← All Phrases

“entry operator”

Cash Credits & Unexplained ItemsSection 68Section 682,071 judgments

The decision most relied on for entry operator is CIT v. Jamnadevi Agarwal (328 ITR 656), cited in 230 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on entry operator

CIT v. Jamnadevi Agarwal
328 ITR 656 · 2010 · High Court
230
citing judgments

When faced with allegations of bogus long-term capital gains from penny stocks, the Assessing Officer must discharge the onus of proving that the assessee's transactions were not genuine. The assessee can rely on the principle of preponderance of probability, and the Revenue must present substantial evidence to establish that the transactions were a colourable device or that the assessee was an entry operator.

ITO, 19(3) (4) Mumbai v. Shamim M Bharwani
69 Taxmann.com 65 · 2016 · Reported
142
citing judgments

Long Term Capital Gains (LTCG) from penny stock transactions are liable to be treated as bogus and added back under Section 68 as unexplained cash credits, especially when evidence suggests the involvement of entry operators providing accommodation entries.

5. PCIT v. Paramount Communication (P.) Ltd. Delhi High Court
392 ITR 444 · 2017 · High Court
111
citing judgments

For valid initiation of reassessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer must possess tangible material and apply independent mind to form a 'reason to believe' that income has escaped assessment. Reassessment cannot be based on mere borrowed satisfaction or unverified information without proper scrutiny.

2 CIT v. Indrajit Singh Suri
33 Taxmann.com 281 · 2013 · High Court
100
citing judgments

The validity of reassessment proceedings initiated under Sections 147/148 against legal representatives of a deceased assessee requires a demonstrable 'reason to believe' that income escaped assessment, often based on third-party information such as alleged accommodation entries.

Dharappa v. Bijapur Co-operative Milk Producers Societies Union Ltd.
9 SCC 109 · 2007 · Reported
62
citing judgments

When a State Act has obtained presidential assent, its repugnant provisions prevail over the provisions of a Central Act in that State, even if both laws relate to subjects in the Concurrent List. This principle was applied to determine repugnancy between the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act, 1959, and the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.

CIT v. Sanghamitra Bharali
361 ITR 481 · 2014 · High Court
60
citing judgments

Capital gains arising from sham transactions, particularly those involving penny stocks designed to appear genuine, are not exempt under Section 10(38) but are taxable as unaccounted income brought into the books.

CIT v. Active Traders (P.) Ltd.
214 ITR 583 · 1995 · High Court
55
citing judgments

When a sum is credited on account of share capital or share premium, the assessee must establish the existence, identity, genuineness, and creditworthiness of the share applicants, going beyond mere submission of documents. The Assessing Officer has the power to investigate and lift the corporate veil to ascertain the bonafides of such transactions.

Income Tax Vs. India Discount Co. Ltd. 75 ITR 191 (SC), Commissioner of Income Tax v. Provincial Farmers (P) Ltd.
245 ITR 421 · 2000 · Supreme Court
55
citing judgments

The entry in the books of accounts is not determinative of the true nature of a transaction for income tax purposes; the substance of the transaction, rather than its accounting treatment, governs its taxability and deductibility.

Judgments citing entry operator

Magnolia Martinique Clothing Private Limited, Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circle 17, New Delhi, Delhi

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 4291/DEL/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Nov 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri S.Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: Shri Dushayant Chaudhary, CAFor Respondent: Shri Jitender Singh, CIT DR
Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148

Subsequently, a search and seizure action was carried out on Mr. Himanshu Verma Group on 13.04.2017. Shri Himanshu Verma was an entry operator who provided accommodation entries in lieu of commission. Shri Himanshu Verma was found to be operating and managing more than 200 shell companies and he admitted that

Magnolia Martinique Clothing Private Limited, Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circle-17, New Delhi, Delhi

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 4290/DEL/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Nov 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri S.Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: Shri Dushayant Chaudhary, CAFor Respondent: Shri Jitender Singh, CIT DR
Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148

Subsequently, a search and seizure action was carried out on Mr. Himanshu Verma Group on 13.04.2017. Shri Himanshu Verma was an entry operator who provided accommodation entries in lieu of commission. Shri Himanshu Verma was found to be operating and managing more than 200 shell companies and he admitted that

Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, Ajmer vs. Vijeta Lodha, Jaipur

