CIT v. Ankitech (P) Ltd.

340 ITR 14High Court2012#459 most cited

What is CIT v. Ankitech (P) Ltd. authority for?

Deemed dividend under section 2(22)(e) cannot be taxed in the hands of a non-shareholder. The Supreme Court confirmed this view, affirming the Delhi High Court's decision in Ankitech.

202

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,842 Indian tax judgments — from 2012 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Ankitech · section 2(22)(e) · deemed dividend · non-shareholder · beneficial owner · registered shareholder · accumulated profits · closely held company

Also reported as

11 Taxmann.com 100199 Taxmann 3412011 SCC OnLine DEL 2213

Sections most often in play

Section 2(22)(e)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 142(2A)Section 14ASection 40(a)(ia)Section 40A(2)(b)
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 40(3)closely held companyshort deduction of tdssection 2(22)accumulated profitsdeemed dividendsection 2(22)(e)interest on interestshort deduction of taxbeneficial ownerrelated party transactionsection 194j

Judgments citing CIT v. Ankitech (P) Ltd.

The ITO, Ward-3(1)(2), Ahmedabad vs. Petal Motocon Pvt.Ltd., Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 483/AHD/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad02 Mar 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 483/Ahd/2015 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2011-2012 I.T.O, Petal Motocon Pvt. Ltd., Ward-3(1)(2), Vs. 131, M H Mill Compound, Ahmedabad. Planet House, Khokhra Circle, Maninagar East, Ahmedabad-380008. Pan: Aafcp0078F

For Appellant: Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr. Advocate with Shri P.B. Parmar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri L.P. Jain, Sr.D.R
Section 2(22)Section 2(22)(e)

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, अहमदाबाद "यायपीठ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘’ C’’ BENCH, AHMEDABAD (CONDUCTED THROUGH VIRTUAL COURT AT AHMEDABAD) BEFORE SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER And Ms MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No. 483/AHD/2015 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2011-2012 I.T.O, Petal Motocon Pvt. Ltd., Ward-3(1)(2), Vs. 131, M H Mill Compound, Ahmedabad. Planet House, Khokhra Circle, Maninagar East, Ahmedabad-380008. PAN: AAFCP0078F (Applicant) (Respondent) Revenue by : Shri L.P. Jain, Sr.D.R Assessee by : Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr. Advocate with Shri P.B. Parmar, A.R सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date…

M/S Multiventure Financial Services Pvt Ltd., Mumbai vs. ITO 3 (2)(2), Mumbai

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

ITA 4882/MUM/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Feb 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Shri Vishnu Aggarwal, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Bharat Andhala, D.R
Section 143(3)Section 2Section 2(47)

…g a direct shareholder of the company which gave the loan , the loan was not assessable as deemed dividend in the hands of the assessee. The Supreme Court dismissed the appeals of the revenue. It upheld the Delhi High Court decision in CIT Vs Ankitech Pvt Ltd 340 ITR 14 in toto saying that they agree completely. 3.2.9. …………………………………….. …………………………………………… 3.2.10. Now, it is found that this instant case of the appellant falls within the four corners of the judgement reproduced above. Respectfully following the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court and Ld Delhi High Court, I direct the Assessing officer to delete the a…

ITO - 3(2)(2), Mumbai vs. M/S Multiventure Financial Services Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai

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

ITA 3715/MUM/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Feb 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Shri Vishnu Aggarwal, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Bharat Andhala, D.R
Section 143(3)Section 2Section 2(47)

…g a direct shareholder of the company which gave the loan , the loan was not assessable as deemed dividend in the hands of the assessee. The Supreme Court dismissed the appeals of the revenue. It upheld the Delhi High Court decision in CIT Vs Ankitech Pvt Ltd 340 ITR 14 in toto saying that they agree completely. 3.2.9. …………………………………….. …………………………………………… 3.2.10. Now, it is found that this instant case of the appellant falls within the four corners of the judgement reproduced above. Respectfully following the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court and Ld Delhi High Court, I direct the Assessing officer to delete the a…

The ITO, Ward-1(1)(4), Ahmedabad vs. M/S. Dhwani Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., Ahmedabad

