1) CIT v. Sahibganj Electric Cables Pvt. Ltd. (

151 ITR 150High Court1985#1445 most cited

What is 1) CIT v. Sahibganj Electric Cables Pvt. Ltd. ( authority for?

The assessee's burden under Section 68 to prove cash credits is discharged by establishing the identity of the creditor and the genuineness of the transaction; the assessee is not required to prove the creditor's source of funds or creditworthiness, as the department can use Section 131 for further investigation.

79

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2011 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Sahibganj Electric Cables Pvt. Ltd. · 151 ITR 150 · Section 68 · Section 131 · cash credits · onus of proof · identity of creditor · genuineness of transaction · creditor's creditworthiness · source of funds · addition u/s 68

Sections most often in play

Section 68Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 133(6)Section 131Section 69CSection 115BBE

Issues it is cited on

trade creditorsonus of proofaddition under section 68shell companynon application of mindaddition u/s 68share application moneysection 194aprincipal commissioner of income-taxgenuineness of the transactionsection 44asection 131

Judgments citing 1) CIT v. Sahibganj Electric Cables Pvt. Ltd. (

M/S. Bhandari Hospital and Research Centre, Indore vs. The Pr. CIT-1, Indore

ITA 355/IND/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Indore20 Mar 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradassessment Year: 2012-13 M/S Bhandari Hospital & Pr. Cit-(I) Research Centre, Gf-21 & Indore बनाम/ 22, Opp. Meghdoot Garden, Vs. Vijay Nagar, Indore (Appellant) (Revenue ) P.A. No.Aadfb8151A

Section 131(1)(d)Section 143(3)Section 144ASection 263Section 35A

…umber, address, confirmation from the creditors, the assessee has discharged the burden to prove the genuineness of parties and transaction in addition to the capacity satisfactorily as such there is no ground for addition (Addl. CIT v. Hanuman Agarwal [1985] 151 ITR 150 (Patna)). In this regard the Department also has not brought any material to disprove the genuineness of the parties, capacity of the lenders and transactions on the basis of cogent facts on record. The hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Orissa Corporation P. Ltd. [1986] 159 ITR 78 (headnote) : 'Held, that in this case the respondent had…

Income Tax Officer, Ward 3(3), Guwahati vs. Prag Raj Singla, Guwahati

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 160/GTY/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati02 Aug 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.160/Gau/2018 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2013-14)

For Appellant: Shri Sandip Sengupta, JCIT DRFor Respondent: Shri B. L. Purohit FCA & Shri Subash Purohit, FCA
Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 68

…he genuineness of the loan, despite the aforesaid reply of the loan creditor, the AO should have summoned the creditor under Section 131 for further verification as held by the Hon'ble Patna High Court in the case of Additional CIT vs. Hanuman Agarwal [(1985) 151 ITR 150 (Patna)]. In this regard the following observations of the Hon'ble Patna High Court are quite relevant: Prag Raj Singla Assessment Year:2013-14 "The revenue on its part did not summon the creditor under Section 131 of the Act. It took no steps to verify the statement of the assessee. Thus after the assesse filed the confirmatory letter with the…

Champ Info Software, Noida vs. Prcit, Noida

The appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 2799/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Jun 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year: 2013-14 Champ Info Software, Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax, E-24, Sector-55, A2, D Block, Sector 24, Noida. Noida (U.P.)-201301 Vs

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Ms Nidhi Srivastava, C.I.T. DR
Section 143(3)Section 154Section 263

…h deposits in their bank accounts as unexplained investments of those creditors under section 69." 5.4.1 The Hon’ble Jharkhand High Court had also relied upon the judgement of the Hon'ble Patna High Court in the case of ACIT vs. Hanuman Agarwal reported in 151 ITR 150 where in it had been held as under: “3. It is by now well-settled that Sec.131 (1)(b) empowers but does not oblige the revenue authorities concerned to administer oath. Therefore, the statements of witnesses taken without administration of oath are equally admissible in evidence. When the evidence of such witness is being taken in the course of…

Prayag Polytech Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addl. CIT, Special Range- 7, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 6015/DEL/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Jun 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri B.R.R. Kumarassessment Year: 2014-15

