(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.

Jayesh Tarachand Kothari, Mumbai vs. ACIT-19(2), Mumbai

Accordingly we direct the AO to delete the addition made in this regard for both AYs 2014-15 and 2015-16. 12. In result, the appeal of the assessee for AY 2013-14 to 2015-16 are allowed

ITA 1553/MUM/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Mar 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Ms. Rutuja N Pawar / Sneha MoreFor Respondent: Ms. Kavitha Kaushik, Sr. DR
Section 10(38)Section 143(2)Section 148Section 68Section 69C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “F” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI ANIKESH BANERJEE, JM & MS PADMAVATHY S, AM I.T.A. No. 1553/Mum/2024 (Assessment Year: 2013-14) I.T.A. No. 1552/Mum/2024 (Assessment Year: 2014-15) I.T.A. No. 1551/Mum/2024 (Assessment Year: 2015-16) Jayesh Tarachand Kothari, ACIT-19(2), 1st Floor, Nirmal Niketan, Room No. 207, 2nd Floor, 221, Khetwadi Main Road, Vs. Matru Mandir, Tardeo Road, Mumbai-400004. Mumbai-400007. PAN: AACPK1361Q Appellant) : Respondent) Appellant /Assessee by : Ms. Rutuja N Pawar / Sneha More, AR Revenue / Respondent by : Ms. Kavitha Kaushik, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 12.0…

Jayesh Tarachand Kothari, Mumbai vs. ACIT-19(2), Mumbai

Accordingly we direct the AO to delete the addition made in this regard for both AYs 2014-15 and 2015-16. 12. In result, the appeal of the assessee for AY 2013-14 to 2015-16 are allowed

ITA 1552/MUM/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Mar 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Ms. Rutuja N Pawar / Sneha MoreFor Respondent: Ms. Kavitha Kaushik, Sr. DR
Section 10(38)Section 143(2)Section 148Section 68Section 69C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “F” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI ANIKESH BANERJEE, JM & MS PADMAVATHY S, AM I.T.A. No. 1553/Mum/2024 (Assessment Year: 2013-14) I.T.A. No. 1552/Mum/2024 (Assessment Year: 2014-15) I.T.A. No. 1551/Mum/2024 (Assessment Year: 2015-16) Jayesh Tarachand Kothari, ACIT-19(2), 1st Floor, Nirmal Niketan, Room No. 207, 2nd Floor, 221, Khetwadi Main Road, Vs. Matru Mandir, Tardeo Road, Mumbai-400004. Mumbai-400007. PAN: AACPK1361Q Appellant) : Respondent) Appellant /Assessee by : Ms. Rutuja N Pawar / Sneha More, AR Revenue / Respondent by : Ms. Kavitha Kaushik, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 12.0…

Jayesh Tarachand Kothari, Mumbai vs. ACIT- 19(2), Mumbai

Accordingly we direct the AO to delete the addition made in this regard for both AYs 2014-15 and 2015-16. 12. In result, the appeal of the assessee for AY 2013-14 to 2015-16 are allowed

ITA 1551/MUM/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Mar 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Ms. Rutuja N Pawar / Sneha MoreFor Respondent: Ms. Kavitha Kaushik, Sr. DR
Section 10(38)Section 143(2)Section 148Section 68Section 69C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “F” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI ANIKESH BANERJEE, JM & MS PADMAVATHY S, AM I.T.A. No. 1553/Mum/2024 (Assessment Year: 2013-14) I.T.A. No. 1552/Mum/2024 (Assessment Year: 2014-15) I.T.A. No. 1551/Mum/2024 (Assessment Year: 2015-16) Jayesh Tarachand Kothari, ACIT-19(2), 1st Floor, Nirmal Niketan, Room No. 207, 2nd Floor, 221, Khetwadi Main Road, Vs. Matru Mandir, Tardeo Road, Mumbai-400004. Mumbai-400007. PAN: AACPK1361Q Appellant) : Respondent) Appellant /Assessee by : Ms. Rutuja N Pawar / Sneha More, AR Revenue / Respondent by : Ms. Kavitha Kaushik, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 12.0…

Hermon Educational Society, Visakhapatnam vs. Income Tax Officer (Exemption Ward), Visakhapatnam

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 347/VIZ/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam19 Mar 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri G. Manjunatha & Shri K. Narasimha Chary

For Appellant: Shri C. Subrahmanyam, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. AR
Section 10Section 68

…INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL VISAKHAPATNAM BENCH : VISAKHAPATNAM [THROUGH VIRTUAL HEARING] BEFORE SHRI G. MANJUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI K. NARASIMHA CHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA.No.347/VIZ./2024 Assessment Year 2017-2018 Hermone Educational Society, The Income Tax Officer, VISAKHAPATNAM vs. Exemption Ward Pin 530 013 VISAKHAPATNAM. PAN AABAH5146A (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Shri C. Subrahmanyam, CA For Revenue : Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. AR Date of Hearing : 10.03.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 19.03.2025 ORDER PER MANJUNATHA G. A.M. : This appeal filed by the assessee has been directed against t…

Piyush Suppliers Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 9(3), Kolkata, Income Tax Department

In the result, the appeal of the assesseeis allowed

ITA 269/KOL/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata17 Mar 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Dilip Kumar Patni, ARFor Respondent: Shri Raja Sengupta, DR
Section 131Section 142(1)Section 68

…as before the Id. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals). The Id. CIT (A) has relied on the decision of Govindarajulu Mudaliar (A. Vs. CIT (1959) 34 ITR 807 (SC), CIT vs. Durga Prasad More (1971) 82 ITR 540 (SC), PCIT vs. NRA Iron & Steel (P.) Ltd. (SC) (2019) 412 ITR 161. However, in our opinion these decisions are distinguishable on facts. We find that the assessee has filed all the evidences before the authorities below and mere non-compliance to the summons u/s 131 of the Act cannot be ground for making an addition. The case of the find force from the decision of the following decisions namely In defense of hi…

ITO, Mumbai vs. Bhumika Rajesh Vatnani, Mumbai

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

ITA 5177/MUM/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Mar 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Sandeep Gosainassessment Year : 2013-14 Income Tax Officer-24(1)(1), Bhumika Rajesh Vatnani, Piramal Chambers, 2601/02, Royal Empire, Lalbaugh, Parel, Vs. Shashtri Nagar, Mumbai Andheri West, Mumbai Pan :Admpv7590F (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Bhupendra ShahFor Respondent: Shri Leyaqat Ali Aafaqui
Section 10(38)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI “B” BENCH : MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI B.R. BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year : 2013-14 Income Tax Officer-24(1)(1), Bhumika Rajesh Vatnani, Piramal Chambers, 2601/02, Royal Empire, Lalbaugh, Parel, vs. Shashtri Nagar, Mumbai Andheri West, Mumbai PAN :ADMPV7590F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Bhupendra Shah Revenue by : Shri Leyaqat Ali Aafaqui Date of Hearing : 05-03-2025 Date of Pronouncement : 10-03-2025 O R D E R PER B.R. BASKARAN, A.M : The Revenue has filed this appeal challenging the order dated 07-08-20…

Principal Commissioner of Income Tax 2 Kolkata vs. M/S Mundhra Construction Private Limited

ITAT/10/2025HC Calcutta07 Mar 2025

Bench: : The Hon'Ble The Chief Justice T.S Sivagnanam -A N D- The Hon'Ble Justice Chaitali Chatterjee (Das)

Section 260ASection 68

…3. Whether the learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal has committed substantial error in law in appreciating the principle which has been laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Pr. CIT [Central]-1, Kolkata vs. NRA Iron & Steel Private Ltd. [412 ITR 161] [2020] 117 taxmann.com 752 [SC] ? 4. Whether the learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal has committed substantial error in law in not following the judicial principles laid down in the matter of Pr. CIT 2, Kolkata [C]-2, Kolkata vs. M/s. BST Infratech Ltd. in ITAT/67/2024 dated 23.4.2024, which is an earlier decision of Hon’ble High Court h…

Manojbhai Arvindbhai Parekh, Rajkot vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle - 2(1), Rajkot

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee, is partly allowed in above terms

ITA 385/RJT/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot27 Feb 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 385 /Rjt/2023 ("नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: (2017-18) Manojbhai Arvindbhai Parekh The Acit Of I. T. Circle – 2(1), Shreeji Giriraj Trading, 19-Giriraj Vs. Rajkot – 360001 Chamber, Old Gadhiwas Soni Bazar, Rajkot – 360001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Acypp1471C (अपीलाथ"/Assessee) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Chetan Agarwal, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr.DR
Section 115BSection 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 68

…Hon'ble Kolkata High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Precision Finance (P) Ltd. 208 ITR 465(Cal), on the issue of genuineness of transactions. The ld CIT(A) also relied on the judgement of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of PCIT VS NRA Iron and Steel Pvt. Ltd. 412 ITR 161 (SC), wherein it was observed that all the transactions of Manojbhai Arvindbhai Parekh v. ACIT ITA No.385/Rjt/2023 AY. 2017-18 conversion of unaccounted money should be subjected to careful scrutiny. Hence the assessee was required to prove the source of cash deposited during demonetization period with proper evidence but the assessee has failed…