In the result, both the appeal filed by revenue and cross objection filed by assessee are dismissed

ITA 2232/AHD/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad09 Feb 2021AY 2008-09
For Appellant: Smt. Nupur Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Rajdeep Singh, Sr. D.R
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 2(22)(e)

…care Private Limited (2010) 324 ITR 263 (Bom.) The Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT v/s Daisy Packers (P) Ltd decided the issue in favour of the assesses, relying on the decision of the Division Bench of the High Court in CIT v. Ankitech (P.) Ltd. (2012) 340 ITR 14 (Del) wherein it was held that if the assessee-company does not hold a share in other company from which it had received deposit then it cannot be treated to be a deemed dividend under Section 2(22)(e) of the Act. From the reading of the provisions of section 2(22)(e), it is seen that the provision is intended to tax the dividend in the hands of a…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Ritesh Properties & Industries Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and the appeal of the assessee is allowed in part

ITA 3920/DEL/2011[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Jan 2021AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri K. Narasimha Charyassessment Year: 2008-09 Dcit Vs. Ritesh Properties & Industries Ltd. Circle – 15(1), 11/5B, First Floor, Pussa Road, C.R. Bldg., I.P. Estate, New Delhi. New Delhi. Pan Aaacr1437M (Applicant) (Respondent) & Cross Objection No. 329/Del/2011 (In Ita No. 3920/Del/2011) Assessment Year: 2008-09

For Appellant: Sh. Kanv Bali, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Sh. Rohit Jain, Adv
Section 115JSection 139(5)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 2

…reholder. He submitted that the said decision of the Special Bench has been affirmed by the Hon’ble High Court of Bombay in the case of CIT v. Universal Medicare: 324 ITR 263 (Bom). He also placed reliance on the additions reported inCIT vs. Ankitech (P) Ltd: 340 ITR 14 (Del), which was further upheld by the apex Court in the case of CIT vs. Madhur Housing and Development Company 401 ITR 152 (SC), and IT vs. MotherIndia Refrigeration Industries (P) Ltd. 155 ITR 711. He also placed reliance on the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of ITO vs. MotherIndia Refrigeration Industries (P) Ltd.: 155 ITR 711 a…

M/S. Precimetal Cast Pvt. Ltd., Kadi vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(1)(4), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 3499/AHD/2015[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad10 Dec 2020AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Shri P.B. Parmar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Kamlesh Makwana, Sr. D.R
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 2(22)(e)

…n the hands of the assessee company merely because there was a common shareholder in the payee company. The ld. counsel has placed reliance on in the following decisions:- > ACIT vs. Bhaumik Colors P. Ltd. - 118 1TD 1 (Mum)(SB); > CIT vs. Ankitech (P.) Ltd. - 340 ITR 14 (Del); > CIT vs. Mahavir Inducto Pvt Ltd. - Tax Appeal 891 of 2016 (High Court of Gujarat) > ACIT vs. Leela Ship Recylcing Pvt Ltd. - ITA 1658/Ahd/2012 On the other hand, the ld. Departmental Representative has supported the order of the lower authorities. 7. Heard both the sides and perused the material on record. The Assessing Officer noticed t…

Bhotika Trade & Services Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle - 9(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2034/KOL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Aug 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Sh. Amit Shukladr. B. R. R. Kumar(E-Court Module) Ita No. 2034/Kol./2017 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 Bhotika Trade & Services Pvt. Ltd., V Dy. Commissioner Of Income Epms, Vasant Square Mall, Plot-A, S Tax, Circle-9(1), Sector-B, Pocket-V, Community Kolkata-700069 Centre, Sf-11, 2Nd Floor, Vasant Kunj, New Delhi-110070 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaccb5790K Assessee By : Sh. Ved Jain, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. Jagdish Singh, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 03.08.2020 Date Of Pronouncement: 26.08.2020

For Appellant: Sh. Ved Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Jagdish Singh, Sr. DR
Section 2(22)(e)

