(Central)-1 v. NRA Iron & Steel (P) Ltd.

103 Taxmann.com 48Supreme Court of India2019#76 most cited

What is (Central)-1 v. NRA Iron & Steel (P) Ltd. authority for?

When assessing cash credits, share capital, or loans, the assessee bears the onus to prove the identity, creditworthiness, and genuineness of transactions. This burden is not discharged merely by documentary evidence if field inquiries reveal accommodation entries or dealings with paper/shell companies.

696

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 371,887 Indian tax judgments — from 2011 to 2026.

Also referred to as

NRA Iron & Steel · (Central)-1 v. NRA Iron & Steel · Section 68 · cash credit · share capital · share application money · unexplained loan · onus of proof · creditworthiness · genuineness of transaction · paper company · shell company · accommodation entries

Sections most often in play

Section 68Section 143(3)Section 147Section 10(38)Section 148Section 69CSection 131Section 133(6)

Issues it is cited on

price riggingbogus share capitalbogus long term capital gainonus of proofpenny stockpaper companypreponderance of probabilitycreditworthiness of the creditorsection 10(38)bogus ltcgshell companysource of source

Judgments citing (Central)-1 v. NRA Iron & Steel (P) Ltd.

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 3(4), Hyderabad vs. Aijaz Investments &Estates Private Limited, Hyderabad

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 80/HYD/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad17 Feb 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri K.Narsimha Charyआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.78/Hyd/2021 To 80/Hyd/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2011-12, 2013-14 & 2014-15) Asst.Commissioner Of Vs. M/S Aijaz Investments Income Tax & Estates Pvt.Ltd. Central Circle-3(4) Secunderabad Hyderabad [Pan : Aaica2190E] (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri P.Murali Mohan Rao,Ar रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By: Shri Srinath Sadanala, Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 21/11/2024 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of 17/02/2025 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Manjunatha G., A.M: These Appeals Filed By The Revenue Are Directed Against Order Dated 11.09.2020 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) [“Ld.Cit(A)”]-11, Hyderabad Pertaining To A.Y.2011-12, 2013-14 & 2014-15. Since, Facts Are Identical & Issues Are Common, For The Sake Of Convenience, The Appeals Filed By The Revenue Are Being Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Off By This Common Order.

For Appellant: Shri P.Murali Mohan Rao,ARFor Respondent: Shri Srinath Sadanala, DR
Section 132Section 143(1)Section 153ASection 153C

…he creditor cannot be treated as income of the assessee u/s 68 of the Act. Although the Assessing Officer referred to number of judicial precedents, including the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of PCIT Vs. NRA Iron and Steel Private Ltd. (2019) 412 ITR 161, but facts remain that the facts of the present case are entirely 27 ITA No.78-80/Hyd/2021 Aijaz Investments & Estates Pvt. Ltd., different from various case laws referred by the Assessing Officer and therefore, in our considered view, the case laws relied upon by the Assessing Officer are considered to be not applicable to the case of the asse…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 3(4), Hyderabad vs. Aijaz Investments & Estates Private Limited, Secunderabad

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 79/HYD/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad17 Feb 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri K.Narsimha Charyआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.78/Hyd/2021 To 80/Hyd/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2011-12, 2013-14 & 2014-15) Asst.Commissioner Of Vs. M/S Aijaz Investments Income Tax & Estates Pvt.Ltd. Central Circle-3(4) Secunderabad Hyderabad [Pan : Aaica2190E] (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri P.Murali Mohan Rao,Ar रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By: Shri Srinath Sadanala, Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 21/11/2024 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of 17/02/2025 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Manjunatha G., A.M: These Appeals Filed By The Revenue Are Directed Against Order Dated 11.09.2020 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) [“Ld.Cit(A)”]-11, Hyderabad Pertaining To A.Y.2011-12, 2013-14 & 2014-15. Since, Facts Are Identical & Issues Are Common, For The Sake Of Convenience, The Appeals Filed By The Revenue Are Being Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Off By This Common Order.

