CIT v. Ajinath Hi-tech Builders P Ltd.

412 ITR 316High Court2019#12772 most cited
8

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2019 to 2025.

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 143(3A)Section 143(3B)Section 250Section 269SSSection 269TSection 271DSection 271E

Issues it is cited on

penalty under section 271econvertible foreign exchangesection 269tsection 271esection 269ssection 249(3)section 273royalty incomesection 269sssection 273bsection 271dsection 269

Judgments citing CIT v. Ajinath Hi-tech Builders P Ltd.

Yuksom Breweries Ltd., Sikim vs. Addl./Joint CIT, Range - 2, Siliguri

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

ITA 1921/KOL/2024[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 Jul 2025AY 2018-2019

Bench: Sri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Sri Rakesh Mishra

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 269TSection 271ESection 273BSection 274

…avening the provisions of section 269T.” 5. Reliance has also been placed on the decision of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income-tax (Central)-IV vs. Ajitnath Hi-Tech Builders (P.) Ltd. [2018] 92 taxmann.com 228 (Bombay)/[2019] 412 ITR 316 (Bombay)[06-02- 2018] wherein the Hon'ble court has held as under: “■ On merits of the issue, both parties agreed that the Tribunal was correct in holding that receipt of any advance/loan by way of journal entries is in breach of section 269SS as the decision of the High Court in CIT v. Triumph International Finance (I) Ltd. [2012] 22 taxmann.com…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax.CC-7(3)., Mumbai vs. M/S Macrotech Developers Ltd(Successsor to Palava Dwellers Pvt Ltd), Mumbai

ITA 1348/MUM/2022[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Sept 2022AY 2016-2017
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 269SSection 271DSection 273B

…26. The appeal is disposed of in the above terms with no order as to costs. 8.1. We find that the ld. CIT(A) further placed reliance on yet another decision of Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs Ajinath Hi-tech Builders P Ltd reported in 412 ITR 316 (Bom) and few tribunal decisions rendered in the Lodha group of cases as detailed supra. We find that the ld. CIT(A) had categorically stated in para 6.8.6 of his order that the nature of transactions carried out by the assessee through journal entries in the instant case are not in the form of loan or advance which has been received or repaid an…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, CC-7(3), Mumbai vs. M/S Macrotech Developers Ltd (Successor to Shreenivas Cotton Mills Ltd), Mumbai

ITA 1347/MUM/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Sept 2022AY 2014-15
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 269SSection 271DSection 273B

…26. The appeal is disposed of in the above terms with no order as to costs. 8.1. We find that the ld. CIT(A) further placed reliance on yet another decision of Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs Ajinath Hi-tech Builders P Ltd reported in 412 ITR 316 (Bom) and few tribunal decisions rendered in the Lodha group of cases as detailed supra. We find that the ld. CIT(A) had categorically stated in para 6.8.6 of his order that the nature of transactions carried out by the assessee through journal entries in the instant case are not in the form of loan or advance which has been received or repaid an…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax CC-7(3), Mumbai vs. M/S Macrotech Developers Ltd.(Successor to M/S Lodha Developer Pvt Ltd), Mumbai

ITA 1291/MUM/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Sept 2022AY 2015-16
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 269SSection 271DSection 273B

…26. The appeal is disposed of in the above terms with no order as to costs. 8.1. We find that the ld. CIT(A) further placed reliance on yet another decision of Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs Ajinath Hi-tech Builders P Ltd reported in 412 ITR 316 (Bom) and few tribunal decisions rendered in the Lodha group of cases as detailed supra. We find that the ld. CIT(A) had categorically stated in para 6.8.6 of his order that the nature of transactions carried out by the assessee through journal entries in the instant case are not in the form of loan or advance which has been received or repaid an…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax CC-7(3), Mumbai vs. M/S Macrotech Developers Ltd(Earlier Known As M/S Lodha Developers Pvt Ltd), Mumbai

ITA 1290/MUM/2022[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Sept 2022AY 2015-2016
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 269SSection 271DSection 273B

…26. The appeal is disposed of in the above terms with no order as to costs. 8.1. We find that the ld. CIT(A) further placed reliance on yet another decision of Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs Ajinath Hi-tech Builders P Ltd reported in 412 ITR 316 (Bom) and few tribunal decisions rendered in the Lodha group of cases as detailed supra. We find that the ld. CIT(A) had categorically stated in para 6.8.6 of his order that the nature of transactions carried out by the assessee through journal entries in the instant case are not in the form of loan or advance which has been received or repaid an…

Bapujibuwa Nagari Sah Pat Sanstha Ltd., Pune vs. Joint Commissioner of Income-Tax, Pune

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 946/PUN/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune17 Feb 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed, Am & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.946/Pun/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13 .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant Bapujibuwa Nagari Sahakari Pat Sanstha Maryadit, S.No.10/2, Dagadu Patil Nagar, Thergaon, Pune – 411033. Pan : Aaaab8597J. बनाम / V/S. The Joint Commissioner Of Income Tax, ……""यथ" / Respondent Range – 9, Pune.

For Appellant: Smt. Deepa KhareFor Respondent: Shri Vitthal Bhosale
Section 269SSection 271DSection 80P

…13 on the ground that it was under a bonafide belief that it was engaged in banking business and provisions of section 269SS and 269T were not applicable to it. 7. The Hon'ble Bombay High Court has in the case of CIT v. Ajitnath Hi-tech Builders P Ltd. (2019) 412 ITR 316 (Bombay) held that prior to its order dated 12.06.2012 in the case of Triumph International Finance (I) Ltd. (2012) 22 taxman.com 138 (Bombay) holding that loan I deposit repaid by merely debiting account through journal entry contravened the provisions of section 269T, there were decisions of various benches of tribunal and a delhi high court de…

M/S. Vijay Steel Corporation Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. ACIT, Range-13(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeals are allowed

ITA 187/MUM/2019[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Nov 2020AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri N.K. Pradhan

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Sushil Kumar Mishra
Section 269SSection 271DSection 271ESection 274

…gh book/journal entries would attract provisions of section 269SS and 269T of the Act. However, the aforesaid legal proposition has been further clarified by the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in CIT v/s Ajitnath High–Tech Builders Pvt. Ltd. & Ors., [2019] 412 ITR 316 (Bom.), wherein, it has been held that, since, prior to the decision of the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in Triumph International Finance India Ltd. (supra), which was rendered on 12th June 2012, there was reasonable cause for the assessee to receive and re–pay loan through journal entries because of various decisions of the Tribunal holding…

Surendra Enginering Corporation, Mumbai vs. JCIT 17(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal stands allowed

ITA 2386/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Dec 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Shri Saktijit Dey

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay R. ParikhFor Respondent: Shri V. Vinod Kumar
Section 143(3)Section 2(23)Section 269SSection 271D

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “G” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PRAMOD KUMAR, VICE PRESIDENT, AND SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA no.2386/Mum./2017 (Assessment Year : 2012–13) Surendra Engineering Corporation 1, Jaitirath Mansion 6A, Barrack Road ……………. Appellant Mumbai 400 020 PAN – AAAFS2803B v/s Jt. Commissioner of Income Tax ……………. Respondent Circle–17(3), Mumbai Assessee by : Shri Sanjay R. Parikh Revenue by : Shri V. Vinod Kumar Date of Hearing – 12.09.2019 Date of Order – 05.12.2019 O R D E R PER SAKTIJIT DEY, J.M. The captioned appeal has been filed by the assessee challenging the order d…

CIT v. Ajinath Hi-tech Builders P Ltd. (412 ITR 316) — Cited in 8 Judgments | BharatTax