Income Tax Officer, Ward-9(1), Kolkata vs. Aakash Saree Trading Private Limited, Kolkata

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

ITA 1291/KOL/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata27 Feb 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy(Kz) & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 68

…No.-2:- Whether on the fact and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) did not consider the case relying on recently based the verdict of the Hon'ble Apex Court on 05.03.2019 in the case of Pr. CIT (Central-1), Delhi Vs. NRA Iron & Steel Pvt. Ltd. (412 ITR 161) also suggests that if the enquiries and investigations reveals that identity of the creditors to be dubious or doubtful or lack creditworthiness, then the genuineness of the transaction would not be established. In such a case the assessee would not have discharged the primary onus contemplated by section 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. In facts…

Vijeta Trading Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi

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

ITA 206/MUM/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Feb 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankarvs. Cit, (Appeals), Vijeta Trading Pvt. Ltd. Nfac, Office No.64,3Rd Floor Poddar Chambers, 23 Parsi Bazar Street, Fort Mumbai – 4000001. Pan/Gir No. Aabcv1137H (Applicant) (Respondent)

Section 143Section 143(3)Section 250Section 254Section 55A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “F” BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI PRABHASH SHANKAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Vs. CIT, (Appeals), Vijeta Trading Pvt. Ltd. NFAC, Office No.64,3rd Floor Poddar Chambers, 23 Parsi Bazar Street, Fort Mumbai – 4000001. PAN/GIR No. AABCV1137H (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee by None Revenue by Ms. Nidhi Agarwal, Sr. DR सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date of Hearing 13.01.2025 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date of Pronouncement 26.01.2025 आदेश / ORDER PER SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM: The present appeal has been filed by the assessee challenging the impugned order dated 20.12.2023, passed u/s…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle3-(4), Hyderabad vs. Aarthik Greentech Solutions Private Limited, Hyderabad

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 32/HYD/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad21 Feb 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri K.Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.32/Hyd/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2014-15) Asst.Commissioner Of Vs. Aarthik Greentech Income Tax Solutions Pvt.Ltd. Central Circle-3(4) Hyderabad Hyderabad [Pan : Aalca6887D] आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.33/Hyd/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2014-15) Asst.Commissioner Of Vs. Aarthik Infra Projects Income Tax Pvt.Ltd. Central Circle-3(4) Hyderabad Hyderabad [Pan : Aahca0719N] (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri P.Murali Mohan Rao,Ar रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By: Ms.M.Narmada, Cit-Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 19/12/2024 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of 21/02/2025 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.2014-15. Since, Facts Are Identical & Issues Are Common, For The Sake Of Aarthik Greentech Solutions Pvt. Ltd. & Aarthik Infra Projects Pvt.Ltd.

For Appellant: Shri P.Murali Mohan Rao,ARFor Respondent: Ms.M.Narmada, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 143(1)Section 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. 14. In view of this matter and considering the facts of the…

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

ITA 70/HYD/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad20 Feb 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri K.Narsimha Charyआ.अपी. सं/Ita No.66/Hyd/2021 To 69/Hyd/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ष/A.Y: 2011-12, 2013-14, 2015-16 & 2016-17) Asst.Commissioner Of Income Tax Central Circle-3(4) Hyderabad (Appellant) Vs. M/S Zainab Investments Pvt. Ltd. Secunderabad [Pan : Aaacz4043R] (Respondent) आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.70/Hyd/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ष/A.Y: 2018-19) Asst.Commissioner Of Income Tax Central Circle-3(4) Hyderabad (Appellant) Vs. M/S Zainab Investments Pvt. Ltd. Secunderabad [Pan : Aaacz4043R] (Respondent) आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.111/Hyd/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ष/A.Y: 2018-19) M/S Zainab Investments Pvt. Ltd. Secunderabad [Pan : Aaacz4043R] (Appellant) Vs. Asst.Commissioner Of Income Tax Central Circle-3(4) Hyderabad (Respondent) निर्धारिती द्वारा / Assessee By: Shri P.Murali Mohan Rao,Ar राजस्व द्वारा / Revenue By: Shri Srinath Sadanala, Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 26/11/2024 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of 20/02/2025 Pronouncement: 2

For Appellant: Shri P.Murali Mohan Rao,ARFor Respondent: Shri Srinath Sadanala, DR
Section 132Section 143(1)Section 153ASection 68

…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. 24. In view of this matter and considering the facts of the…