For Appellant: Shri P.Murali Mohan Rao,ARFor Respondent: Shri Srinath Sadanala, DR
Section 132Section 143(1)Section 153ASection 153C

…he creditor cannot be treated as income of the assessee u/s 68 of the Act. Although the Assessing Officer referred to number of judicial precedents, including the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of PCIT Vs. NRA Iron and Steel Private Ltd. (2019) 412 ITR 161, but facts remain that the facts of the present case are entirely 27 ITA No.78-80/Hyd/2021 Aijaz Investments & Estates Pvt. Ltd., different from various case laws referred by the Assessing Officer and therefore, in our considered view, the case laws relied upon by the Assessing Officer are considered to be not applicable to the case of the asse…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle -3(4), Hyderabad vs. Aijaz Investments & Estates Private Limited, Hyderabad

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 78/HYD/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad17 Feb 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri K.Narsimha Charyआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.78/Hyd/2021 To 80/Hyd/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2011-12, 2013-14 & 2014-15) Asst.Commissioner Of Vs. M/S Aijaz Investments Income Tax & Estates Pvt.Ltd. Central Circle-3(4) Secunderabad Hyderabad [Pan : Aaica2190E] (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri P.Murali Mohan Rao,Ar रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By: Shri Srinath Sadanala, Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 21/11/2024 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of 17/02/2025 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Manjunatha G., A.M: These Appeals Filed By The Revenue Are Directed Against Order Dated 11.09.2020 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) [“Ld.Cit(A)”]-11, Hyderabad Pertaining To A.Y.2011-12, 2013-14 & 2014-15. Since, Facts Are Identical & Issues Are Common, For The Sake Of Convenience, The Appeals Filed By The Revenue Are Being Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Off By This Common Order.

For Appellant: Shri P.Murali Mohan Rao,ARFor Respondent: Shri Srinath Sadanala, DR
Section 132Section 143(1)Section 153ASection 153C

…he creditor cannot be treated as income of the assessee u/s 68 of the Act. Although the Assessing Officer referred to number of judicial precedents, including the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of PCIT Vs. NRA Iron and Steel Private Ltd. (2019) 412 ITR 161, but facts remain that the facts of the present case are entirely 27 ITA No.78-80/Hyd/2021 Aijaz Investments & Estates Pvt. Ltd., different from various case laws referred by the Assessing Officer and therefore, in our considered view, the case laws relied upon by the Assessing Officer are considered to be not applicable to the case of the asse…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle -3(4), Hyderabad vs. Shoeb Estates Private Limited, Hyderabad

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 76/HYD/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad17 Feb 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri K.Narsimha Charyआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.76/Hyd/2021 & 77/Hyd/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2011-12 & 2016-17) Asst.Commissioner Of Vs. M/S Shoeb Estates Income Tax Pvt.Ltd. Central Circle-3(4) Secunderabad Hyderabad [Pan : Aancs8525Q] (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri P.Murali Mohan Rao,Ar रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By: Shri Srinath Sadanala, Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 21/11/2024 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of 17/02/2025 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Manjunatha G., A.M: These Appeals Filed By The Revenue Are Directed Against Order Dated 14.09.2020 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) [“Ld.Cit(A)”]-11, Hyderabad Pertaining To A.Y.2011-12 & 2016-17. Since, Facts Are Identical & Issues Are Common, For The Sake Of Convenience, The Appeals Filed By The Revenue Are Being Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Off, By This Common Order. Shoeb Estates Pvt. Ltd.

For Appellant: Shri P.Murali Mohan Rao,ARFor Respondent: Shri Srinath Sadanala, DR
Section 132Section 143(1)Section 153ASection 153C

…he creditor cannot be treated as income of the assessee u/s 68 of the Act. Although the Assessing Officer referred to number of judicial precedents, including the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of PCIT Vs. NRA Iron and Steel Private Ltd. (2019) 412 ITR 161, but facts remain that the facts of the present case are entirely different from various case laws referred by the Assessing Officer and therefore, in our considered view, the case laws relied upon by the Assessing Officer are considered to be not applicable to the case of the assessee. Shoeb Estates Pvt. Ltd. 24. In view of this matter and cons…