For Appellant: Sh. Ved Jain, Adv. & Sh. Ashish Goel, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Surender Pal, Sr. DR
Section 127(1)Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 68

…Court in the case of PCIT Vs. Chawla Interbild Construction Co. Pvt. Ltd., ITA No. 1103 of 2015, dated 28.02.2018 where a similar issue has come up. 10.3 The Ld. AR further placed reliance on following judgments: (i) Addl. CIT Bihar vs Hanuman Agarwal (1985) 151 ITR 150 (Patna High Court) (ii) Jalan Timber vs CIT (1997) 223 ITR 11 (Gauhati H.C.) (iii) Neeru Devi Kothari vs ITO (2001) 116 Taxman 224 (Jodhpur) (iv) Sarogi Credit Corporation vs CIT (1976) 103 ITR 344 (Patna HC) (v) Nemi Chand Kothari vs CIT [2004] 264 ITR 254(Gau) (vi) S. Hastimal vs CIT 49 ITR 272 (vii) CIT vs PithampurConzima (P) Ltd. (2000) 244…

Addl. CIT, Special Range- 7, New Delhi vs. Prayag Polytech Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5970/DEL/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Jun 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri B.R.R. Kumarassessment Year: 2014-15

For Appellant: Sh. Ved Jain, Adv. & Sh. Ashish Goel, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Surender Pal, Sr. DR
Section 127(1)Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 68

…Court in the case of PCIT Vs. Chawla Interbild Construction Co. Pvt. Ltd., ITA No. 1103 of 2015, dated 28.02.2018 where a similar issue has come up. 10.3 The Ld. AR further placed reliance on following judgments: (i) Addl. CIT Bihar vs Hanuman Agarwal (1985) 151 ITR 150 (Patna High Court) (ii) Jalan Timber vs CIT (1997) 223 ITR 11 (Gauhati H.C.) (iii) Neeru Devi Kothari vs ITO (2001) 116 Taxman 224 (Jodhpur) (iv) Sarogi Credit Corporation vs CIT (1976) 103 ITR 344 (Patna HC) (v) Nemi Chand Kothari vs CIT [2004] 264 ITR 254(Gau) (vi) S. Hastimal vs CIT 49 ITR 272 (vii) CIT vs PithampurConzima (P) Ltd. (2000) 244…

Vijay Aggarwal, Delhi vs. ITO, Ward- 48(5), New Delhi

In the result, all the appeals of different assessees are partly allowed

ITA 1077/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 May 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: : Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri L.P. Sahuassessment Year: 2010-11

Section 147Section 148Section 56(2)(vii)Section 68

…) CIT v. Jai Kumar Bakliwal v. [2013] 214 Taxman 440 (Allahabad) Zafa Ahmad & Co. v. CIT vi. 103 ITR 344 at 349-350 ( Patna) Saraogi Credit Corporation v CIT vii. 59 ITR 632 at 636 (Assam) TolaRam Daga v cIT viii. 49 ITR 273 at 279 (Mad) S. Hastimal v CIT ix. 151 ITR 150 at 156-157 (Pat) Addl. CIT, Bihar v Hanuman Aggarwal x. 154 ITR 244 at 247 (Pat) Addl CIT v Bahri Bros. (P) Lt xi. 264 ITR 254 at 261-266 (Gau) Nemichand Kothari v. CIT xii. 280 ITR 512 at 518 (Guj) Murlidhar Lahorimal Vs. CIT xiii. [2008] 219 CTR (Raj.) 571 at 577 Labh Chand Bohra v. ITO xiv. 256 ITR 360 at 369 (Guj) DCIT Vs Rohini Builders It…

The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-3, Surat vs. M/S. Happy Home Corporation, Surat

ITA 715/AHD/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Surat15 Jan 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Shri Rasesh Shah, CAFor Respondent: Smt.Smita Nair, Sr.DR
Section 131Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 68Section 80I

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SURAT–BENCH, SURAT BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA.No.1991/AHD/2016 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2012-13 AND आयकर अपील सं./ITA.No.715/AHD/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2013-14 DCIT, Cent.Cir.3 Vs. M/s.Happy Home Corporation Surat. T.P.., F.P.No.39, Shantikunj Nr.SD Jain School U.M. Road, Vesu Char Rasta Surat. अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Revenue by : Smt.Smita Nair, Sr.DR Assessee by : Shri Rasesh Shah, CA सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date of Hearing : 15/11/2018 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date of P…