Assiatant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 3(4), Hyderabad vs. Zainab Investments Private Limited, Hyderabad

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue and the assessee for the A

ITA 69/HYD/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad20 Feb 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri K.Narsimha Charyआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.66/Hyd/2021 To 69/Hyd/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा/A.Y: 2011-12, 2013-14, 2015-16 & 2016-17) Asst.Commissioner Of Vs. M/S Zainab Income Tax Investments Pvt. Ltd. Central Circle-3(4) Secunderabad Hyderabad [Pan : Aaacz4043R] (Appellant) (Respondent) आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.70/Hyd/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा/A.Y: 2018-19) Asst.Commissioner Of Vs. M/S Zainab Income Tax Investments Pvt. Ltd. Central Circle-3(4) Secunderabad Hyderabad [Pan : Aaacz4043R] (Appellant) (Respondent) आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.111/Hyd/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा/A.Y: 2018-19) M/S Zainab Investments Vs. Asst.Commissioner Of Income Tax Pvt. Ltd. Central Circle-3(4) Secunderabad Hyderabad [Pan : Aaacz4043R] (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: 26/11/2024 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of 20/02/2025 Pronouncement:

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

…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. 24. In view of this matter and considering the facts of the…

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

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue and the assessee for the A

ITA 68/HYD/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad20 Feb 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri K.Narsimha Charyआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.66/Hyd/2021 To 69/Hyd/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा/A.Y: 2011-12, 2013-14, 2015-16 & 2016-17) Asst.Commissioner Of Vs. M/S Zainab Income Tax Investments Pvt. Ltd. Central Circle-3(4) Secunderabad Hyderabad [Pan : Aaacz4043R] (Appellant) (Respondent) आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.70/Hyd/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा/A.Y: 2018-19) Asst.Commissioner Of Vs. M/S Zainab Income Tax Investments Pvt. Ltd. Central Circle-3(4) Secunderabad Hyderabad [Pan : Aaacz4043R] (Appellant) (Respondent) आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.111/Hyd/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा/A.Y: 2018-19) M/S Zainab Investments Vs. Asst.Commissioner Of Income Tax Pvt. Ltd. Central Circle-3(4) Secunderabad Hyderabad [Pan : Aaacz4043R] (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: 26/11/2024 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of 20/02/2025 Pronouncement:

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

…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. 24. In view of this matter and considering the facts of the…

Assiatant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-3(4), Hyderabad vs. Zainab Investments Private Limited, Hyderabad

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue and the assessee for the A

ITA 67/HYD/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad20 Feb 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri K.Narsimha Charyआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.66/Hyd/2021 To 69/Hyd/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा/A.Y: 2011-12, 2013-14, 2015-16 & 2016-17) Asst.Commissioner Of Vs. M/S Zainab Income Tax Investments Pvt. Ltd. Central Circle-3(4) Secunderabad Hyderabad [Pan : Aaacz4043R] (Appellant) (Respondent) आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.70/Hyd/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा/A.Y: 2018-19) Asst.Commissioner Of Vs. M/S Zainab Income Tax Investments Pvt. Ltd. Central Circle-3(4) Secunderabad Hyderabad [Pan : Aaacz4043R] (Appellant) (Respondent) आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.111/Hyd/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा/A.Y: 2018-19) M/S Zainab Investments Vs. Asst.Commissioner Of Income Tax Pvt. Ltd. Central Circle-3(4) Secunderabad Hyderabad [Pan : Aaacz4043R] (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: 26/11/2024 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of 20/02/2025 Pronouncement:

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

…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. 24. In view of this matter and considering the facts of the…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-3(4), Hyderabad vs. Zainab Investments Private Limited, Secunderabad

ITA 66/HYD/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad20 Feb 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri K.Narsimha Charyआ.अपी. सं/Ita No.66/Hyd/2021 To 69/Hyd/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ष/A.Y: 2011-12, 2013-14, 2015-16 & 2016-17) Asst.Commissioner Of Income Tax Central Circle-3(4) Hyderabad Vs. M/S Zainab Investments Pvt. Ltd. Secunderabad [Pan : Aaacz4043R] (Appellant) (Respondent) आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.70/Hyd/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ष/A.Y: 2018-19) Asst.Commissioner Of Income Tax Central Circle-3(4) Hyderabad Vs. M/S Zainab Investments Pvt. Ltd. Secunderabad [Pan : Aaacz4043R] (Appellant) (Respondent) आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.111/Hyd/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ष/A.Y: 2018-19) M/S Zainab Investments Pvt. Ltd. Secunderabad [Pan : Aaacz4043R] Vs. Asst.Commissioner Of Income Tax Central Circle-3(4) Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धारिती द्वारा / Assessee By: Shri P.Murali Mohan Rao,Ar राजस्व द्वारा / Revenue By: Shri Srinath Sadanala, Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: |26/11/2024 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement: 20/02/2025

