← All Phrases

“unsecured loan addition”

Cash Credits & Unexplained ItemsSection 68Section 689 judgments

The decision most relied on for unsecured loan addition is Commissioner of Income Tax v. Navodaya Castles Pvt. Ltd. (367 ITR 306), cited in 216 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on unsecured loan addition

Commissioner of Income Tax v. Navodaya Castles Pvt. Ltd.
367 ITR 306 · 2014 · High Court
216
citing judgments

For an addition under Section 68 relating to share application money or unsecured loans, the Assessing Officer must conduct proper inquiries and rebut the evidence provided by the assessee regarding identity, genuineness, and creditworthiness; additions cannot be sustained merely on suspicion or without investigation if the assessee has discharged its initial onus.

Dy. CIT v. Rohini Builders
127 Taxmann 523 · 2003 · High Court
162
citing judgments

An assessee is required to prove the identity, creditworthiness, and genuineness of a cash credit in their books of accounts, such as an unsecured loan, but is generally not required to prove the source of the source for such credits. Additions under Section 68 are deleted if sufficient proof of creditors, repayment, and TDS on interest is provided.

CIT v. Daulatram Rawatmull
53 ITR 574 · 1964 · Supreme Court
97
citing judgments

Additions to income cannot be made based merely on suspicion; concrete evidence is required to substantiate such claims by the tax authorities.

CIT v. Apex Therm Packaging (P.) Ltd.
42 Taxmann.com 473 · 2014 · High Court
95
citing judgments

Where an assessee furnishes full particulars of unsecured loans, including confirmation, name, address, PAN, income tax returns, balance sheet, profit and loss account, and computation of total income for all creditors, and the loans are routed through cheques and duly reflected in the balance sheet, the Assessing Officer is not justified in making an addition under Section 68.

Principal CIT v. Sreeleathers
448 ITR 332 · 2022 · High Court
88
citing judgments

Additions made by an Assessing Officer under Section 68 for unsecured loans or share capital/premium are perverse if based merely on an allegation of 'shell companies' without proper findings, especially when the assessee has provided evidence and lenders confirmed transactions through Section 133(6) notices.

PCIT v. Ojas Tarmake Pvt Ltd.
156 Taxmann.com 75 · 2023 · High Court
82
citing judgments

An addition made under Section 68 for unsecured loans is to be deleted when the loan amount is returned to the lender within the same financial year, and all transactions are carried out through banking channels, as this discharges the assessee's onus of liability.

Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax-4 v. Hi-Tech Residency (P.) Ltd.
96 Taxmann.com 403 · 2018 · Supreme Court
52
citing judgments

An addition under Section 68 for cash credits is deleted when the assessee discharges its onus by establishing the identity, genuineness, and creditworthiness of both investors for share allotments and lenders for unsecured loans.

159 ITR 78/25 Taxman 80F (SC), Commissioner of Income-tax v. Mark Hospitals (P.) Ltd.
373 ITR 115 · 2015 · High Court
35
citing judgments

An addition under Section 68 for unsecured loans is not justified if the assessee provides documentary evidence establishing the identity, creditworthiness of the creditors, and genuineness of the transactions.

Judgments citing unsecured loan addition