…tions conducted between 07.12.2011 to 22.02.2012 disregarding the fact that there has been a closing debit balance of Rs.54.30 lakhs as on 30.03.2012. 8. Hence, keeping in view the judgments of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs Ankitech Pvt. Ltd. 340 ITR 14, judgments of Hon’ble Mumbai High Court in the case of Bhaumik Colour Pvt. Ltd. 313 ITR 146 and keeping in view the fact that the transactions are in the nature of regular business transactions which are not liable to be taxed u/s 2(22)(e) as held in the case of CIT Vs Suraj Devi Dada 367 ITR 78 (P&H), we hereby hold that no addition in the hands…

ACIT, Circle- 21(1), New Delhi vs. Religare Finvest Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, for assessment year 2007-08 the appeal of the assessee as well as Revenue are dismissed

ITA 2364/DEL/2018[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Aug 2020AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri O.P. Kant & Shri Kuldip Singh, Judicialmember

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14A

…issions. It has been established that the appellant is not a share holder in M/s. Religare Securities Ltd., from whom it had obtained a loan. In this connection, I place reliance upon order of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Ankitech (P) Ltd., 340 ITR 14 Delhi (paras 33 and 34 of this order, related specifically to this proposition). This order of Hon’ble Delhi High Court has been approved by the Hon’ble Supreme Court vide order dated 05.10.2017. Thus, as the appellant is not a share holder of M/s. Religare Securities Ltd., provisions of section 2(22)(e) are not applicable. Accordingly, grounds 8…

Religare Finvest Ltd, New Delhi vs. Addl.Ciy, Range-21, New Delhi

In the result, for assessment year 2007-08 the appeal of the assessee as well as Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1947/DEL/2018[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Aug 2020AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri O.P. Kant & Shri Kuldip Singh, Judicialmember

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14A

…issions. It has been established that the appellant is not a share holder in M/s. Religare Securities Ltd., from whom it had obtained a loan. In this connection, I place reliance upon order of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Ankitech (P) Ltd., 340 ITR 14 Delhi (paras 33 and 34 of this order, related specifically to this proposition). This order of Hon’ble Delhi High Court has been approved by the Hon’ble Supreme Court vide order dated 05.10.2017. Thus, as the appellant is not a share holder of M/s. Religare Securities Ltd., provisions of section 2(22)(e) are not applicable. Accordingly, grounds 8…

M/S Religare Finvest Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, for assessment year 2007-08 the appeal of the assessee as well as Revenue are dismissed

ITA 6474/DEL/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Aug 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri O.P. Kant & Shri Kuldip Singh, Judicialmember

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14A

…issions. It has been established that the appellant is not a share holder in M/s. Religare Securities Ltd., from whom it had obtained a loan. In this connection, I place reliance upon order of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Ankitech (P) Ltd., 340 ITR 14 Delhi (paras 33 and 34 of this order, related specifically to this proposition). This order of Hon’ble Delhi High Court has been approved by the Hon’ble Supreme Court vide order dated 05.10.2017. Thus, as the appellant is not a share holder of M/s. Religare Securities Ltd., provisions of section 2(22)(e) are not applicable. Accordingly, grounds 8…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Religare Finvest Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, for assessment year 2007-08 the appeal of the assessee as well as Revenue are dismissed

ITA 5872/DEL/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Aug 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri O.P. Kant & Shri Kuldip Singh, Judicialmember

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14A

…issions. It has been established that the appellant is not a share holder in M/s. Religare Securities Ltd., from whom it had obtained a loan. In this connection, I place reliance upon order of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Ankitech (P) Ltd., 340 ITR 14 Delhi (paras 33 and 34 of this order, related specifically to this proposition). This order of Hon’ble Delhi High Court has been approved by the Hon’ble Supreme Court vide order dated 05.10.2017. Thus, as the appellant is not a share holder of M/s. Religare Securities Ltd., provisions of section 2(22)(e) are not applicable. Accordingly, grounds 8…

