CIT & Another v. Arunananda Textiles Pvt. Ltd.

33 ITR 116Reported decision#20625 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2018 to 2018.

Judgments citing CIT & Another v. Arunananda Textiles Pvt. Ltd.

BMM ISPAT LIMITED,HOSPET vs. DCIT, BANGALORE

In the result, Revenue’s appeal for Assessment Year 2011-12 is dismissed

ITA 779/BANG/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore10 Apr 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri Jason P Boaz

For Appellant: Shri K.R. Pradeep, C.AFor Respondent: Shri K.V.Arvind, Standing Counsel for Dept

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153DSection 234BSection 234DSection 68

…he Department is free to proceed to re-open their individual assessments in accordance with law. Hence, we find no infirmity with the impugned judgment.” 33.5.3 The Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT & Another Vs. Arunananda Textiles Pvt. Ltd., (33 ITR 116) held as under at paras 5 and 6 of its order:- “5. The short question that arises for our consideration in this appeal is "If the company has received share amount from the intending shareholders, is it required for the respondent- assessee to identify and establish the creditworthiness of the depositors." The question raised in this appeal is sq…

DINESH KUMAR SINGHI,BANGALORE vs. DCIT, BANGALORE

In the result, the assessee's appeal for Assessment Year 2011-12 is partly allowed

ITA 699/BANG/2015[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore10 Apr 2018AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri Jason P Boaz

For Appellant: Shri K.R. Pradeep, C.AFor Respondent: Shri K.V. Arvind, Standing Counsel for Dept

Section 10BSection 132Section 143(3)Section 148Section 153ASection 154

…shareholders in whose hands such an investment if it is unexplained can be considered. In this regard, the assessee places reliance on the following case laws: 1) CIT v. Lovely Exports (P) Ltd (216 CTR (SC) 195) 2) CIT & Anr v. Arunananda Textiles (P) Ltd. (333 ITR 116) 3) CIT & Anr v. Mulberry Silk International Ltd (68 DTR 149) 4) Pr.CIT vs Laxman Industrial Resources Ltd - ITA 169/2017 - Delhi HC 5) CIT vs Gagandeep Infrastructure Pvt Ltd - ITA 1613/2014 - Bom HC. 6) CIT vs Orchid Industries Pvt Ltd - ITA 1433/2014 - Bom HC. 7) ITO vs Nishit Fincap (P) Ltd - 46 CCH 365 - Delhi ITAT. In the above context, the…

ASST.C.I.T., BANGALORE vs. M/S BMM CEMENTS LIMITED, BANGALORE

In the result, the assessee’s C

ITA 1109/BANG/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore10 Apr 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri Jason P Boazthe Asst. Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Central Circle-1(2), Bengaluru. . Appellant Vs. M/S Bmm Cements Ltd., Bengaluru. . Respondent Co No.206/Bang/2015 Appellant By : Shri K.V Aarvind, Standing Counsel Respondent By : Shri K.R Pradeep, Advocate Date Of Hearing : 01-2-2018 Date Of Pronouncement : 10-4-2018 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri K.V Aarvind, Standing CounselFor Respondent: Shri K.R Pradeep, Advocate

Section 132Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

…the Department is free to proceed to re-open their individual assessments in accordance with law. Hence, we find no infirmity with the impugned judgment.” 4.3.3 The Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT & Another Vs. Arunananda Textiles Pvt. Ltd., (33 ITR 116) held as under at paras 5 and 6 of its order:- “5. The short question that arises for our consideration in this appeal is "If the company has received share amount from the intending shareholders, is it required for the respondent- assessee to identify and establish the creditworthiness of the depositors." ITA No.1109/B/15 CO No.206/B/15 17 The…

RANJITPURA INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD.,,BANGALORE vs. DCIT, BANGALORE

In the result, the assessee's appeals for Assessment Years 2010-11

ITA 1104/BANG/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore10 Apr 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri Jason P Boaz

For Appellant: Shri k.R. Pradeep, C.AFor Respondent: Shri K.V.Arvind, Standing Counsel for Dept

Section 132Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

…the Department is free to proceed to re-open their individual assessments in accordance with law. Hence, we find no infirmity with the impugned judgment.” 3.4.3 The Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT & Another Vs. Arunananda Textiles Pvt. Ltd., (33 ITR 116) held as under at paras 5 and 6 of its order:- “5. The short question that arises for our consideration in this appeal is "If the company has received share amount from the intending shareholders, is it required for the respondent- assessee to identify and establish the creditworthiness of the depositors. The question raised in this appeal is squ…