The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-3, Surat vs. M/S. Happy Home Corporation, Surat

ITA 1991/AHD/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Surat15 Jan 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Shri Rasesh Shah, CAFor Respondent: Smt.Smita Nair, Sr.DR
Section 131Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 68Section 80I

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SURAT–BENCH, SURAT BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA.No.1991/AHD/2016 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2012-13 AND आयकर अपील सं./ITA.No.715/AHD/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2013-14 DCIT, Cent.Cir.3 Vs. M/s.Happy Home Corporation Surat. T.P.., F.P.No.39, Shantikunj Nr.SD Jain School U.M. Road, Vesu Char Rasta Surat. अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Revenue by : Smt.Smita Nair, Sr.DR Assessee by : Shri Rasesh Shah, CA सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date of Hearing : 15/11/2018 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date of P…

The ACIT, Cen-Circle, Kollam vs. M/S.Sabari Enterprises P. Ltd, Kollam

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue as well as the Cross

ITA 360/COCH/2017[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin13 Dec 2018AY 2015-2016

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 139(1)Section 153ASection 68

…om cash credit has been, eventually, received by Assessee.” The Ld. AR relied on the following judgments of the High Courts in support of the above contention: 1) CIT vs. Sahibganj Electric Cables Pvt. Ltd. (115 ITR 408) (Cal.) 2) ACIT vs. Hanuman Agarwal (151 ITR 150) (Patna) 3) Mod Creations Pvt. Ltd. vs. ITO (354 ITR 282) (Delhi) 4) CIt vs. Anirudh Narayan Agarwal (84 CCH 24)(All.) 5) DCIT vs. Rohini Builders (265 ITR 360) (Guj.) 7. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the record. The seized material marked as SKP/KLM/DA 1 to 23 clearly showed a lot of trade activities between the assessee and…

The ACIT, Cen-Circle, Kollam vs. M/S.Sabari Enterprises P. Ltd, Kollam

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue as well as the Cross

ITA 359/COCH/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin13 Dec 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 139(1)Section 153ASection 68

…om cash credit has been, eventually, received by Assessee.” The Ld. AR relied on the following judgments of the High Courts in support of the above contention: 1) CIT vs. Sahibganj Electric Cables Pvt. Ltd. (115 ITR 408) (Cal.) 2) ACIT vs. Hanuman Agarwal (151 ITR 150) (Patna) 3) Mod Creations Pvt. Ltd. vs. ITO (354 ITR 282) (Delhi) 4) CIt vs. Anirudh Narayan Agarwal (84 CCH 24)(All.) 5) DCIT vs. Rohini Builders (265 ITR 360) (Guj.) 7. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the record. The seized material marked as SKP/KLM/DA 1 to 23 clearly showed a lot of trade activities between the assessee and…

The ACIT, Cen-Circle, Kollam vs. M/S.Sabari Enterprises P. Ltd, Kollam

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue as well as the Cross

ITA 358/COCH/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin13 Dec 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 139(1)Section 153ASection 68

…om cash credit has been, eventually, received by Assessee.” The Ld. AR relied on the following judgments of the High Courts in support of the above contention: 1) CIT vs. Sahibganj Electric Cables Pvt. Ltd. (115 ITR 408) (Cal.) 2) ACIT vs. Hanuman Agarwal (151 ITR 150) (Patna) 3) Mod Creations Pvt. Ltd. vs. ITO (354 ITR 282) (Delhi) 4) CIt vs. Anirudh Narayan Agarwal (84 CCH 24)(All.) 5) DCIT vs. Rohini Builders (265 ITR 360) (Guj.) 7. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the record. The seized material marked as SKP/KLM/DA 1 to 23 clearly showed a lot of trade activities between the assessee and…

Sri.P.Sunil Kumar, Kollam vs. The ACIT, Cen-Circle, Kollam

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue as well as the Cross

ITA 355/COCH/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin13 Dec 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 139(1)Section 153ASection 68