ACIT Corporate Circle-6(2), Chennai vs. Shri T Padmakumar, Chennai

In the result, the Revenue’s above appeals are dismissed

ITA 2805/CHNY/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai02 Jun 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं/.I.T.A. No. 2685/Chny/2019 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year : 2012-13 Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Shri. Velayuthamsundaramoorthy, Corporate Circle 6(2), Vs. L 604, Metrozone, No. 44, Chennai. Pillaiyarkoil Street, Anna Nagar, Chennai – 600 040. [Pan: Bcfps 5842G] ()*यथ,/Respondent) (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) आयकर अपील सं/.I.T.A. No. 2805/Chny/2019 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year : 2012-13 Shri. T. Padmakumar, Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Vs. R 203, Metrozone, No. 44, Corporate Circle 6(2), Pillayarkoil Street, Chennai. Anna Nagar, Chennai – 600 040. [Pan: Aizpp 5293M] : Shri. A. Sundararajan, Addl. Cit अपीलाथ,क-ओरसे/ Appellant By Shri. M. Karunakaran, Advocate )*यथ,क-ओरसे/Respondent By :

Section 2(22)(e)

…अपील"यअ"धकरण ,’बी’ "यायपीठ,चे"नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, CHENNAI "ी धु"वु"आर.एलरे"डी, "या यकसद#यएवं"ी एस जयरामन, लेखा सद#यके सम( BEFORE SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. JAYARAMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं/.I.T.A. No. 2685/Chny/2019 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year : 2012-13 Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Shri. VelayuthamSundaramoorthy, Corporate Circle 6(2), Vs. L 604, Metrozone, No. 44, Chennai. PillaiyarKoil Street, Anna Nagar, Chennai – 600 040. [PAN: BCFPS 5842G] ()*यथ,/Respondent) (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) आयकर अपील सं/.I.T.A. No. 2805/Chny/2019 "नधा"रण वष"/Assess…

ACIT, Corporate Circle-6(2), Chennai vs. Shri Velayutham Sundaramoorthy, Chennai

In the result, the Revenue’s above appeals are dismissed

ITA 2685/CHNY/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai02 Jun 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं/.I.T.A. No. 2685/Chny/2019 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year : 2012-13 Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Shri. Velayuthamsundaramoorthy, Corporate Circle 6(2), Vs. L 604, Metrozone, No. 44, Chennai. Pillaiyarkoil Street, Anna Nagar, Chennai – 600 040. [Pan: Bcfps 5842G] ()*यथ,/Respondent) (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) आयकर अपील सं/.I.T.A. No. 2805/Chny/2019 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year : 2012-13 Shri. T. Padmakumar, Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Vs. R 203, Metrozone, No. 44, Corporate Circle 6(2), Pillayarkoil Street, Chennai. Anna Nagar, Chennai – 600 040. [Pan: Aizpp 5293M] : Shri. A. Sundararajan, Addl. Cit अपीलाथ,क-ओरसे/ Appellant By Shri. M. Karunakaran, Advocate )*यथ,क-ओरसे/Respondent By :

Section 2(22)(e)

…अपील"यअ"धकरण ,’बी’ "यायपीठ,चे"नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, CHENNAI "ी धु"वु"आर.एलरे"डी, "या यकसद#यएवं"ी एस जयरामन, लेखा सद#यके सम( BEFORE SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. JAYARAMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं/.I.T.A. No. 2685/Chny/2019 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year : 2012-13 Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Shri. VelayuthamSundaramoorthy, Corporate Circle 6(2), Vs. L 604, Metrozone, No. 44, Chennai. PillaiyarKoil Street, Anna Nagar, Chennai – 600 040. [PAN: BCFPS 5842G] ()*यथ,/Respondent) (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) आयकर अपील सं/.I.T.A. No. 2805/Chny/2019 "नधा"रण वष"/Assess…

Sh. Kabul Chawla, New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5396/DEL/2014[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Jan 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Prashant Maharishii.T.A. No. 5396/Del/2014 (A.Y – 2011-12) Kabul Chawla, Vs Acit, 7-A, Amrita Shegill Marg, Central Circle – 23, New Delhi-110 011. New Delhi (Pan : Aafpc 6879 C) (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri Ajay Bhagwani, C.A. Respondent By Shri G. Johnson, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing 08.01.2020 Date Of Pronouncement 14.01.2020 Order

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 2(22)(e)

