357 ITR 147 and PCIT v. Laxman Industrial Resources Ltd.

397 ITR 106High Court2017#2175 most cited

What is 357 ITR 147 and PCIT v. Laxman Industrial Resources Ltd. authority for?

The Assessing Officer cannot ignore comprehensive documentary evidence submitted by an assessee to establish the genuineness of transactions, especially concerning share application money. Such evidence, including PAN details, assessment particulars, bank statements, and cheque numbers, requires due consideration beyond mere confirmation letters.

53

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,005 Indian tax judgments — from 2018 to 2026.

Also referred to as

PCIT v. Laxman Industrial Resources Ltd. · Section 68 · share application money · genuineness of transactions · documentary evidence · Assessing Officer duty · cash credits · burden of proof · AO cannot ignore evidence · identity creditworthiness genuineness

Sections most often in play

Section 68Section 143(2)Section 148Section 132Section 132(4)Section 132(4A)Section 145(3)Section 147

Issues it is cited on

cash found during searchjewellery found during searchinterest u/s 234csection 271aabunexplained jewellerysource of sourcesummons under section 131paper companypreponderance of probabilityaccumulated profitsbogus long term capital gainsection 158bb

Judgments citing 357 ITR 147 and PCIT v. Laxman Industrial Resources Ltd.

ACIT, Central Circle, Ghaziabad vs. Nidhi Sharma, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessees is allowed and the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 2124/DEL/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Oct 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Sh. C. M. Gargdr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Rajiv Khandelwal, CA &For Respondent: Mr. Waseem Arshad, CIT-DR
Section 115BSection 234ASection 271ASection 68Section 69A

…7 ITD 222 (Mumbai - Trib.)[03-12- 2020],  Moongipa Dev. & Inf. Ltd. vs DCIT, Mum. [2021] 127 taxmann.com 808 (Mumbai — Trib.)/[2021] 189 ITD 388 (Mumbai — Trib.) [03-05-2021]  PCIT-5 vs Laxman Industrial Resources Ltd., [2017] taxmann.com 648 (Delhi)/(2017) 397 ITR 106 (Delhi[14- 03-2017]  Bini Builders (P) Ltd. vs DCIT, Central range-7(3), [2020] 118 taxmann.com 447 (Mumbai-Trib [2020] 185 ITD 236 (Mumbai-Trib.[12-03-2020)  Ancon Chemplast (P) Ltd. vs ITO, Ward-2(4), New Delhi, [2021] 127 taxmann.com 150 (Delhi - Trib.)2022) 93 ITR(T) 167 (Delhi - Trib.).[2021] 189 ITD 156 (Delhi-Trib [30-04-2021]  PCIT vs.…

Ankit Sharma, Ghaziabad vs. DCIT, Central Circle, Ghaziabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessees is allowed and the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1842/DEL/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Oct 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Sh. C. M. Gargdr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Rajiv Khandelwal, CA &For Respondent: Mr. Waseem Arshad, CIT-DR
Section 115BSection 234ASection 271ASection 68Section 69A

…7 ITD 222 (Mumbai - Trib.)[03-12- 2020],  Moongipa Dev. & Inf. Ltd. vs DCIT, Mum. [2021] 127 taxmann.com 808 (Mumbai — Trib.)/[2021] 189 ITD 388 (Mumbai — Trib.) [03-05-2021]  PCIT-5 vs Laxman Industrial Resources Ltd., [2017] taxmann.com 648 (Delhi)/(2017) 397 ITR 106 (Delhi[14- 03-2017]  Bini Builders (P) Ltd. vs DCIT, Central range-7(3), [2020] 118 taxmann.com 447 (Mumbai-Trib [2020] 185 ITD 236 (Mumbai-Trib.[12-03-2020)  Ancon Chemplast (P) Ltd. vs ITO, Ward-2(4), New Delhi, [2021] 127 taxmann.com 150 (Delhi - Trib.)2022) 93 ITR(T) 167 (Delhi - Trib.).[2021] 189 ITD 156 (Delhi-Trib [30-04-2021]  PCIT vs.…

Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(1), Raipur vs. Mesers Aryan Builders and Developers Private Limited, Raipur