…om cash credit has been, eventually, received by Assessee.” The Ld. AR relied on the following judgments of the High Courts in support of the above contention: 1) CIT vs. Sahibganj Electric Cables Pvt. Ltd. (115 ITR 408) (Cal.) 2) ACIT vs. Hanuman Agarwal (151 ITR 150) (Patna) 3) Mod Creations Pvt. Ltd. vs. ITO (354 ITR 282) (Delhi) 4) CIt vs. Anirudh Narayan Agarwal (84 CCH 24)(All.) 5) DCIT vs. Rohini Builders (265 ITR 360) (Guj.) 7. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the record. The seized material marked as SKP/KLM/DA 1 to 23 clearly showed a lot of trade activities between the assessee and…

The DCIT, Cen-Circle, Kollam vs. Sri.P>Sunil Kumar, Kollam

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue as well as the Cross

ITA 354/COCH/2017[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin13 Dec 2018AY 2015-16

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 139(1)Section 153ASection 68

…om cash credit has been, eventually, received by Assessee.” The Ld. AR relied on the following judgments of the High Courts in support of the above contention: 1) CIT vs. Sahibganj Electric Cables Pvt. Ltd. (115 ITR 408) (Cal.) 2) ACIT vs. Hanuman Agarwal (151 ITR 150) (Patna) 3) Mod Creations Pvt. Ltd. vs. ITO (354 ITR 282) (Delhi) 4) CIt vs. Anirudh Narayan Agarwal (84 CCH 24)(All.) 5) DCIT vs. Rohini Builders (265 ITR 360) (Guj.) 7. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the record. The seized material marked as SKP/KLM/DA 1 to 23 clearly showed a lot of trade activities between the assessee and…

The DCIT, Cen-Circle, Kollam vs. Sri.P>Sunil Kumar, Kollam

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue as well as the Cross

ITA 352/COCH/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin13 Dec 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 139(1)Section 153ASection 68

…om cash credit has been, eventually, received by Assessee.” The Ld. AR relied on the following judgments of the High Courts in support of the above contention: 1) CIT vs. Sahibganj Electric Cables Pvt. Ltd. (115 ITR 408) (Cal.) 2) ACIT vs. Hanuman Agarwal (151 ITR 150) (Patna) 3) Mod Creations Pvt. Ltd. vs. ITO (354 ITR 282) (Delhi) 4) CIt vs. Anirudh Narayan Agarwal (84 CCH 24)(All.) 5) DCIT vs. Rohini Builders (265 ITR 360) (Guj.) 7. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the record. The seized material marked as SKP/KLM/DA 1 to 23 clearly showed a lot of trade activities between the assessee and…

The ACIT, Kollam vs. Sri.P.Sunilkumar, Kollam

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue as well as the Cross

ITA 351/COCH/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin13 Dec 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 139(1)Section 153ASection 68

…om cash credit has been, eventually, received by Assessee.” The Ld. AR relied on the following judgments of the High Courts in support of the above contention: 1) CIT vs. Sahibganj Electric Cables Pvt. Ltd. (115 ITR 408) (Cal.) 2) ACIT vs. Hanuman Agarwal (151 ITR 150) (Patna) 3) Mod Creations Pvt. Ltd. vs. ITO (354 ITR 282) (Delhi) 4) CIt vs. Anirudh Narayan Agarwal (84 CCH 24)(All.) 5) DCIT vs. Rohini Builders (265 ITR 360) (Guj.) 7. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the record. The seized material marked as SKP/KLM/DA 1 to 23 clearly showed a lot of trade activities between the assessee and…

The ACIT, Cen-Circle, Kollam vs. Sri.P.Sunil Kumar, Kollam

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue as well as the Cross

ITA 350/COCH/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin13 Dec 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 139(1)Section 153ASection 68

…om cash credit has been, eventually, received by Assessee.” The Ld. AR relied on the following judgments of the High Courts in support of the above contention: 1) CIT vs. Sahibganj Electric Cables Pvt. Ltd. (115 ITR 408) (Cal.) 2) ACIT vs. Hanuman Agarwal (151 ITR 150) (Patna) 3) Mod Creations Pvt. Ltd. vs. ITO (354 ITR 282) (Delhi) 4) CIt vs. Anirudh Narayan Agarwal (84 CCH 24)(All.) 5) DCIT vs. Rohini Builders (265 ITR 360) (Guj.) 7. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the record. The seized material marked as SKP/KLM/DA 1 to 23 clearly showed a lot of trade activities between the assessee and…

