2014) 90 CCH 0105 (Delhi); (ii) Commissioner of Income Tax v. Globus Securities & Finance Pvt. Ltd.

264 CTR 481High Court2014#10436 most cited

What is 2014) 90 CCH 0105 (Delhi); (ii) Commissioner of Income Tax v. Globus Securities & Finance Pvt. Ltd. authority for?

Merely producing a PAN number or assessment particulars does not establish the identity and creditworthiness of a person or company. The genuineness of a transaction requires proof of the business undertaken by the subscriber and that bank accounts reflect more than just rotation of money.

10

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,315 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2024.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Globus Securities & Finance Pvt. Ltd. · section 68 · identity · creditworthiness · genuineness of transaction · share capital · cash credit · section 143(2) · section 143(3) · section 250 · section 251 · company · document

Sections most often in play

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 251Section 68

Issues it is cited on

section 68transfercompanydocument

Judgments citing 2014) 90 CCH 0105 (Delhi); (ii) Commissioner of Income Tax v. Globus Securities & Finance Pvt. Ltd.

DCIT, Circle-13(1), New Delhi vs. Janpath Ventures Pvt.Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 9015/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 May 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Yogesh Kumar Us

For Appellant: Shri Sunny Mittal, Chartered AccountantFor Respondent: Mr. Waseem Arshad, CIT (DR)
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 68

…f confirmation of transaction by so called applicants do not establish the creditworthiness and genuineness of transaction per se. A reference was made to the judgments rendered in the case of CIT vs. Globus Securities and Finance Pvt. Ltd. reported in (2014) 264 CTR 481 (Del) and CIT vs. NR Portfolio Pvt. Ltd., (2014) 64 CTR 258 (Del) to challenge the nature and source of impugned receipts. I.T.A. No. 9015/Del/2019 4 4.3 As pointed out in paragraph 5.7 of the impugned order of the CIT(A), the remand report of the AO was sent to the assessee for its comment. The communication of the CIT(A) to Assessee however r…

M/S. Layog Properties Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

ITA 753/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Sept 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year 2012-13 M/S. Layog Properties Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Ito N-18, First Floor, Ward-15(2) Malviya Nagar, New Delhi. New Delhi – 110 017 Pan Aabcl9997R (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Salil Aggarwal, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Smita Singh, Sr. DR
Section 131Section 133(6)Section 234BSection 68

…ecord. Relief was granted to the assessee as it was the case of public placement. This aspect of the shareholder vis a vis private limited company relationship was also discussed in a subsequent decision of the Delhi High Court in Globus Securities & Finance (264 CTR 481) and also in the case of NR Portfolio Pvt. Ltd. [IT Appeal Nos. 1018 & 1019 of 2011, dated 22- 11-2013] which held merely producing PAN number or assessment particulars did not establish the identity of the person. The actual and true identity of the person or a company was the business undertaken by them. Where the share subscribers did not any…

Nav Consec P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO 9(2)(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3258/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Jan 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri. Gagan Goyal, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.3258/Mum/2016 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2011-12) M/S Nav Consec Pvt Ltd बिधम/ Income Tax Officer, Ward 9(2)(3) Mumbai. Vs. C/O Sanjay Shah, 108, 1St Floor Sujata Niketan, Rani Sati Marg Malad East, Mumbai-400097 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aadcn1435A (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Revenue By: Shri Anil Surana, Ca (Written Submission) Assessee By: Dr Mahesh Akhade, Cit Dr

For Appellant: Dr Mahesh Akhade, CIT DRFor Respondent: Shri Anil Surana, CA (written
Section 68

…book transactions, and there was no cash receipt. The decisions in (i) Commissioner of Income Tax v. Focus Exports Pvt. Ltd., reported in (2014) 90 CCH 0105 (Delhi): (ii) Commissioner of Income Tax v. Globus Securities & Finance Pvt. Ltd.. reported in (2014) 264 CTR 481 (Delhi); (Hi) Onassis Axles Private Limited v. Commissioner of Income Tax, reported in (2014) 364 ITR 53 (Delhi), (iv) Olwin Tiles India (P) Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax reported in (2016) 382 ITR 291 (Gujarat); (v) B.R. Petruchem Pvt. Lid. v. The Income Tax Officer, (Order dated 24.4.2017 in T.C.(A) No. 1498 of 12 ITA 3258/Mum/2016…

M/S. Govind Stone Private Limited, Hamirpur vs. Income Tax Officer -5(4), Banda

ITA 258/ALLD/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad19 Dec 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shrivijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: Shri. R. S. Agrawal, Adv. &VinayGoel, C.AFor Respondent: Shri A.K. Singh Sr.D.R
Section 143Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 56Section 68