For Appellant: Shri P.Murali Mohan Rao,ARFor Respondent: Shri Srinath Sadanala, DR
Section 132Section 143(1)Section 153ASection 68

…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. 24 ITA No.66 - 69/Hyd/2021 and ITA No.70& 111/Hyd/2021 Zaina…

Zainab Investments Private Limited, Secunderabad vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle -3(4), Hyderabad

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue and the assessee for the A

ITA 111/HYD/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad20 Feb 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri K.Narsimha Charyआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.66/Hyd/2021 To 69/Hyd/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा/A.Y: 2011-12, 2013-14, 2015-16 & 2016-17) Asst.Commissioner Of Vs. M/S Zainab Income Tax Investments Pvt. Ltd. Central Circle-3(4) Secunderabad Hyderabad [Pan : Aaacz4043R] (Appellant) (Respondent) आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.70/Hyd/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा/A.Y: 2018-19) Asst.Commissioner Of Vs. M/S Zainab Income Tax Investments Pvt. Ltd. Central Circle-3(4) Secunderabad Hyderabad [Pan : Aaacz4043R] (Appellant) (Respondent) आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.111/Hyd/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा/A.Y: 2018-19) M/S Zainab Investments Vs. Asst.Commissioner Of Income Tax Pvt. Ltd. Central Circle-3(4) Secunderabad Hyderabad [Pan : Aaacz4043R] (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: 26/11/2024 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of 20/02/2025 Pronouncement:

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

…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. 24. In view of this matter and considering the facts of the…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 3(4), Hyderabad vs. Sv Multi Logitech Private Limited, Secunderabad

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 82/HYD/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad18 Feb 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri K.Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.81/Hyd/2021 & 82/Hyd/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2015-16 & 2016-17) Asst.Commissioner Of Vs. S.V.Multi Logitech Income Tax Private Ltd. Central Circle-3(4) Secunderabad Hyderabad [Pan :Aascs7131D] (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: 25/11/2024 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of 18/02/2025 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Manjunatha G., A.M: These Appeals Filed By The Revenue Are Directed Against Order Dated 04.09.2020 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) [“Ld.Cit(A)”]-11, Hyderabad Pertaining To A.Y.2015-16 & 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. S.V.Multi Logitech Private Ltd.

For Appellant: Shri P.Murali Mohan Rao,ARFor Respondent: Shri Srinath Sadanala, DR
Section 132Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 68

…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 S.V.Multi Logitech Private 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 assessee. 12. In view of this matter…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-3(4), Hyderabad vs. Sv Multi Logitech Private Limited, Secunderbad

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 81/HYD/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad18 Feb 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri K.Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.81/Hyd/2021 & 82/Hyd/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2015-16 & 2016-17) Asst.Commissioner Of Vs. S.V.Multi Logitech Income Tax Private Ltd. Central Circle-3(4) Secunderabad Hyderabad [Pan :Aascs7131D] (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: 25/11/2024 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of 18/02/2025 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Manjunatha G., A.M: These Appeals Filed By The Revenue Are Directed Against Order Dated 04.09.2020 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) [“Ld.Cit(A)”]-11, Hyderabad Pertaining To A.Y.2015-16 & 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. S.V.Multi Logitech Private Ltd.

For Appellant: Shri P.Murali Mohan Rao,ARFor Respondent: Shri Srinath Sadanala, DR
Section 132Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 68

…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 S.V.Multi Logitech Private 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 assessee. 12. In view of this matter…

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

In the result appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 65/HYD/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad18 Feb 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri K.Narsimha Charyआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.64/Hyd/2021 & 65/Hyd/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2011-12 & 2016-17) Asst.Commissioner Of Vs. M/S Zara Investments Income Tax Pvt.Ltd. Central Circle-3(4) Secunderabad Hyderabad [Pan : Aaacz4043R] (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: 26/11/2024 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of 18/02/2025 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Manjunatha G., A.M: These Appeals Filed By The Revenue Are Directed Against Order Dated 04.09.2020 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. Zara Investments Pvt. Ltd.

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

…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 Zara Investments Pvt. Ltd. Officer are considered to be not applicable to the case of the assessee. 26. In view of this matter and…