← All Phrases

“peak credit theory”

Cash Credits & Unexplained ItemsSection 68Section 68215 judgments

The decision most relied on for peak credit theory is Bhaiyalal Shyam Behari v. CIT (276 ITR 38), cited in 63 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on peak credit theory

Bhaiyalal Shyam Behari v. CIT

276 ITR 38 · 2005 · High Court

citing judgments

The peak credit theory applies only to credits and withdrawals that are held to be non-genuine. If the assessee claims all deposits are genuine, the benefit of the peak credit theory may not be available.

552 (SC) Zaveri Diamonds v. CIT 11-12 3

118 Taxmann.com 166 · 2020 · High Court

citing judgments

The court considers the evidentiary value of unaudited books and loose papers when assessing income, particularly concerning trade creditors and their verification.

Sh. Rajesh Kumar Jain v. ACIT Hon'ble High Court Of Delhi

84 Taxmann.com 257 · 2017 · High Court

citing judgments

The assessment can apply the peak credit theory for additions related to unexplained credits or entries. Furthermore, assessment proceedings are not vitiated merely because the Department proceeded under an incorrect section if material existed to justify the assessment under a proper provision like section 148.

Point E COT v. Vijay Agricultural Industries

294 ITR 610 · 2007 · High Court

citing judgments

The peak credit theory is applicable only when the source and corresponding outgo of a deposit are unexplained, and it does not apply to issues concerning purchases.

Navin Shantilal Mehta v. Income-tax Officer, Ward-32 (2) (4), Mumbai

90 Taxmann.com 16 · 2018 · ITAT

citing judgments

Addition under section 69C for bogus purchases from non-existent suppliers is justified, even if purchase bills are produced and payments are made through banking channels, if other evidence is lacking.

Commissioner of Income Tax v. D.K. Garg

250 Taxmann 104 · 2017 · High Court

citing judgments

An assessee who acts as an accommodation entry provider and cannot explain the sources of deposits and corresponding payments is not entitled to the benefit of peak credit.

III v. Tirupati Construction Co.

55 Taxmann.com 308 · 2015 · High Court

citing judgments

The peak credit theory can be applied to determine unexplained income arising from a series of transactions, even when exact quantum is difficult to ascertain. However, it may not be applicable to singular unexplained credits.

Kaveri Rice Mills v. CIT

157 Taxmann 376 · 2006 · High Court

citing judgments

The High Court determines whether additions based on uncorroborated purchase invoices are justified when the revenue relies on multiple conflicting precedents.

Judgments citing peak credit theory

Shri Shiv Shankar Sharma, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 4(3), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed and the assessee’s appeals are partly allowed

ITA 2682/MUM/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Aug 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(3)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘B’ BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

Shiv Shankar Sharma, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 4(3), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed and the assessee’s appeals are partly allowed

ITA 2162/MUM/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Aug 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(3)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘B’ BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

Shiv Shankar Sharma, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 4(3), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed and the assessee’s appeals are partly allowed

ITA 2161/MUM/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Aug 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(3)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘B’ BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

DCIT, Central Circle - 8 (1), Mumbai vs. Shiv Shankar Sharma, Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed and the assessee’s appeals are partly allowed

ITA 1690/MUM/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Aug 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(3)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘B’ BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

DCIT, Central Circle-8(1), Mumbai vs. Shiv Shankar Sharma, Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed and the assessee’s appeals are partly allowed

ITA 1689/MUM/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Aug 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(3)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘B’ BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

Rsd Containers Private Limited, Jaipur vs. ITO, Ward 7(1), Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1320/JPR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur06 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Mukesh Khandelwal, C.AFor Respondent: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT, Sr.-DR

Section 115BSection 147Section 148Section 149Section 151Section 151ASection 153CSection 68

business relationship was shown. The CIT(A)'s finding that these are shell/paper companies based on wider departmental investigation is well-founded. 6. Peak Credit Theory Not Applicable in Accommodation Entry Cases The "Peak Credit" principle applies to gemine, recurring, and cyclic banking transactions, not one-time accommodation entries ... before the Assessing Officer, has conceded that if any addition is to be made, it should be computed on the basis of the peak credit theory. This is a categorical acknowledgment that: Certain transactions were not disclosed: Escapement of income did occur. This admission establishes the Revenue's substantive case

Shri Gunjan Kumar Bihani, Raipur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-3 (4), Raipur

In the result, the captioned appeal filed by the assessee is allowed in terms of the aforesaid observations

ITA 122/RPR/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur05 Aug 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.122/Rpr/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16 Shri Gunjan Kumar Bihani Ashoka Ratan, Khamhardih, Shankar Nagar, Raipur-492 009 (C.G) Pan: Ajupb5787C

