011 · High Court
235
citing judgments

If an assessee provides the identity, address, PAN, and banking details of shareholders for share capital or application money received through banking channels, the Assessing Officer must conduct a thorough investigation beyond merely issuing unserved summons before making an addition under Section 68.

CIT v. Orchid Industries Pvt. Ltd.
397 ITR 136 · 2017 · High Court
222
citing judgments

Mere non-compliance with summons issued under Section 131 does not automatically disprove a transaction, and the Assessing Officer cannot disregard other documentary evidence furnished by the assessee when making additions under Section 68.

Crystal Networks Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT
353 ITR 171 · 2013 · High Court
130
citing judgments

When an assessee furnishes sufficient evidence proving the identity, genuineness, and creditworthiness of loan or share application transactions under Section 68, the Assessing Officer cannot make an addition solely because summons issued to the creditors or subscribers were unserved or went uncomplied with. The inability of the tax authorities to secure the attendance or response of third parties does not automatically negate the evidence provided by the assessee.

Nathu Ram Premchand v. CIT
49 ITR 561 · 1963 · High Court
71
citing judgments

An assessment is rendered void if the assessee is denied the opportunity to cross-examine a third party whose adverse evidence is used against them. The Assessing Officer possesses powers akin to a civil court for summoning witnesses and enforcing their appearance.

(a) CIT v. Genesis Commet (P) Ltd.
163 Taxmann 482 · 2007 · High Court
48
citing judgments

An Assessing Officer, when disbelieving an assessee's explanation, must issue summons to the relevant parties for independent verification. No adverse inference can be drawn against the assessee without such an inquiry.

Diagnostics v. CIT
334 ITR 111 · 2011 · High Court
47
citing judgments

A party's non-appearance or inability to be found at an address three years after a transaction does not, by itself, prove the party does not exist or that the transaction is not genuine, especially when payments were made via account payee cheques.

(a) CIT Vs. Genesis Commet (P) Ltd. 163 Taxman 482 (Del) (b) CIT v. V. B. Aggarwal
49 ITR 650 · 1963 · High Court
35
citing judgments

The Income Tax Officer has a duty to assist the assessee in producing evidence by exercising powers such as summoning parties, and an assessee is prejudiced if this duty is not fulfilled.

Judgments citing summons under section 131

Shri Shamjibhai M. Sheladiya, Surat vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Cir.-3(2), Surat

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 234/SRT/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Surat03 Mar 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Pawan Singhआ.अ.सं./Ita No.234/Srt/2022 (Ay 2016-17) (Hearing In Physical Court) Shri Shamjibhai M Sheladiya Assistant Commissioner Of 11, Chandanbaug Society, Income-Tax, Circle-3(2), Vs Opp. Dharam Nagar, A.K. Aayakar Bhawan, Majura Road, Surat-395006 Gate, Surat-395001 Pan No: Afxps 3164 B अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By Shri Sapnesh R Sheth, C.A राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing 28.12.2022 उ"घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of 03.03.2023 Pronouncement Order Under Section 254(1) Of Income Tax Act Per Pawan Singh: 1. This Appeal By Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [For Short To As “Nfac/Ld.Cit(A)”] Dated 27.05.2022 For Assessment Year 2016-17, Which In Turn Arises Out Assessment Order Passed By Assessing Officer Under Section 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) Dated 06.12.2018. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:- “1. On The Facts Of The Case As Well As Law On The Subject, The Learned Cit(A), Nfac Has Erred In Confirming The Action Of Assessing Officer In Making Addition Of Rs.15,00,000/- As Unexplained Cash Credit U/S 68 Of The I.T. Act,1961. Sh.Shamjibhai M Sheladiya 2. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case As Well As Law On The Subject, The Learned Cit(A), Nfac Has Erred In Confirming The Action Of Assessing Officer In Invoking Provisions Of Section 115Bbe Of The Act & In Thereby Taxing Entire Cash Credit Of Rs.15,00,000/- At 30 Percentage.

Section 115BSection 143(3)Section 254(1)Section 68Section 80C

discharged his onus in proving identity, creditworthiness and genuineness of such transaction. The Assessing Officer neither issued notice under section 133(6) or summons under section 131 to bring any contrary evidence. Once the assessee discharged his onus and the Assessing Officer did not pursue the matter further in examining ... cheques to the assessee in case of both the lenders. The Assessing Officer has not issued any notice under section 133(6) or summons under section 131 of the Act. To make further investigation against the creditworthiness in issuing such cheques on account of unsecured loan. 10. I find that