In the result, both appeal of the revenue and cross objection of the assessee stand dismissed in terms of our observations

ITA 201/RPR/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur06 Sept 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: SHRI RAVISH SOOD (Judicial Member), SHRI ARUN KHODPIA (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Ramesh Kumar Singhania, CA, &For Respondent: Shri S.K.Meena, CIT-DR
Section 143(2)Section 250(4)Section 68

…1 आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, रायपुर "यायपीठ, रायपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RAIPUR BENCH, RAIPUR "ी र"वश सूद, "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी अ"ण खोड़"पया, लेखा सद"य के सम" । BEFORE SHRI RAVISH SOOD, JM & SHRI ARUN KHODPIA, AM आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.201/RPR/2018 (Assessment Year: 2012-2013) The Income Tax Officer-2(1), Vs M/s.Aryan Builders and- Raipur Developers Pvt. Ltd., Near Shitla Mandir, Machhi Talab, Gudiyari, Raipur PAN No. : AAJCA 3942 M AND Cross Objection No.09/RPR/2022) (Arising out of ITA No.201/RPR/2018) (Assessment Year: 2012-2013) M/s.Aryan Builders and – Vs ITO-2(1), Raipur Developers Pvt. Ltd., Near…

Shri Vinod Bansal, Chennai vs. Aci-Cent. Circle-3(2), Chennai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 445/CHNY/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Mar 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkery, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 445/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13

For Respondent: Shri. S. Senthil Kumaran, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 153ASection 263

…thus, it cannot be said that assessment order passed by the AO is erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the revenue. In this regard, he relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of PCIT vs Laxman Industrial Resources Ltd [2017] 397 ITR 106 (Del). 7. The ld. DR, on the other hand supporting the order of the PCIT submitted that, the PCIT has elaborately discussed the issue in light of sworn statement recorded from Shri. Ashok Kumar Kayan, where he had categorically admitted that assessee is one of the beneficiaries of accommodation entries in the form of long term capital gains thro…

Smt. Bimala Devi Agarwal, Chennai vs. ACIT, Central Circle3(1), Chennai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 422/CHNY/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Mar 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 422/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri. D. Anand, Advocate
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 153ASection 263

…thus, it cannot be said that assessment order passed by the AO is erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the revenue. In this regard, he relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of PCIT vs Laxman Industrial Resources Ltd [2017] 397 ITR 106 (Del). 7. The ld. DR, on the other hand supporting the order of the PCIT submitted that, the PCIT has elaborately discussed the issue in light of sworn statement recorded from Shri. Ashok Kumar Kayan, where he had categorically admitted that assessee is one of the beneficiaries of accommodation entries in the form of long term capital gains thro…

Smt. Shoba Agarwal, Chennai vs. ACIT Cent Circle 3(2), Chennai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 421/CHNY/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Mar 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 421/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13

For Respondent: Shri. R. Mohan Reddy, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 153ASection 263

…thus, it cannot be said that assessment order passed by the AO is erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the revenue. In this regard, he relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of PCIT vs Laxman Industrial Resources Ltd [2017] 397 ITR 106 (Del). 7. The ld. DR, on the other hand supporting the order of the PCIT submitted that, the PCIT has elaborately discussed the issue in light of sworn statement recorded from Shri. Ashok Kumar Kayan, where he had categorically admitted that assessee is one of the beneficiaries of accommodation entries in the form of long term capital gains thro…

Pankaj Agarwal, Chennai vs. PCIT, Chenai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 434/CHNY/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai24 Feb 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 434/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13

For Respondent: Shri. S. Senthil Kumaran, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 153ASection 263

…thus, it cannot be said that assessment order passed by the AO is erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the revenue. In this regard, he relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of PCIT vs Laxman Industrial Resources Ltd [2017] 397 ITR 106 (Del). 7. The ld. DR, on the other hand supporting the order of the PCIT submitted that, the PCIT has elaborately discussed the issue in light of sworn statement recorded from Shri. Ashok Kumar Kayan, where he had categorically admitted that assessee is one of the beneficiaries of accommodation entries in the form of long term capital gains thro…