…1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: ‘D’ NEW DELHI BEFORE MS SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No. 5396/DEL/2014 (A.Y – 2011-12) Kabul Chawla, Vs ACIT, 7-A, Amrita Shegill Marg, Central Circle – 23, New Delhi-110 011. New Delhi (PAN : AAFPC 6879 C) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) Appellant by Shri Ajay Bhagwani, C.A. Respondent by Shri G. Johnson, Sr. D.R. Date of Hearing 08.01.2020 Date of Pronouncement 14.01.2020 ORDER PER SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JM This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax [Appeals]-XXXIII…

M/S International Fresh Farm Products (India) Limited, Chandigarh vs. DCIT, C-1(1), Chandigarh

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 386/CHANDI/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh11 Dec 2019AY 2014-15
For Appellant: Shri Parikshit Aggarwal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Sudarshan, Sr. DR
Section 10(34)Section 115Section 143(1)Section 2(22)(e)

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण,च"डीगढ़ "यायपीठ “ए” , च"डीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH BENCH “A”, CHANDIGARH "ी एन.के.सैनी, उपा"य" एवं "ी संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य BEFORE: SHRI. N.K.SAINI, VP & SHRI , SANJAY GARG, JM आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No.386/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2014-15 M/s International Fresh Farm The DCIT बनाम Products (India) Limited Circle-1(1) C/o Parikshit Aggarwal, CA Chandigarh H.No. 1238, Sector 22-B Chandigarh "थायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: AAACI5038D अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee by : Shri Parikshit Aggarwal, CA राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue by : Shri Arv…

DCIT, Cir-12(1), Kolkata vs. M/S Bengal Ambuja Housing Development Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, the both appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1514/KOL/2015[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Oct 2019AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri A.L.Saini, Am]

Section 80ISection 80i

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH: KOLKATA [Before Shri A. T. Varkey, JM & Shri A.L.Saini, AM] I.TA No. 1514/Kol/2015 Assessment Year: 2010-11 And I.TA No. 1515/Kol/2015 Assessment Year: 2011-12 DCIT, Cir-12(1), Kolkata Vs. M/s. Bengal Ambuja Housing Development Ltd. PAN: AABCB0977F Appellant Respondent Date of Hearing 01.08.2019 Date of Pronouncement 18. 10 .2019 For the Appellant Dr. (Shri ) P.K. Srihari, CIT, ld.DR For the Respondent Shri D.S.Damle, FCA & Shri Akkal Dudhwewala, FCA, ld.ARs ORDER PER SHRI A.T. VARKEY, JM These appeals are preferred by the Revenue against the separate o…

Srinivasa Machine Works, Chennai vs. ITO, Chennai

In the result, the assessee’s appeal for the assessment year

ITA 844/CHNY/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Oct 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.Nos.1969 & 3434/Chny/2016 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2011-12 & 2012-13) Vs The Income Tax Officer, M/S. Srinivasa Machine Works, No.1A, Regency Apartments, No.5, Non-Corporate Ward 3(3), 1St Lane, Nungambakkam High Chennai. Road, Chennai – 600 034. Pan: Aaqfs2166M (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) & आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.844/Chny/2017 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) Vs The Income Tax Officer, M/S. Srinivasa Machine Works, No.1A, Regency Apartments, No.5, Non-Corporate Ward 3(4), 1St Lane, Nungambakkam High Chennai. Road, Chennai – 600 034. Pan: Aaqfs2166M (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri T. Banusekar, Ca ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Clement Ramesh Kumar, Jcit

For Appellant: Shri T. Banusekar, CAFor Respondent: Shri Clement Ramesh Kumar, JCIT
Section 2(22)(e)Section 80G

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘सी’ "ायपीठ, चे"ई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , ‘C’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी धु"ु" आर.एल रे"ी, "ाियक सद" एवं "ी एस जयरामन, लेखा सद" के सम" BEFORE SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. JAYARAMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.Nos.1969 & 3434/CHNY/2016 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2011-12 & 2012-13) Vs The Income Tax Officer, M/s. Srinivasa Machine Works, No.1A, Regency Apartments, No.5, Non-Corporate Ward 3(3), 1st Lane, Nungambakkam High Chennai. Road, Chennai – 600 034. PAN: AAQFS2166M (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) & आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.844/CHNY/2017 (…

