← All Phrases

“paper company”

Cash Credits & Unexplained ItemsSection 68Section 68582 judgments

The decision most relied on for paper company is (Central)-1 v. NRA Iron & Steel (P) Ltd. (103 Taxmann.com 48), cited in 696 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on paper company

(Central)-1 v. NRA Iron & Steel (P) Ltd.
103 Taxmann.com 48 · 2019 · Supreme Court
696
citing judgments

When assessing cash credits, share capital, or loans, the assessee bears the onus to prove the identity, creditworthiness, and genuineness of transactions. This burden is not discharged merely by documentary evidence if field inquiries reveal accommodation entries or dealings with paper/shell companies.

Commissioner of Income Tax v. Nova Promoters and Finlease (P) Ltd.
342 ITR 169 · 2012 · High Court
658
citing judgments

To make an addition under Section 68 for unexplained cash credits, the Assessing Officer must conduct proper inquiry into the identity, genuineness, and creditworthiness of the creditor, especially concerning share application money. The assessee's initial discharge of burden by providing necessary details shifts the onus back to the AO for further investigation, including the source of source.

CIT v. Oasis Hospitalities P. Ltd.
333 ITR 119 · 2011 · High Court
292
citing judgments

When explaining cash credits under Section 68, the assessee must establish the identity of the creditor, their creditworthiness or financial capacity, and the genuineness of the transaction. Merely proving identity does not discharge this initial onus, which shifts to the Assessing Officer once these three elements are prima facie proven.

CIT v. Nipun Builders & Developers
350 ITR 407 · 2013 · High Court
264
citing judgments

For any sum credited in an assessee's books, including share application money, the assessee must prove the identity and creditworthiness of the creditor and the genuineness of the transaction. Failure to discharge this onus under Section 68 renders the amount taxable.

CIT v. N.R. Portfolio (P.) Ltd.
42 Taxmann.com 339 · 2014 · High Court
252
citing judgments

For cash credit additions under Section 68, establishing the 'identity' of a creditor requires more than just producing PAN or assessment particulars; it necessitates demonstrating their actual business operations, place of work, staff, and public recognition. This rigorous standard ensures the assessee proves the identity, creditworthiness, and genuineness of the transaction.

CIT v. Steller Investment Ltd.
251 ITR 263 · 2001 · Supreme Court
233
citing judgments

An increase in a company's subscribed share capital cannot be treated as the company's undisclosed income under section 68, even if the subscribers to the capital are found not to be genuine. The amount of share capital cannot be regarded as undisclosed income of the company itself.

Glass Lines Equipments Company Ltd. v. CIT
253 ITR 454 · 2002 · High Court
150
citing judgments

The Assessing Officer cannot selectively accept parts of a statement or seized evidence that are favourable to the revenue while rejecting other parts favourable to the assessee without proper investigation; the evidence must be considered as a whole. Additions cannot be made based on mere presumptions or surmises without further inquiry.

CIT v. MAF Academy (P) Ltd.
361 ITR 258 · 2014 · High Court
132
citing judgments

Amounts received from bogus share transactions, where a private limited company sells shares to unrelated parties at a huge premium and then repurchases them at a loss shortly after, are taxable as unexplained cash credits under Section 68. The onus to prove identity, creditworthiness, and genuineness of such transactions lies solely on the assessee.

Judgments citing paper company

The ACIT, Central Circle-3, Vadodara vs. M/S. Aikya Chemicals Pvt. Ltd., Vadodara

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are hereby dismissed

ITA 160/AHD/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad01 Oct 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble, Judical Member & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaआयकर अपील (एसएस) सं./I.T (Ss).A. No. 81/Ahd/2021 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2014-15) बनाम/ Asstt. Commissioner Of M/S. Cube Mines & Income-Tax Minerals Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Central Circle-3, Vadodara 11/C Ground Floor, Jaishri Narayan Co-Operative Hsg. Society, Subhanpura, Gorwa, Vadodara, Gujarat 390015 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaccc5761D (Appellant) .. (Respondent) & आयकर अपील (एसएस) सं./I.T (Ss).A. No. 82/Ahd/2021 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2014-15) & आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 159/Ahd/2021 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2015-16) बनाम/ Asstt. Commissioner Of M/S. Iolite Cube Income-Tax Inframaterial Ltd. Vs. Central Circle-3, Vadodara 1, Chandamani Nagar, Vidhya Vihar School Lane, Subhanpura, Vadodara, "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aacci5944A (Appellant) .. (Respondent) &

For Appellant: Shri Jigar Adhiyaru, A.RFor Respondent: Shri H. Phani Raju, CIT. DR
Section 132Section 153A

year 2010. This company was floated by an accommodation entry operator of Kolkata, namely, Mr. Pankaj Agrawal who had admitted that BVPL was a paper company. BVPL had raised funds of about Rs.40 Crores by issuing shares with premium in F.Y. 2010-11. Subsequently, BVPL was acquired by Cube Group ... BVPL was floated by an accommodation entry operator of Kolkata, namely, Mr. Pankaj Agrawal who had accepted in his statement that BVPL was a paper company. As mentioned earlier, the company BVPL had raised funds of Rs.40,16,29,000/- during F.Y. 2010-11, by issuing share capital at premium

The ACIT, Central Circle-3, Vadodara vs. M/S. Iolite Cube Inframaterial Ltd., Vadodara

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are hereby dismissed

ITA 159/AHD/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad01 Oct 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble, Judical Member & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaआयकर अपील (एसएस) सं./I.T (Ss).A. No. 81/Ahd/2021 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2014-15) बनाम/ Asstt. Commissioner Of M/S. Cube Mines & Income-Tax Minerals Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Central Circle-3, Vadodara 11/C Ground Floor, Jaishri Narayan Co-Operative Hsg. Society, Subhanpura, Gorwa, Vadodara, Gujarat 390015 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaccc5761D (Appellant) .. (Respondent) & आयकर अपील (एसएस) सं./I.T (Ss).A. No. 82/Ahd/2021 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2014-15) & आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 159/Ahd/2021 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2015-16) बनाम/ Asstt. Commissioner Of M/S. Iolite Cube Income-Tax Inframaterial Ltd. Vs. Central Circle-3, Vadodara 1, Chandamani Nagar, Vidhya Vihar School Lane, Subhanpura, Vadodara, "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aacci5944A (Appellant) .. (Respondent) &

For Appellant: Shri Jigar Adhiyaru, A.RFor Respondent: Shri H. Phani Raju, CIT. DR
Section 132Section 153A

year 2010. This company was floated by an accommodation entry operator of Kolkata, namely, Mr. Pankaj Agrawal who had admitted that BVPL was a paper company. BVPL had raised funds of about Rs.40 Crores by issuing shares with premium in F.Y. 2010-11. Subsequently, BVPL was acquired by Cube Group ... BVPL was floated by an accommodation entry operator of Kolkata, namely, Mr. Pankaj Agrawal who had accepted in his statement that BVPL was a paper company. As mentioned earlier, the company BVPL had raised funds of Rs.40,16,29,000/- during F.Y. 2010-11, by issuing share capital at premium