58. As a result, the impugned order by Learned CIT(A) deleting the

ITA 390/JPR/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur19 Nov 2025AY 2015-16
For Appellant: Shri Rajeev Sogani, C.A. (through V.C.)For Respondent: None
Section 10(38)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 68Section 69C

assessee has not disclosed any such particulars. 31. At PB 11 of the assessment order, the Assessing Officer has observed that a bogus entry operator chooses one of such like penny stocks, which does not pose a big picture of its financial affairs before general investor, and in this ... transaction. It would be very difficult to gather direct proof of the meeting of minds of those brokers or sub-brokers or middlemen or entry operators and therefore, the test to be applied is the test of preponderance of probabilities to ascertain as to whether there has been violation

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-4(3), Kolkata vs. Shree Ramchandra Ingot India Private Limited, Kolkata

ITA 1556/KOL/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata19 Nov 2025AY 2021-22
Section 115JSection 132Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

assessee company as it acquired these companies through amalgamation. The Assessing Officer noted that these shell entities were managed by the same entry operators. Thereafter, the Assessing Officer discussed the modus operandi and details regarding these shell companies in the assessment order. The AO also discussed the sale of shares

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-4(3), Kolkata vs. Shree Ramchandra Ingot India Private Limited, Kolkata

In the result, all six appeals of the assessee are allowed and all six appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 1555/KOL/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata19 Nov 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: S/Shriand Rajesh Kumar & Pradip Kumar Choubeyita No.1363/Kol/2025: Assessment Year: 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Manish Rastogi, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sanat Kumar Raha, CIT DR
Section 115JSection 132Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

assessee company as it acquired these companies through amalgamation. The Assessing Officer noted that these shell entities were managed by the same entry operators. Thereafter, the Assessing Officer discussed the modus operandi and details regarding these shell companies in the assessment order. The AO also discussed the sale of shares

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-4(3), Kolkata vs. Shree Ramchandra Ingot India Private Limited, Kolkata

In the result, all six appeals of the assessee are allowed and all six appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 1554/KOL/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata19 Nov 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: S/Shriand Rajesh Kumar & Pradip Kumar Choubeyita No.1363/Kol/2025: Assessment Year: 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Manish Rastogi, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sanat Kumar Raha, CIT DR
Section 115JSection 132Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

assessee company as it acquired these companies through amalgamation. The Assessing Officer noted that these shell entities were managed by the same entry operators. Thereafter, the Assessing Officer discussed the modus operandi and details regarding these shell companies in the assessment order. The AO also discussed the sale of shares

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-4(3), Kolkata vs. Shree Ramchandra Ingot India Private Limited, Kolkata

In the result, all six appeals of the assessee are allowed and all six

ITA 1553/KOL/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata19 Nov 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: S/Shriand Rajesh Kumar & Pradip Kumar Choubey

For Appellant: Shri Manish Rastogi, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sanat Kumar Raha, CIT DR
Section 115JSection 132Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

assessee company as it acquired these companies through amalgamation. The Assessing Officer noted that these shell entities were managed by the same entry operators. Thereafter, the Assessing Officer discussed the modus operandi and details regarding these shell companies in the assessment order. The AO also discussed the sale of shares

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-4(3), Kolkata vs. Shree Ramchandra Ingot India Private Limited, Kolkata

In the result, all six appeals of the assessee are allowed and all six appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 1552/KOL/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata19 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: S/Shriand Rajesh Kumar & Pradip Kumar Choubeyita No.1363/Kol/2025: Assessment Year: 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Manish Rastogi, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sanat Kumar Raha, CIT DR
Section 115JSection 132Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

assessee company as it acquired these companies through amalgamation. The Assessing Officer noted that these shell entities were managed by the same entry operators. Thereafter, the Assessing Officer discussed the modus operandi and details regarding these shell companies in the assessment order. The AO also discussed the sale of shares

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-4(3), Kolkata vs. Shree Ramchandra Ingot India Private Limited, Kolkata

In the result, all six appeals of the assessee are allowed and all six appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 1551/KOL/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata19 Nov 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: S/Shriand Rajesh Kumar & Pradip Kumar Choubeyita No.1363/Kol/2025: Assessment Year: 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Manish Rastogi, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sanat Kumar Raha, CIT DR
Section 115JSection 132Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

assessee company as it acquired these companies through amalgamation. The Assessing Officer noted that these shell entities were managed by the same entry operators. Thereafter, the Assessing Officer discussed the modus operandi and details regarding these shell companies in the assessment order. The AO also discussed the sale of shares