Srinivasa Machine Works, Chennai vs. ITO, Chennai

In the result, the assessee’s appeal for the assessment year

ITA 3434/CHNY/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Oct 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.Nos.1969 & 3434/Chny/2016 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2011-12 & 2012-13) Vs The Income Tax Officer, M/S. Srinivasa Machine Works, No.1A, Regency Apartments, No.5, Non-Corporate Ward 3(3), 1St Lane, Nungambakkam High Chennai. Road, Chennai – 600 034. Pan: Aaqfs2166M (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) & आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.844/Chny/2017 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) Vs The Income Tax Officer, M/S. Srinivasa Machine Works, No.1A, Regency Apartments, No.5, Non-Corporate Ward 3(4), 1St Lane, Nungambakkam High Chennai. Road, Chennai – 600 034. Pan: Aaqfs2166M (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri T. Banusekar, Ca ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Clement Ramesh Kumar, Jcit

For Appellant: Shri T. Banusekar, CAFor Respondent: Shri Clement Ramesh Kumar, JCIT
Section 2(22)(e)Section 80G

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘सी’ "ायपीठ, चे"ई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , ‘C’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी धु"ु" आर.एल रे"ी, "ाियक सद" एवं "ी एस जयरामन, लेखा सद" के सम" BEFORE SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. JAYARAMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.Nos.1969 & 3434/CHNY/2016 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2011-12 & 2012-13) Vs The Income Tax Officer, M/s. Srinivasa Machine Works, No.1A, Regency Apartments, No.5, Non-Corporate Ward 3(3), 1st Lane, Nungambakkam High Chennai. Road, Chennai – 600 034. PAN: AAQFS2166M (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) & आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.844/CHNY/2017 (…

Srinivasa Machine Works, Chennai vs. DCIT, Chennai

In the result, the assessee’s appeal for the assessment year

ITA 1969/CHNY/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Oct 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.Nos.1969 & 3434/Chny/2016 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2011-12 & 2012-13) Vs The Income Tax Officer, M/S. Srinivasa Machine Works, No.1A, Regency Apartments, No.5, Non-Corporate Ward 3(3), 1St Lane, Nungambakkam High Chennai. Road, Chennai – 600 034. Pan: Aaqfs2166M (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) & आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.844/Chny/2017 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) Vs The Income Tax Officer, M/S. Srinivasa Machine Works, No.1A, Regency Apartments, No.5, Non-Corporate Ward 3(4), 1St Lane, Nungambakkam High Chennai. Road, Chennai – 600 034. Pan: Aaqfs2166M (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri T. Banusekar, Ca ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Clement Ramesh Kumar, Jcit

For Appellant: Shri T. Banusekar, CAFor Respondent: Shri Clement Ramesh Kumar, JCIT
Section 2(22)(e)Section 80G

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘सी’ "ायपीठ, चे"ई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , ‘C’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी धु"ु" आर.एल रे"ी, "ाियक सद" एवं "ी एस जयरामन, लेखा सद" के सम" BEFORE SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. JAYARAMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.Nos.1969 & 3434/CHNY/2016 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2011-12 & 2012-13) Vs The Income Tax Officer, M/s. Srinivasa Machine Works, No.1A, Regency Apartments, No.5, Non-Corporate Ward 3(3), 1st Lane, Nungambakkam High Chennai. Road, Chennai – 600 034. PAN: AAQFS2166M (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) & आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.844/CHNY/2017 (…

Hancraft Expo Designs P.Ltd, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle-11(1), New Delhi

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1333/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Jun 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri G. D. Agrawal & Ms Suchitra Kamble

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 2(22)(e)Section 234B

…l before the CIT(A) and the CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee. 5. The Ld. AR submitted that assessee’s case is covered by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court decision in case of CIT vs. Ankitech Pvt. Ltd. which was now confirmed by the Hon’ble Apex Court (340 ITR 14). The Ld. AR further submitted that the CIT(A) though considered the Hon’ble Delhi High Court’s decision has taken into account the Apex Court decision in case of Gopal & Sons (HUF) vs. CIT (2017) 77 Taxman.com 71 (S.C.) and National Travel Services vs. CIT (2018) 89 taxmann.com 332 (SC) but has distinguishing factors. The Ld. AR submitted that th…