…, reported in (2021) 283 Taxman 395(Mad. HC) e) CIT v. Sadiq Sheikh (2021) 429 ITR 163(Bom. HC) f) Royal Rich Developers Private Limited v. PCIT , reported in (2019) 265 Taxman 99(Bom.) g) CIT v. Globus Securities & Finance Private Limited, reported in (2014) 264 CTR 481(Del) h) Shantananda Steels Private Limited v. ITO, reported in (2020) 182 ITD 434(Chennai-trib.) i) Pratik Syntex Private Limited v. ITO, reported in (2018) 94 taxmann.com 12(Mum-trib.) j) DCIT v. Lotus Logistics & Developers Limited , reported in (2022) 195 ITD 24(Mum-trib.) k) ITO v. Parsoli Motor Works Private Limited, reported in (2022) 193 I…

Vidya Education Investments Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1778/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Apr 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Sh. Bhavnesh Sainidr. B. R. R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing) Ita No. 1778/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year : 2011-12 Vidya Education Investments Pvt. Vs Dcit, Ltd., 5C, Old Friends Colony Circle-17(1), (West), Main Mathura Road, New Delhi New Delhi-110065 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aabcv9413E Assessee By : Sh. P. C. Yadav, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. Bhopal Singh, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 08.03.2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 26.04.2021

For Appellant: Sh. P. C. Yadav, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Bhopal Singh, Sr. DR
Section 133(6)Section 68

…there was no compliance to the notices issued u/s 133(6) to the loan party. The ld. DR supported the order of the ld. CIT (A) which placed reliance on the judgment of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Globus Securities and Finance Pvt. Ltd. Reported in 264 CTR 481 while confirming the addition. The relevant findings are as under: 4 Vidya Education Investments Pvt. Ltd. “Section 68 of the Income-tax Act, 1961- Cash credit [Burden of proof/share capital]- Assessment year 2006-07 whether merely reliance on neutral documentary evidence cannot always be regarded as satisfactory discharge of onus- held, yes- whe…

ITO, Ward - 6(1), Kolkata vs. M/S. Dhankamal Commosaes Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2089/KOL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata17 Jun 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri Aby T. Varkey) Assessment Year: 2012-13

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 68

…105 (Delhi); (ii) Commissioner of Income Tax v. Globus Securities & Finance Pvt. (Delhi); (ii) Commissioner of Income Tax v. Globus Securities & Finance Pvt. (Delhi); (ii) Commissioner of Income Tax v. Globus Securities & Finance Pvt. Ltd., reported in (2014) 264 CTR 481 (Delhi); (iii) Onassis Axles Private Ltd., reported in (2014) 264 CTR 481 (Delhi); (iii) Onassis Axles Private Ltd., reported in (2014) 264 CTR 481 (Delhi); (iii) Onassis Axles Private Limited v. Commissioner of Income Tax, reported in (2014) 364 ITR 53 Commissioner of Income Tax, reported in (2014) 364 ITR 53 Commissioner of Income Tax, reported…

ITO, Ward - 13(2), Kolkata vs. M/S. Gouri Nandan Real Estate Pvt. Ltd., Howrah

In the result, we uphold the same and dismiss the appeal of the Revenue

ITA 2102/KOL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata29 Nov 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Shri S.S. Godara]

Section 144Section 250Section 56(2)(vii)Section 68Section 80G

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA ‘B’ BENCH, KOLKATA [Before Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Accountant Member & Shri S.S. Godara, Judicial Member] I.T.A. No. 2102/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2012-13 ITO, Ward-13(2), Kolkata.………….....................................…......……................................Appellant Vs. M/s. Gouri Nandan Real Estate Pvt. Ltd..................................................................Respondent [PAN: AAECG 2832 R] C.O. No. 120/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/s. Gouri Nandan Real Estate Pvt. Ltd......................................................................Appellan…

M/S. Access Global Limited, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward - 4(3), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is allowed

ITA 13/KOL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata24 Apr 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri A.T. Varkey, J.M. & Dr.A.L.Saini, A.M.)