Shree Ramchandra Ingot India Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. D.C.I.T., CC-4(3), Kolkata

In the result, all six appeals of the assessee are allowed and all six appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 1368/KOL/2025[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata19 Nov 2025AY 2016-2017

Bench: S/Shriand Rajesh Kumar & Pradip Kumar Choubeyita No.1363/Kol/2025: Assessment Year: 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Manish Rastogi, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sanat Kumar Raha, CIT DR
Section 115JSection 132Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

assessee company as it acquired these companies through amalgamation. The Assessing Officer noted that these shell entities were managed by the same entry operators. Thereafter, the Assessing Officer discussed the modus operandi and details regarding these shell companies in the assessment order. The AO also discussed the sale of shares

Shree Ramchandra Ingot India Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. D.C.I.T., CC - 4(3), Kolkata

In the result, all six appeals of the assessee are allowed and all six appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 1367/KOL/2025[2021-2022]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata19 Nov 2025AY 2021-2022

Bench: S/Shriand Rajesh Kumar & Pradip Kumar Choubeyita No.1363/Kol/2025: Assessment Year: 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Manish Rastogi, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sanat Kumar Raha, CIT DR
Section 115JSection 132Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

assessee company as it acquired these companies through amalgamation. The Assessing Officer noted that these shell entities were managed by the same entry operators. Thereafter, the Assessing Officer discussed the modus operandi and details regarding these shell companies in the assessment order. The AO also discussed the sale of shares

Shree Ramchandra Ingot India Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. D.C.I.T., CC-4(3), Kolkata

In the result, all six appeals of the assessee are allowed and all six

ITA 1366/KOL/2025[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata19 Nov 2025AY 2020-2021

Bench: S/Shri & Rajesh Kumar & Pradip Kumar Choubey

For Appellant: Shri Manish Rastogi, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sanat Kumar Raha, CIT DR
Section 115JSection 132Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

assessee company as it acquired these companies through amalgamation. The Assessing Officer noted that these shell entities were managed by the same entry operators. Thereafter, the Assessing Officer discussed the modus operandi and details regarding these shell companies in the assessment order. The AO also discussed the sale of shares

Shree Ramchandra Ingot India Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. D.C.I.T., CC-4(3), Kolkata

In the result, all six appeals of the assessee are allowed and all six appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 1365/KOL/2025[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata19 Nov 2025AY 2019-2020

Bench: S/Shriand Rajesh Kumar & Pradip Kumar Choubeyita No.1363/Kol/2025: Assessment Year: 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Manish Rastogi, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sanat Kumar Raha, CIT DR
Section 115JSection 132Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

assessee company as it acquired these companies through amalgamation. The Assessing Officer noted that these shell entities were managed by the same entry operators. Thereafter, the Assessing Officer discussed the modus operandi and details regarding these shell companies in the assessment order. The AO also discussed the sale of shares

Shree Ramchandra Ingot India Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. D.C.I.T., CC - 4(3), Kolkata

In the result, all six appeals of the assessee are allowed and all six appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 1364/KOL/2025[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata19 Nov 2025AY 2018-2019

Bench: S/Shriand Rajesh Kumar & Pradip Kumar Choubeyita No.1363/Kol/2025: Assessment Year: 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Manish Rastogi, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sanat Kumar Raha, CIT DR
Section 115JSection 132Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

assessee company as it acquired these companies through amalgamation. The Assessing Officer noted that these shell entities were managed by the same entry operators. Thereafter, the Assessing Officer discussed the modus operandi and details regarding these shell companies in the assessment order. The AO also discussed the sale of shares

Shree Ramchandra Ingot India Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. D.C.I.T., CC-4(3), Kolkata

In the result, all six appeals of the assessee are allowed and all six appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 1363/KOL/2025[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata19 Nov 2025AY 2017-2018

Bench: S/Shriand Rajesh Kumar & Pradip Kumar Choubeyita No.1363/Kol/2025: Assessment Year: 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Manish Rastogi, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sanat Kumar Raha, CIT DR
Section 115JSection 132Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

assessee company as it acquired these companies through amalgamation. The Assessing Officer noted that these shell entities were managed by the same entry operators. Thereafter, the Assessing Officer discussed the modus operandi and details regarding these shell companies in the assessment order. The AO also discussed the sale of shares

ITO WD 2(1) Kol, Kolkata vs. Unicorn Plaza (P) Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed and cross-objection of the assessee is also dismissed