Smt.Rita Agarwal, Chenai vs. PCIT, Chennai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 433/CHNY/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai24 Feb 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 433/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13

For Respondent: Shri. S. Senthil Kumaran, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 153ASection 263

…thus, it cannot be said that assessment order passed by the AO is erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the revenue. In this regard, he relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of PCIT vs Laxman Industrial Resources Ltd [2017] 397 ITR 106 (Del). 7. The ld. DR, on the other hand supporting the order of the PCIT submitted that, the PCIT has elaborately discussed the issue in light of sworn statement recorded from Shri. Ashok Kumar Kayan, where he had categorically admitted that assessee is one of the beneficiaries of accommodation entries in the form of long term capital gains thro…

M/S Lucky Agency Pvt Ltd, Kolkata vs. I.T.O, Ward-1(4), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2501/KOL/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 Feb 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 131Section 143(3)Section 68

…-HC) 4 I.T.A. No. 2501/Kol/2019 Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/s Lucky Agencies Pvt. Ltd. iii) CIT vs. Orchid Industries Pvt. Ltd. in 397 ITR 136 (Bom-HC) iv) Pr. CIT vs. Apeak Infotech in 397 ITR 148 (Bom-HC) v) Pr. CIT vs. Laxman Industrial Resources Ltd. in 397 ITR 106 (Del-HC) vi) CIT vs. Expo Globe India Ltd. in 361 ITR 147 (Del-HC) vii) CIT vs. Lovely Exports Ltd., in 216 ITR 195 (SC) viii) CIT vs. Steller Investment Ltd. in 251 ITR 263 (SC) The Ld. A.R therefore prayed that the appeal of the assessee may kindly be allowed as the assessee has discharged its onus whereas the authorities below has failed t…

Mohanlal Khandelwal, Indore vs. The ITO-4(1), Indore

In the result, all the captioned appeals filed by different

ITA 8/IND/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore25 Jun 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Madhumita Royassessment Year 2014-15

Section 10(38)Section 143(3)Section 68

…tary evidences so submitted by assessee and on the aforesaid proposition reliance was placed on the judgments of jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs Fair Finvest Ltd. reported in 357 ITR 147 and PCIT vs Laxman Industrial Resources Ltd. reported in 397 ITR 106.The said documents so submitted by assessee are tabulated as under: For scrip of M/s Turbotech Engineering Ltd. Share Purchase Documents Pg 15 to 17 of PB Share Certificate Pg 18 of PB Share Transfer Form Pg 19 to 21 of PB Contract Note issued by DP Pg 24 to 27 of PB Assessee’s bank statement Pg 28 to 29 of PB DP statement Pg 30 to 32 of PB For…

Radheshyam Khandelwal, Indore vs. ACIT4(1), Indore

In the result, all the captioned appeals filed by different

ITA 7/IND/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore25 Jun 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Madhumita Royassessment Year 2014-15

Section 10(38)Section 143(3)Section 68

…tary evidences so submitted by assessee and on the aforesaid proposition reliance was placed on the judgments of jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs Fair Finvest Ltd. reported in 357 ITR 147 and PCIT vs Laxman Industrial Resources Ltd. reported in 397 ITR 106.The said documents so submitted by assessee are tabulated as under: For scrip of M/s Turbotech Engineering Ltd. Share Purchase Documents Pg 15 to 17 of PB Share Certificate Pg 18 of PB Share Transfer Form Pg 19 to 21 of PB Contract Note issued by DP Pg 24 to 27 of PB Assessee’s bank statement Pg 28 to 29 of PB DP statement Pg 30 to 32 of PB For…

Smt. Rukmani Khandelwal, Indore vs. ITO-4(3), Indore

In the result, all the captioned appeals filed by different

ITA 30/IND/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore25 Jun 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Madhumita Royassessment Year 2014-15