For Appellant: Shri Sakshi Gopal Agrawal, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR

Section 124(3)Section 127Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

case, the Ld. CIT(A),NFAC has erred for restricting the addition been made by Ld. AO to Rs.20,01,997/- by applying peak credit theory instead of deleting the entire addition since the Id. AO had made the addition u/s 68 highly arbitrarily, unjustifiable and uncalled for. 4. Without

Rupesh Jaiswal, Dharampuri vs. Income Tax Officer, Indore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for

ITA 717/IND/2024[A.Y. 2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Indore28 Jul 2025

Bench: B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M Joshirupesh Jaiswal, Income Tax Officer, बनाम/ 111, Azad Marg, Indore Vs. Dist. Dhar, Tehsil Dharampuri, Dharampuri (Pan: Akopj7192C) (Appellant) (Revenue) Assessee By Shri Venus Rawka & Ms. Eva Rawka, Ars Revenue By Shri Anoop Singh, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 22.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 28.07.2025 आदेश / O R D E R

Section 115BSection 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 246ASection 250Section 253Section 69A

transactions which did not align with the business activities as claimed by the appellant. The appellant's argument for the application of the peak credit theory is noted. However, the AO's assessment of the unexplained money was based on the total deposits and withdrawals, which remained inadequately explained ... peak credit theory applies when there is a continuous cycle of deposits and withdrawals within a short span, indicating a circulation of the same money. In this case, the appellant failed to demonstrate that the transactions followed such a pattern convincingly. Therefore, the AO's methodology in treating the total

Ravinder Singh Thakkar, Jaipur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Jaipur

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA no

ITA 820/JPR/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur25 Jul 2025AY 2019-20

For Appellant: Shri Tarun Mittal, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Gorav Avasthi, JCIT

Section 139Section 143(3)Section 147

merits of the dispute Id. CIT(A) granted the part relief to the assessee by applying peak credit theory as against the addition made by AO by treating all the gross advances / loans as unexplained and thereby order to tax the income for these years as tabulated here in below ... taken/given by assessee. Ld. CIT(A), on the observations that as per excel sheet, assessee has given as well as taken money, applied peak credit theory and accordingly allowed part relief. Details of additions confirmed by Id.CIT(A), against which assessee has preferred present appeal is as under: Assessment Year

Ravinder Singh Thakkar, Jaipur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Jaipur

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA no

ITA 819/JPR/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur25 Jul 2025AY 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri Tarun Mittal, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Gorav Avasthi, JCIT

Section 139Section 143(3)Section 147

merits of the dispute Id. CIT(A) granted the part relief to the assessee by applying peak credit theory as against the addition made by AO by treating all the gross advances / loans as unexplained and thereby order to tax the income for these years as tabulated here in below ... taken/given by assessee. Ld. CIT(A), on the observations that as per excel sheet, assessee has given as well as taken money, applied peak credit theory and accordingly allowed part relief. Details of additions confirmed by Id.CIT(A), against which assessee has preferred present appeal is as under: Assessment Year

Ravinder Singh Thakkar, Jaipur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Jaipur

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA no

ITA 818/JPR/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur25 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Tarun Mittal, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Gorav Avasthi, JCIT

Section 139Section 143(3)Section 147

merits of the dispute Id. CIT(A) granted the part relief to the assessee by applying peak credit theory as against the addition made by AO by treating all the gross advances / loans as unexplained and thereby order to tax the income for these years as tabulated here in below ... taken/given by assessee. Ld. CIT(A), on the observations that as per excel sheet, assessee has given as well as taken money, applied peak credit theory and accordingly allowed part relief. Details of additions confirmed by Id.CIT(A), against which assessee has preferred present appeal is as under: Assessment Year

Ravinder Singh Thakkar, Jaipur vs. Assistant Commssioner of Income Tax, Jaipur

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA no

ITA 817/JPR/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur25 Jul 2025AY 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri Tarun Mittal, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Gorav Avasthi, JCIT

Section 139Section 143(3)Section 147

merits of the dispute Id. CIT(A) granted the part relief to the assessee by applying peak credit theory as against the addition made by AO by treating all the gross advances / loans as unexplained and thereby order to tax the income for these years as tabulated here in below ... taken/given by assessee. Ld. CIT(A), on the observations that as per excel sheet, assessee has given as well as taken money, applied peak credit theory and accordingly allowed part relief. Details of additions confirmed by Id.CIT(A), against which assessee has preferred present appeal is as under: Assessment Year