ITA 2213/KOL/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata19 Nov 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubeyassessment Year: 2011-12 Ito, Ward-2(1), Kolkata…………...….……………….……….……….……Appellant Vs. Unicorn Plaza (P) Ltd….………………………………….....……...…..…..Respondent Commerce House, 2A, Ganesh Chandra Avenue Room No.4, 2Nd Floor, Kolkata-700013. [Pan: Aaacu8963B] C.O. 53/Kol/2024 (In Ita No.2213/Kol/2024) Assessment Year: 2011-12 Unicorn Plaza (P) Ltd.….………………. ….……….…….……….……Cross-Objector Commerce House, 2A, Ganesh Chandra Avenue Room No.4, 2Nd Floor, Kolkata-700013. [Pan: Aaacu8963B] Vs. Ito, Ward-2(1), Kolkata ……………………………..…...…..…………….Respondent Appearances By: Shri S. Jhajharia, Fca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri P. N. Barnwal, Cit- Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : November 03, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : November 19, 2025 Order Per Pradip Kumar Choubey:

Section 132Section 133ASection 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 153ASection 250Section 68Section 69C

alleged by the Assessing Officer. It is pertinent to note that the Assessing Officer relied only on the statement of Vikash Chowdhary, an alleged entry operator, who in his statement recorded during the course of survey u/s 133A on 10.09.2015 had admitted that he had provided accommodation entry ... length that the pages 23- 27 and 29 of UPPL/3 referred to by the AO and the statement of Shri Vikash Chowdhary, an alleged entry operator do not constitute as “incriminating material”. It is not the case of the AO that the share capital raised, or the subsequent investments made

Kiran Mahana, Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circle-27, Delhi

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3441/DEL/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Nov 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. Sudhir Kumar & Sh. Manish Agarwalassessment Year: 2014-15 Kiran Mahana Vs. Dcit, Central Circle -27 Trough Legal Heir Ved New Delhi Parkash Mahana,229/39, New Delhi West Patel Nagar New Delhi-110008 Pan No. Aippm6862K (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 132Section 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 153ASection 153DSection 69B

through their Chartered Accountant. The assessing officer framed the assessment order detailing the modus operandi as to how the cash is provided to accommodation entry operator in lieu of allotment of shares of a private company. Thereafter when the matter was carried up in appeal before

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 3(2), Kolkata vs. Sincere Commodities and Derivatives Market Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, both the captioned appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 1256/KOL/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Nov 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey

Section 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 68

both M/s Desire ImpexPvt Ltd and M/s Gurumukh Sincere Commodities And Derivatives Markets Pvt. Ltd Mercantile Pvt Ltd were shell companies controlled by an entry operator, Mukesh Banka and that there was huge cash withdrawal from the bank accounts of shell companies of Banka Group. Having spelt out the allegation

Deputy Commissioner of Income Taxcentral Circle 3(2), Kolkata, Kolakta vs. Sincere Commodities and Derivatives Market Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, both the captioned appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 1255/KOL/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Nov 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey

Section 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 68

both M/s Desire ImpexPvt Ltd and M/s Gurumukh Sincere Commodities And Derivatives Markets Pvt. Ltd Mercantile Pvt Ltd were shell companies controlled by an entry operator, Mukesh Banka and that there was huge cash withdrawal from the bank accounts of shell companies of Banka Group. Having spelt out the allegation

Narendra Shantilal Bapna, Navi Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer, WD-28(2)(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 4198/MUM/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Nov 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Prabhash Shankarnarendra Shantilal Bapna V/S. Income Tax Officer, Ward – Flat No. A2501, Plot No. R3 बनाम 28(2)(3) B Emerald Bay, Sector 14, 4Th Floor, Tower No. 6, Vashi Nerul, Navi Mumbai – Station Complex, Vashi, Navi 400 706, Maharashtra Mumbai– 400703, Maharashtra स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aclpb8458J Appellant/अपीलार्थी .. Respondent/प्रतिवादी

For Appellant: Shri Prakash Jhunjhunwala, ARFor Respondent: Shri Leyaqat Ali Aafaqui, (Sr.DR)
Section 131Section 143(3)Section 68

business activity were negligible, the share prices had been artificially rigged to unusual high. Exit Provider was shell company operated by well known entry operator as per finding of Investigation wing, Kolkata. It had no assets, employee, business or commercial activities. This proved that the transaction, which was a colorable