Section 10(38)Section 143(3)Section 68

…tary evidences so submitted by assessee and on the aforesaid proposition reliance was placed on the judgments of jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs Fair Finvest Ltd. reported in 357 ITR 147 and PCIT vs Laxman Industrial Resources Ltd. reported in 397 ITR 106.The said documents so submitted by assessee are tabulated as under: For scrip of M/s Turbotech Engineering Ltd. Share Purchase Documents Pg 15 to 17 of PB Share Certificate Pg 18 of PB Share Transfer Form Pg 19 to 21 of PB Contract Note issued by DP Pg 24 to 27 of PB Assessee’s bank statement Pg 28 to 29 of PB DP statement Pg 30 to 32 of PB For…

Shri Suresh Khandelwal, Indore vs. The ITO-4(1), Indore

In the result, all the captioned appeals filed by different

ITA 29/IND/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore25 Jun 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Madhumita Royassessment Year 2014-15

Section 10(38)Section 143(3)Section 68

…tary evidences so submitted by assessee and on the aforesaid proposition reliance was placed on the judgments of jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs Fair Finvest Ltd. reported in 357 ITR 147 and PCIT vs Laxman Industrial Resources Ltd. reported in 397 ITR 106.The said documents so submitted by assessee are tabulated as under: For scrip of M/s Turbotech Engineering Ltd. Share Purchase Documents Pg 15 to 17 of PB Share Certificate Pg 18 of PB Share Transfer Form Pg 19 to 21 of PB Contract Note issued by DP Pg 24 to 27 of PB Assessee’s bank statement Pg 28 to 29 of PB DP statement Pg 30 to 32 of PB For…

Smt. Sandhya Khandelwal, Indore vs. ITO 4(3), Indore

In the result, all the captioned appeals filed by different

ITA 113/IND/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore25 Jun 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Madhumita Royassessment Year 2014-15

Section 10(38)Section 143(3)Section 68

…tary evidences so submitted by assessee and on the aforesaid proposition reliance was placed on the judgments of jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs Fair Finvest Ltd. reported in 357 ITR 147 and PCIT vs Laxman Industrial Resources Ltd. reported in 397 ITR 106.The said documents so submitted by assessee are tabulated as under: For scrip of M/s Turbotech Engineering Ltd. Share Purchase Documents Pg 15 to 17 of PB Share Certificate Pg 18 of PB Share Transfer Form Pg 19 to 21 of PB Contract Note issued by DP Pg 24 to 27 of PB Assessee’s bank statement Pg 28 to 29 of PB DP statement Pg 30 to 32 of PB For…

M/S. Singh Consultancy Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 3061/DEL/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Apr 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year : 2009-10

For Appellant: Sh. S.K. Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Sh. H.K. Choudhary, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…nces furnished after due enquiry by the Assessing Officer. Therefore, such addition is not tenable in law in view of the following decisions:- i. CIT vs. Goel Sons Golden Estate Pvt Ltd. ITA 212/2012 (Del); ii. Pr. CIT Vs Laxman Industrial Resources Ltd in 397 ITR 106 (Del); iii. Pr. CIT vs. Green Valley Plywood Limited (ITA No. 358/2016 (Del); iv. Pr. CIT vs Rakam Money Matters Pvt Ltd ITA 778/2015 (Del); 7 v. CIT vs M/s Russian technology Centre (P) Ltd 300 CTR 0501 (Del). 8. He submitted that the Assessing Officer in the penalty order, failed to support the charge of furnishing of inaccurate particulars…

Roop Kishore Madan, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circle-16, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of Assessee partly allowed

ITA 663/DEL/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 May 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri N.K. Billaiya

For Appellant: And Shri Shailesh Gupta, C.AFor Respondent: Smt. Sushma Singh, CIT.DR
Section 69C

…ted by the A.O. Learned Counsel for the Assessee relied upon Judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs., Orissa Corporation Ltd., 159 ITR 78 (SC) and Judgment of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of PCIT vs., Laxman Industrial Resources Ltd., 397 ITR 106 (Del.). Learned Counsel for the Assessee with regard to addition of Rs.9,02,95,000/- regarding loans and advances reiterated that same were supported by income tax return, confirmations and bank statements and even source of the source have been explained. Notice under section 133(6) were issued to all parties which have been complied with. The A…

Rmp Holding (P) Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward- 20(3), New Delhi

ITA 79/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Aug 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahuasstt. Year: 2007-08