Ravinder Singh Thakkar, Jaipur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Jaipur

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA no

ITA 816/JPR/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur25 Jul 2025AY 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri Tarun Mittal, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Gorav Avasthi, JCIT

Section 139Section 143(3)Section 147

merits of the dispute Id. CIT(A) granted the part relief to the assessee by applying peak credit theory as against the addition made by AO by treating all the gross advances / loans as unexplained and thereby order to tax the income for these years as tabulated here in below ... taken/given by assessee. Ld. CIT(A), on the observations that as per excel sheet, assessee has given as well as taken money, applied peak credit theory and accordingly allowed part relief. Details of additions confirmed by Id.CIT(A), against which assessee has preferred present appeal is as under: Assessment Year

DCIT, CC-3, Ludhiana, Kitchlu Nagar vs. Sh. Aman Batra, Civil Lines

Appeal stands dismissed

ITA 1041/CHANDI/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh21 Jul 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: or at the time of hearing of the appeal.

For Appellant: Shri Pankaj Bhalla, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Manav Bansal, CIT, DR

Section 143(2)Section 144BSection 28Section 69Section 69ASection 69C

addition of Rs. 1,29,00,000/- u/s 69/69A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on account of unaccounted loan & advances by applying peak credit theory & by giving telescopig benefit when no cash now was submitted by the assessee? 6. Whether upon facts and circumstances of the case

Sh. Rajesh Kumar Jain, Kota vs. ACIT, Central Circle, Kota

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA nos

ITA 641/JPR/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur17 Jul 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. MITHA LAL MEENA (Accountant Member), DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Sh. P. C. Parwal, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Rajesh Ojha, CIT-DR

Section 132(1)Section 153ASection 69

recoveries is made without owning up of these transactions. This issue is discussed in detail while deciding the issue of application of peak credit theory. It is also admitted fact that the assessee has not provided name, address and copy of ledger accounts of the persons to whom loans were

Sh. Rajesh Kumar Jain, Kota vs. ACIT, Central Circle, Kota

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA nos

ITA 640/JPR/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur17 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. MITHA LAL MEENA (Accountant Member), DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Sh. P. C. Parwal, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Rajesh Ojha, CIT-DR

Section 132(1)Section 153ASection 69

recoveries is made without owning up of these transactions. This issue is discussed in detail while deciding the issue of application of peak credit theory. It is also admitted fact that the assessee has not provided name, address and copy of ledger accounts of the persons to whom loans were

Sh. Rajesh Kumar Jain, Kota vs. ACIT, Central Circle, Kota

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA nos

ITA 639/JPR/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur17 Jul 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. MITHA LAL MEENA (Accountant Member), DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Sh. P. C. Parwal, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Rajesh Ojha, CIT-DR

Section 132(1)Section 153ASection 69

recoveries is made without owning up of these transactions. This issue is discussed in detail while deciding the issue of application of peak credit theory. It is also admitted fact that the assessee has not provided name, address and copy of ledger accounts of the persons to whom loans were

Sh. Rajesh Kumar Jain, Kota vs. ACIT, Central Circle, Kota

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA nos

ITA 638/JPR/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur17 Jul 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. MITHA LAL MEENA (Accountant Member), DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Sh. P. C. Parwal, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Rajesh Ojha, CIT-DR

Section 132(1)Section 153ASection 69

recoveries is made without owning up of these transactions. This issue is discussed in detail while deciding the issue of application of peak credit theory. It is also admitted fact that the assessee has not provided name, address and copy of ledger accounts of the persons to whom loans were

Sh. Rajesh Kumar Jain, Kota vs. ACIT, Central Circle, Kota

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA nos

ITA 637/JPR/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur17 Jul 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr. MITHA LAL MEENA (Accountant Member), DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Sh. P. C. Parwal, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Rajesh Ojha, CIT-DR

Section 132(1)Section 153ASection 69

recoveries is made without owning up of these transactions. This issue is discussed in detail while deciding the issue of application of peak credit theory. It is also admitted fact that the assessee has not provided name, address and copy of ledger accounts of the persons to whom loans were

Sh. Rajesh Kumar Jain, Kota vs. ACIT, Central Circle, Kota

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA nos

ITA 636/JPR/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur17 Jul 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Dr. MITHA LAL MEENA (Accountant Member), DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Sh. P. C. Parwal, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Rajesh Ojha, CIT-DR

Section 132(1)Section 153ASection 69

recoveries is made without owning up of these transactions. This issue is discussed in detail while deciding the issue of application of peak credit theory. It is also admitted fact that the assessee has not provided name, address and copy of ledger accounts of the persons to whom loans were