Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal / NCLT & Others
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
In Favour Of: New
---- In Favour Of ----
  • ---- In Favour Of ----
  • Assessee
  • In favour of Assessee
  • Partly in favour of Assessee
  • Revenue
  • In favour of Revenue
  • Partly in favour of Revenue
  • Appellant / Petitioner
  • In favour of Appellant
  • In favour of Petitioner
  • In favour of Respondent
  • Partly in favour of Appellant
  • Partly in favour of Petitioner
  • Others
  • Neutral (alternate remedy)
  • Neutral (Others)
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court.
Eg: Madhya Pradesh, Orissa, Hyderabad

Use comma for multiple locations.

AY/FY: New?
Enter only the year or year range (e.g., 2025, 2025–26, or 2025–2026).
Include Word: ?
Searches for this word in Main (Whole) Text
Exclude Word: ?
This word will not be present in Main (Whole) Text
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:

---------------- For section wise search only -----------------


Statute Type: ?
This filter alone wont work. 1st select a law > statute > section from below filter
New
---- All Statutes----
  • ---- All Statutes ----
  • Select the law first, to see the statutes list
Sections: ?
Select a statute to see the list of sections here
New
---- All Sections ----
  • ---- All Sections ----
  • Select the statute first, to see the sections list

Accuracy Level ~ 90%



TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2026
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
Sort By: ?
In Sort By 'Default', exact matches for text search are shown at the top, followed by the remaining results in their regular order.
RelevanceDefaultDate
TMI Citation
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      Show All SummariesHide All Summaries
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        whatsappJoin Channel
        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        2018 (11) TMI 1320 - AT - Income Tax

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        -

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        Appeal success: ITAT rules against unjustified tax addition under Section 68. The appeal of the assessee was allowed by the ITAT, and the addition of Rs. 86,00,000/- under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, was deemed ...
                        Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.

                            Appeal success: ITAT rules against unjustified tax addition under Section 68.

                            The appeal of the assessee was allowed by the ITAT, and the addition of Rs. 86,00,000/- under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, was deemed unjustified. The ITAT emphasized the acceptance of the identity, creditworthiness, and genuineness of transactions by the revenue in previous years, concluding that the sum converted from unsecured loans into share capital could not be treated as unexplained cash credits. The ITAT held that the assessee had provided sufficient evidence to support the legitimacy of the transactions, leading to the dismissal of the addition under Section 68.




                            Issues Involved:

                            1. Justification of the addition of Rs. 86,00,000/- under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

                            Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

                            1. Justification of the Addition of Rs. 86,00,000/- under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961:

                            The primary issue in this appeal is whether the addition of Rs. 86,00,000/- under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, was justified. The assessee, a private limited company engaged in the business of transmission line of power service station and civil work, had filed its return of income for the Assessment Year 2012-13, declaring a total income of Rs. 30,97,180/-. During the year under appeal, the assessee had allotted paid-up share capital to the tune of Rs. 86,00,000/-, which was converted from unsecured loans.

                            The assessee explained that it had received unsecured loans from eight parties, and some of these loans were carried over as opening balances from the previous year. Interest was paid on these loans up to the date of conversion into equity share capital at face value, and the interest paid was allowed as a deduction by the Assessing Officer (AO) in the earlier year. Details of these transactions, including interest paid and TDS, were provided.

                            The AO questioned the creditworthiness of the shareholders, noting their low taxable income and minimal business activity. Summons issued to the director of the assessee company to produce the share subscribers were not complied with, leading the AO to treat the entire credit of Rs. 86,00,000/- as unexplained cash credit under Section 68.

                            The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)] upheld the AO's decision, leading the assessee to appeal before the ITAT.

                            Upon review, the ITAT found that the assessee had not received any new sum towards share capital during the year under consideration. The assessee had received unsecured loans from existing creditors, and these loans were converted into equity share capital. The ITAT noted that the interest paid on these loans was allowed as a deduction by the AO in the past and in the year under appeal, indicating the acceptance of the identity, creditworthiness, and genuineness of the transactions by the revenue.

                            The ITAT referenced several judicial precedents, including decisions from the Karnataka High Court, Gujarat High Court, and the Jurisdictional High Court, which supported the view that amounts received in earlier years and converted into share capital in the current year could not be treated as unexplained cash credits under Section 68.

                            The ITAT concluded that the assessee had furnished all required documents to prove the identity, creditworthiness, and genuineness of the transactions. The non-compliance with summons for personal appearance did not justify treating the transactions as bogus. The ITAT held that there was no case for making any addition under Section 68 for the sum of Rs. 86,00,000/- and allowed the appeal of the assessee.

                            Conclusion:

                            The appeal of the assessee was allowed, and the addition of Rs. 86,00,000/- under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, was found to be unjustified. The ITAT emphasized the importance of the identity, creditworthiness, and genuineness of transactions, and the fact that these were accepted by the revenue in earlier years.
                            Full Summary is available for active users!
                            Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.

                            Topics

                            ActsIncome Tax
                            No Records Found