Assistant Commisioner of Income Tax Central Circle-3(4), Hyderabad vs. Asma Estates & Investments Private Limited, Hyderabad

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 37/HYD/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad13 Feb 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri K.Narsimha Charyआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.37/Hyd/2021 To 39/Hyd/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2011-12, 2013-14 & 2014-15) Asst.Commissioner Of Vs. M/S Asma Estates & Income Tax Investments Pvt.Ltd. Central Circle-3(4) Secunderabad Hyderabad [Pan : Aaica2191F] (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri P.Murali Mohan Rao,Ar रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By: Shri Srinath Sadanala, Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 21/11/2024 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of 13/02/2025 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Manjunatha G., A.M: These Appeals Filed By The Revenue Are Directed Against Order Dated 11.09.2020 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) [“Ld.Cit(A)”]-11, Hyderabad Pertaining To A.Y.2011-12, 2013-14 & 2014-15. Since, Facts Are Identical & Issues Are Common, For The Sake Of Convenience, The Appeals Filed By The Revenue Are Being Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Off, By This Common Order.

For Appellant: Shri P.Murali Mohan Rao,ARFor Respondent: Shri Srinath Sadanala, DR
Section 132Section 143(1)Section 153ASection 153C

…he creditor cannot be treated as income of the assessee u/s 68 of the Act. Although the Assessing Officer referred to number of judicial precedents, including the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of PCIT Vs. NRA Iron and Steel Private Ltd. (2019) 412 ITR 161, 27 ITA No.37-39/Hyd/2021 Asma Estates & Investments Pvt. Ltd., Hyderabad but facts remain that the facts of the present case are entirely different from various case laws referred by the Assessing Officer and therefore, in our considered view, the case laws relied upon by the Assessing Officer are considered to be not applicable to the case of…

I.T.O., Ward-1(2), Kolkata vs. M/S Ka Vanijya Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

The appeal of the Revenue is treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 339/KOL/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Feb 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY, VICE PRESIDENT SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI (Accountant Member)

Section 147Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 68

…cumentation was presented before the authorities below to justify the transaction as also prove the creditworthiness etc expect of the impugned transactions. He also stated that the department’s reliance on the case law- NRA Iron & Steel Pvt. Ltd. reported in 412 ITR 161 (SC), was misplaced and the Ld. CIT(A) had passed a well-reasoned order. 5 M/s KA Vanijya Pvt. Ltd. 4. We have carefully heard the rival contentions and also gone through the documents placed before us. Right at the outset, it is worthwhile mentioning that item Nos. 15 to 24 filed with the paper book of which the index has been extracted (supra)…

Nitin Shantilal Solanki, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 27(2)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 5183/MUM/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Feb 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhailassessment Year : 2016-17 Nitin Shantilal Solanki, Income Tax Officer, 4Th Floor, Ward-27(2)(1), Veer Vijay Apartment, Vs. Vashi Railway Station Building, M.G. Road, Ghatkoper West, 3Rd & 4Th Floor, Mumbai 6Th Tower, Complex, Pan: Aqbps3462P Navi Mumbai (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Shashank MehtaFor Respondent: Ms. Monika H. Pande
Section 10(38)Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI “B” BENCH : MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI B.R. BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year : 2016-17 Nitin Shantilal Solanki, Income Tax Officer, 4th Floor, Ward-27(2)(1), Veer Vijay Apartment, vs. Vashi Railway Station Building, M.G. Road, Ghatkoper West, 3rd & 4th Floor, Mumbai 6th Tower, Complex, PAN: AQBPS3462P Navi Mumbai (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Shri Shashank Mehta For Revenue : Ms. Monika H. Pande Date of Hearing : 29-01-2025 Date of Pronouncement : 06-02-2025 PER B.R. BASKARAN, A.M : The assessee has filed…

Suburban Builders Private Limited, Mumbai vs. ITO-8(2)(4), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1135/MUM/2024[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Jan 2025AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Ms. Renu Jauhriassessment Year: 2007-08

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay Kapadia, Ld. A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Monika H. Pande, Ld. Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 250