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Shri Surender Pal. Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 271(1)(c)Section 68

…tive wards of the share applicants or the respective Banks to verify the genuineness of the companies. Under these circumstances, the addition u/s 68 cannot be upheld. Reliance is placed on following judgments: 1. CIT vs. Laxman Industrial Resources Pvt. Ltd. 397 ITR 106 dated 14th March, 2017 (Delhi HC) 2. CIT vs. Gangeshwari Metal (P) Ltd. (2014) 361 ITR 10 (Del) 3. Pre CIT vs. Green Valley Plywood Limited (ITA No. 358/2016 dated 1.6.2016) (Delhi High Court) 4. Pre CIT vs Rakam Money Matters Pvt Ltd ITA 778/2015 Dated 13.10.2015(Delhi High Court} 5. CIT vs. Victor Electrodes Ltd. (2012) 329 ITR271 (Del) 6. CIT…

R.N. Khemka Enterprises (P) Ltd., Delhi vs. ITO, Ward- 20(3), New Delhi

ITA 78/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Aug 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahuasstt. Year: 2007-08

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Shri Surender Pal. Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 271(1)(c)Section 68

…tive wards of the share applicants or the respective Banks to verify the genuineness of the companies. Under these circumstances, the addition u/s 68 cannot be upheld. Reliance is placed on following judgments: 1. CIT vs. Laxman Industrial Resources Pvt. Ltd. 397 ITR 106 dated 14th March, 2017 (Delhi HC) 2. CIT vs. Gangeshwari Metal (P) Ltd. (2014) 361 ITR 10 (Del) 3. Pre CIT vs. Green Valley Plywood Limited (ITA No. 358/2016 dated 1.6.2016) (Delhi High Court) 4. Pre CIT vs Rakam Money Matters Pvt Ltd ITA 778/2015 Dated 13.10.2015(Delhi High Court} 5. CIT vs. Victor Electrodes Ltd. (2012) 329 ITR271 (Del) 6. CIT…

ITO, Ward- 20(3), New Delhi vs. Rmp Holding (P) Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 6017/DEL/2018[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Aug 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahuasstt. Year: 2007-08

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Shri Surender Pal. Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 271(1)(c)Section 68

…tive wards of the share applicants or the respective Banks to verify the genuineness of the companies. Under these circumstances, the addition u/s 68 cannot be upheld. Reliance is placed on following judgments: 1. CIT vs. Laxman Industrial Resources Pvt. Ltd. 397 ITR 106 dated 14th March, 2017 (Delhi HC) 2. CIT vs. Gangeshwari Metal (P) Ltd. (2014) 361 ITR 10 (Del) 3. Pre CIT vs. Green Valley Plywood Limited (ITA No. 358/2016 dated 1.6.2016) (Delhi High Court) 4. Pre CIT vs Rakam Money Matters Pvt Ltd ITA 778/2015 Dated 13.10.2015(Delhi High Court} 5. CIT vs. Victor Electrodes Ltd. (2012) 329 ITR271 (Del) 6. CIT…

R.N. Khemka Enterprises (P) Ltd., Delhi vs. ITO, Ward- 20(3), New Delhi

ITA 584/DEL/2018[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Aug 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahuasstt. Year: 2007-08

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Shri Surender Pal. Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 271(1)(c)Section 68

…tive wards of the share applicants or the respective Banks to verify the genuineness of the companies. Under these circumstances, the addition u/s 68 cannot be upheld. Reliance is placed on following judgments: 1. CIT vs. Laxman Industrial Resources Pvt. Ltd. 397 ITR 106 dated 14th March, 2017 (Delhi HC) 2. CIT vs. Gangeshwari Metal (P) Ltd. (2014) 361 ITR 10 (Del) 3. Pre CIT vs. Green Valley Plywood Limited (ITA No. 358/2016 dated 1.6.2016) (Delhi High Court) 4. Pre CIT vs Rakam Money Matters Pvt Ltd ITA 778/2015 Dated 13.10.2015(Delhi High Court} 5. CIT vs. Victor Electrodes Ltd. (2012) 329 ITR271 (Del) 6. CIT…