The Central Circle, Kollam vs. Sri.P.Sunil Kumar, Kollam

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue as well as the Cross

ITA 349/COCH/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin13 Dec 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 139(1)Section 153ASection 68

…om cash credit has been, eventually, received by Assessee.” The Ld. AR relied on the following judgments of the High Courts in support of the above contention: 1) CIT vs. Sahibganj Electric Cables Pvt. Ltd. (115 ITR 408) (Cal.) 2) ACIT vs. Hanuman Agarwal (151 ITR 150) (Patna) 3) Mod Creations Pvt. Ltd. vs. ITO (354 ITR 282) (Delhi) 4) CIt vs. Anirudh Narayan Agarwal (84 CCH 24)(All.) 5) DCIT vs. Rohini Builders (265 ITR 360) (Guj.) 7. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the record. The seized material marked as SKP/KLM/DA 1 to 23 clearly showed a lot of trade activities between the assessee and…

The ACIT, Kollam vs. Sri.P.Sunilkumar, Kollam

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue as well as the Cross

ITA 348/COCH/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin13 Dec 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 139(1)Section 153ASection 68

…om cash credit has been, eventually, received by Assessee.” The Ld. AR relied on the following judgments of the High Courts in support of the above contention: 1) CIT vs. Sahibganj Electric Cables Pvt. Ltd. (115 ITR 408) (Cal.) 2) ACIT vs. Hanuman Agarwal (151 ITR 150) (Patna) 3) Mod Creations Pvt. Ltd. vs. ITO (354 ITR 282) (Delhi) 4) CIt vs. Anirudh Narayan Agarwal (84 CCH 24)(All.) 5) DCIT vs. Rohini Builders (265 ITR 360) (Guj.) 7. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the record. The seized material marked as SKP/KLM/DA 1 to 23 clearly showed a lot of trade activities between the assessee and…

The ACIT, Kollam vs. Sri.P. Sunil Kumar, Kollam

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue as well as the Cross

ITA 347/COCH/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin13 Dec 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 139(1)Section 153ASection 68

…om cash credit has been, eventually, received by Assessee.” The Ld. AR relied on the following judgments of the High Courts in support of the above contention: 1) CIT vs. Sahibganj Electric Cables Pvt. Ltd. (115 ITR 408) (Cal.) 2) ACIT vs. Hanuman Agarwal (151 ITR 150) (Patna) 3) Mod Creations Pvt. Ltd. vs. ITO (354 ITR 282) (Delhi) 4) CIt vs. Anirudh Narayan Agarwal (84 CCH 24)(All.) 5) DCIT vs. Rohini Builders (265 ITR 360) (Guj.) 7. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the record. The seized material marked as SKP/KLM/DA 1 to 23 clearly showed a lot of trade activities between the assessee and…

ACIT 30(3), Mumbai vs. Shreedham Builders, Mumbai

ITA 5589/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Jun 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri N.K. Pradhanassessment Year: 2012-13 Acit-30(3), Shreedham Builders, R. No.510, 5Th Floor, 105/106, 1St Floor, बनाम/ Pratayakshkar Bhavan, Vijay Indl. Estate, Vs. Bandra Kurla Complex, Malad (W), Bandra (East), Mumbai-400064 Mumbai-400051 (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) P.A. No. Abdfs0133N

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 68

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, मुंबई "यायपीठ, ई, मुंबई । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES “E”, MUMBAI "ी जो"ग"दर "संह, "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी एन. के. "धान, लेखा सद"य, के सम" Before Shri Joginder Singh, Judicial Member, and Shri N.K. Pradhan, Accountant Member Assessment Year: 2012-13 ACIT-30(3), Shreedham Builders, R. No.510, 5th Floor, 105/106, 1st Floor, बनाम/ Pratayakshkar Bhavan, Vijay Indl. Estate, Vs. Bandra Kurla Complex, Malad (W), Bandra (East), Mumbai-400064 Mumbai-400051 (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) P.A. No. ABDFS0133N राज"व क" ओर से / Revenue by Shri V Justin-DR "नधा"रती क" ओर से / Ass…