…espect of amount received as Share Capital from several companies who were engaged in providing accommodation entries through paper companies were justified. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of PCIT (Central-1) Vs NRA Iron and Steel (P) Ltd. reported in 412 ITR 161 held that merely because assessee company had filed all primary evidence, it could not be said that onus on assessee to establish creditworthiness of investor company stood discharged. Therefore, the AO was justified in passing assessment order making addition u/s 68 for the share premium /share capital received by the assessee company. It is al…

Samkeet Arya Homes LLP, Ahmedabad vs. The ITO, Ward-3(3)(5), Ahmedabad

In the result, Ground Number 2 of the assessee’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 365/AHD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad16 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Ms. Sunjal Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri B.P. Srivastava, Sr. DR
Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE DR. BRR KUMAR, VICE PRESIDENT & SHRI SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No.365/Ahd/2024 (Assessment Year: 2017-18) Samkeet Arya Homes LLP, Vs. Income Tax Officer, B-604, ShapatH-IV, Opp. Ward-3(3)(5), Karnavati Club, S.G. Highway, Ahmedabad Ahmedabad-380015 [PAN No.ACRFS2181D] (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant by : Ms. Sunjal Shah, A.R. Respondent by: Shri B.P. Srivastava, Sr. DR 11.11.2024 Date of Hearing Date of Pronouncement 16.01.2025 O R D E R PER SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL - JUDICIAL MEMBER: This appeal has been filed by the Assessee a…

Principal Commissioner of Income Tax 1 Kolkata vs. Rainbow Vincom Pvt Ltd

ITAT/219/2024HC Calcutta15 Jan 2025

Bench: : The Hon'Ble The Chief Justice T.S Sivagnanam -A N D- Hon'Ble Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharyya Date : January 15, 2025. Appearance :

Section 131(1)Section 260Section 68

…OD-8 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA SPECIAL JURISDICTION (INCOME TAX) ORIGINAL SIDE ITAT/219/2024 IA NO: GA/1/2024, GA/2/2024 PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 1 KOLKATA VS RAINBOW VINCOM PVT LTD BEFORE : THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE T.S SIVAGNANAM -A N D- HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA DATE : January 15, 2025. Appearance : Smita Das De, Adv. Mr. Prithu Dudhoria, Adv. ..for appellant The Court: - Notice has been served on the respondent. Affidavit of service has been filed but none appears for the respondent. There is a delay of 111 days in fil…

M/S. Parwani Traders Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward - 2(1), Kolkata

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1894/KOL/2024[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Jan 2025AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm Ito, Ward-2(1) M/S Parwani Traders Pvt. Ltd. Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, C/O, M/S, Salarpuria& Co., 3Rd Floor, 7, C.R. Avenue, Chowringhee Square, Vs. Kolkata-700072 Kolkata-700069, West Bengal West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacz3659B Assessee By : Shri S. Jhajharia, Ar Revenue By : Shri Amuldeep Kaur, Dr Date Of Hearing: 18.12.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 15.01.2025

For Appellant: Shri S. Jhajharia, ARFor Respondent: Shri Amuldeep Kaur, DR
Section 142(1)Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM AND SHRI PRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY, JM ITO, Ward-2(1) M/s Parwani Traders Pvt. Ltd. Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, C/O, M/s, Salarpuria& Co., 3rd Floor, 7, C.R. Avenue, Chowringhee Square, Vs. Kolkata-700072 Kolkata-700069, West Bengal West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN No. AAACZ3659B Assessee by : Shri S. Jhajharia, AR Revenue by : Shri Amuldeep Kaur, DR Date of hearing: 18.12.2024 Date of pronouncement : 15.01.2025 O R D E R Per Rajesh Kumar, AM: This is an appeal preferred by the assessee against the order of the National Faceless A…

Jayesh Manshukhlal Palan, Mumbai vs. ACIT-29(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2410/MUM/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Jan 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh

For Appellant: Shri Mani JainFor Respondent: Shri Nishant Somaiya Sr. AR
Section 131Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 68Section 69C