For Appellant: Shri S. M Surana, Advocate, ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri A.K. Singh, CIT, ld.Sr.DR
Section 144(1)Section 68

…book transactions, and there was no cash receipt. The decisions in (i) Commissioner of Income Tax v. Focus Exports Pvt. Ltd., reported in (2014) 90 CCH 0105 (Delhi); (ii) Commissioner of Income Tax v. Globus Securities & Finance Pvt. Ltd., reported in (2014) 264 CTR 481 (Del h i) ; (iii) Onassis Axles Private Limited v . Commissioner of Income Tax, reported in (2014 ) 364 ITR 5 3 (Delhi) ; (i v) Olwin Tiles India (P) L td . v . Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, reported in (2016) 382 ITR 291 (Gujarat) ; ( v) B . R . Petrochem Pvt. Ltd . v . The Income Tax Officer, (Order dated 24.4.2017 in T. C (A ) No. 1498 of…

ITO, WD-5(2), Kolkata vs. M/S Sayaji Marketing Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

In the result we set aside the order of the Ld

ITA 282/KOL/2014[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata05 Sept 2018AY 2010-2011

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S.S. Godara, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A No. 282/Kol/2014 Assessment Year : 2010-11 Ito, Ward-5(2), Kolkata -Vs- M/S Sayaji Marketing Pvt. Ltd. [Pan: Aagcs 0147 M] (Appellant) (Respondent) C.O. No. 39/Kol/2018 (Arising Out Of I.T.A No. 282/Kol/2014) Assessment Year : 2010-11 M/S Sayaji Marketing Pvt. Ltd. -Vs- Ito, Ward-5(2), Kolkata [Pan: Aagcs 0147 M] (Cross Objector) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Md. Usman, CIT DRFor Respondent: Shri M. Kataruka, Advocate
Section 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH : KOLKATA [Before Hon’ble Shri S.S. Godara, JM & Shri M.Balaganesh, AM ] I.T.A No. 282/Kol/2014 Assessment Year : 2010-11 ITO, Ward-5(2), Kolkata -vs- M/s Sayaji Marketing Pvt. Ltd. [PAN: AAGCS 0147 M] (Appellant) (Respondent) C.O. No. 39/Kol/2018 (Arising out of I.T.A No. 282/Kol/2014) Assessment Year : 2010-11 M/s Sayaji Marketing Pvt. Ltd. -vs- ITO, Ward-5(2), Kolkata [PAN: AAGCS 0147 M] (Cross Objector) (Respondent) For the Assessee : Md. Usman, CIT DR For the Department : Shri M. Kataruka, Advocate Date of Hearing : 29.08.2018 Date of Pronounceme…

ITO, WD-5(3), Kolkata vs. M/S Blessing Commercial Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

In the result we set aside the order of the Ld

ITA 271/KOL/2014[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Jun 2017AY 2010-2011

Bench: Hon‟Ble Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Sri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm] I.T.A. No. 271/Kol/2014 Assessment Year : 2010-11 I.T.O., Ward-5(3), Kolkata -Vs.- M/S. Blessings Commercial Pvt. Ltd. 228A, A.J.C. Bose Road, Kolkata – 700 020 [Pan : Aaccb 1349 N] (Appellant) (Respondent) For The Appellant : Shri Goulen Hangshing, Cit, Dr. For The Respondent : Shri Manoj Kataruka, Advocate Date Of Hearing : 12.06.2017 Date Of Pronouncement : 28.06.2017 Order Per J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am This Is An Appeal Filed By The Revenue Directed Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-Vi, Kolkata, (Hereinafter The “Ld. Cit(A)”), Dt. 19/11/2013, Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter The „Act‟), Relating To Assessment Year 2010-11. 2. Facts In Brief:- The Assessee Is A Company & Is Engaged In The Business Of Finance & Investment. It Filed Its Return Of Income For The Assessment Year 2011-12 On 22/09/2010, Declaring –Nil- Income. It Showed A Loss Of Rs.668/-. The Facts As Recorded By The Assessing Officer In The Assessment Order Are Extracted Below:- “Para 1.2.1 The Assessee Has Shown Receipt Of Under Mentioned Share Capital Of Rs.1,90,00,000/- & Share Premium Of Rs.188,10,00,000/- During The Asst. Year 2010-11. The Assessee Credited Rs.1,90,00,000/- In Total In Its Books Against The Above Receipts. The Assessee Claimed That The Detail Of Receipts Are As Under :-

For Appellant: Shri Goulen Hangshing, CIT, DRFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Kataruka, Advocate
Section 250

…mal course of human conduct. When we do so in this case we have to uphold the action of the AO. 25 I.T.A. No. 271/Kol/2014 Assessment Year : 2010-11 M/s. Blessings Commercial Pvt. Ltd. 31. In the case of CIT vs. Global Securities & Finance (P.) Ltd. (2014) 264 CTR 481 (Delhi) it is held as under :- "11. The respondent assessee is a private limited company. It is not the case of the respondent that their Directors or persons behind the companies, who had purportedly made investment in the shares were related or known to them. In the present case substantial investment has been made in a private limited company…

2014) 90 CCH 0105 (Delhi); (ii) Commissioner of Income Tax v. Globus Securities & Finance Pvt. Ltd. (264 CTR 481) — Cited in 10 Judgments | BharatTax