…ITA No.2410/Mum/2024 Jayesh Manshukhala Palan IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “F” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 2410/Mum/2024 (A.Y.2014-15) Jayesh Manshukhlal Palan, B-12 Navin Manju, S L Road, Mulund W, Mumbai- 400080 Vs. ACIT-29(1) Kautilya Bhavan, Mumbai स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. AGJPP7133L Appellant .. Respondent Appellant by : Shri Mani Jain Respondent by : Shri Nishant Somaiya Sr. AR Date of Hearing 11.12.2024 Date of Pronouncement 09.01.2025 Per Amarjit Singh (AM): आदेश / ORDER The present appeal file…

Meenakshi Gupta, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-35(6), Delhi

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 4710/DEL/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Jan 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA (Judicial Member)

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 151

…ailed to respond. The assessee has also not proved genuineness, creditworthiness of the said entity all along. I thus quote Sumati Dayal Vs. CIT (1995) 214 ITR 801 (SC), CIT Vs. Durga Prasad More (1971) 82 ITR 540 (SC) and PCIT Vs. NRA Iron & Steel Co. (2019) 412 ITR 161 (SC) to conclude that learned lower authorities herein have rightly added the impugned unsecured loans of Rs.25 lakhs in assessee’s hands. Ordered accordingly. 7. No other ground or argument has been pressed. 8. This assessee’s appeal is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court on 6th January, 2025 (SATBEER SINGH GODARA) JUDICIAL MEMBER Date…

Hitesh Mangilal Jain, Mumbai vs. ITO - 19(1)(5), Mumbai

ITA 262/MUM/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Dec 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: Ms. Ridisha Jain / Shri Karan JainFor Respondent: Shri Himanshu Joshi (Sr. DR)
Section 10(38)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 271(1)Section 68Section 69C

…IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “E” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI PRABHASH SHANKAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.262/MUM/2024 (A.Y. 2014-15) Hitesh Mangilal Jain v/s. Income Tax Officer Ward, 2405 Panchratna M.P. Marg, बनाम 19(1)(5), 502, 5th Floor, Opera House, Charni Road, Piramal Chamber, Lalbaug, Mumbai - 400004, Maharashtra Parel, Mumbai - 400 012, Maharashtra स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./ PAN/GIR No: AABPJ2835R Appellant/अपीलार्थी .. Respondent/प्रतिवादी Income Tax Officer, 502, 5th v/s. Hitesh Mangilal Jain Floor, Piramal Chamber, बनाम 2405 Panchratna M.P. Marg, Lalbaug,…

Hitesh Mangilal Jain, Mumbai vs. ITO 19(1)(5), Mumbai

Appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 261/MUM/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Dec 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: Ms. Ridisha Jain / Shri Karan JainFor Respondent: Shri Himanshu Joshi (Sr. DR)
Section 10(38)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 271(1)Section 68Section 69C

…IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “E” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI PRABHASH SHANKAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.261/MUM/2024 (A.Y. 2015-16) ITA No.262/MUM/2024 Hitesh Mangilal Jain (A.Y. 2014-15) v/s. Income Tax Officer Ward, 2405 Panchratna M.P. Marg, Opera House, Charni Road, Mumbai - 400004, Maharashtra 19(1)(5), 502, 5th Floor, Piramal Chamber, Lalbaug, Parel, Mumbai - 400 012, Maharashtra स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./ PAN/GIR No: AABPJ2835R Appellant/अपीलार्थी .. Respondent/प्रतिवादी ITA No.257/MUM/2024 (A.Y. 2015-16) Income Tax Officer, 502, 5th v/s. Hitesh Mangilal Jain F…

Income Tax Officer, Mumbai vs. Hitesh Mangilal Jain, Mumbai

ITA 257/MUM/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Dec 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: Ms. Ridisha Jain / Shri Karan JainFor Respondent: Shri Himanshu Joshi (Sr. DR)
Section 10(38)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 271(1)Section 68Section 69C

…IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “E” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI PRABHASH SHANKAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.262/MUM/2024 (A.Y. 2014-15) Hitesh Mangilal Jain v/s. Income Tax Officer Ward, 2405 Panchratna M.P. Marg, बनाम 19(1)(5), 502, 5th Floor, Opera House, Charni Road, Piramal Chamber, Lalbaug, Mumbai - 400004, Maharashtra Parel, Mumbai - 400 012, Maharashtra स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./ PAN/GIR No: AABPJ2835R Appellant/अपीलार्थी .. Respondent/प्रतिवादी Income Tax Officer, 502, 5th v/s. Hitesh Mangilal Jain Floor, Piramal Chamber, बनाम 2405 Panchratna M.P. Marg, Lalbaug,…

M/S. Bhikshu Polymers Pvt. Ltd. (Earlier Known As M/S. Jeevan Commotrade Pvt. Ltd.), Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward - 6(2), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1538/KOL/2024[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 Dec 2024AY 2009-2010

Bench: SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI (Accountant Member)

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 263Section 68

…aside and the order passed by the CIT(A) dated 28.11.2019 is restored and the substantial questions of law are answered in favour of the revenue.” 3.2. Considerable strength is also drawn from the case of PCIT vs. NRA Iron & Steel (P.) Ltd. reported in [2019] 412 ITR 161 (SC) in which share application money was approved for action u/s 68 of the Act even where the share applicants had filed confirmations and attempted to show that the transactions had taken place through normal banking channels, etc. In this case, the Hon'ble Apex Court has dealt with the issue from a legal perspective and some of the passages de…

Principal Commissioner of Income Tax 2 Kolkata vs. Shreen Hire Purchase P Limited

In the result, the appeal is dismissed and the connected

ITAT/196/2024HC Calcutta20 Dec 2024

Bench: : The Hon’Ble Chief Justice T.S. Sivagnanam

Section 131Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 260ASection 68

…ent proceeding. (iii) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Tribunal was justified in law is not appreciating the settled preparation of law as laid down in Pr. CIT (Central - 1) Kolkata Vs- NRA Iron & Steel Pvt. Ltd. reported in 412 ITR 161 that the assessee is under a legal obligation to prove the receipt of share capital/premium to the satisfaction of the assessing officer failing which would justify addition of the amount in question to the income of the assessee.” We have heard Ms. Smita Das De, learned senior standing counsel appearing for the appellant/revenue…

Kanhaiya Power Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-4(4), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 876/KOL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 Dec 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Sonjoy Sarma & Sri Rakesh Mishra

Section 147Section 250

…axman 169/291 ITR 278 (SC). d) ITO v. Mont Blanc Properties and Industries (P.) Ltd., ITA No. 614/Bom/87 dated 20-4-1994. e) CIT v. N.R. Portfolio (P.) Ltd. [2013] 29 taxmann.com 29 (Delhi) which was approved by the Hon’ble Supreme Court as reported in (2019) 15 SCC 529. 2.2. It was submitted by the ld. AR before us that the order of the Ld. CIT(A) is ex-parte and the appeal was dismissed as proper representation could not be made before the Ld. CIT(A). It was also submitted that the assessee had withdrawn cash of Rs. 8,00,000/- on 24.06.2016 which along with other withdrawals was deposited in the bank account. 2…

Mr Pankaj Goshar, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 8(4), Mumbai

ITA 1256/MUM/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Dec 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh

For Appellant: Shri Neelkanth KhandelwalFor Respondent: Ms.Rajeshwari Menon, Sr.DR
Section 10(38)Section 131Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 69C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI “C” BENCH : MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI B.R. BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. Α.Υ. Appellant Respondent 1224/Mum/2024 2014-15 Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, 6th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K.Road, Mumbai. Pankaj Dhanji Goshar, 1101, Mont Blanc, 550, Jam-e-Jamshed Road, Matunga East, Mumbai PAN: AACPG7709G 1223/Mum/2024 2015-16 Mr. Pankaj Goshar, 1601, Mount Pleasant, 586, Lady Jehangir Road, Matunga, Mumbai PAN: AACPG7709G Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-8(4), Aayakar Bhavan, M.K.Road, Mumbai. 1256/Mum/2024 2015-1…