How many judgments cite CIT v. Creative World Telefilms Ltd.?

235 judgments on BharatTax cite CIT v. Creative World Telefilms Ltd. (333 ITR 100), spanning 2015 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does CIT v. Creative World Telefilms Ltd. come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 133(6), Section 143(3), Section 147, Section 68, Section 131, Section 132(4).

CIT v. Creative World Telefilms Ltd.

333 ITR 100High Court2011#376 most cited

What is CIT v. Creative World Telefilms Ltd. authority for?

If an assessee provides the identity, address, PAN, and banking details of shareholders for share capital or application money received through banking channels, the Assessing Officer must conduct a thorough investigation beyond merely issuing unserved summons before making an addition under Section 68.

235

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Creative World Telefilms Ltd. · Section 68 · share capital addition · share application money · Assessing Officer investigation · onus on AO · genuineness of transaction · creditworthiness of shareholders · PAN details · unserved summons · 333 ITR 100

Also reported as

15 Taxmann.com 183

Sections most often in play

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 147 Section 68 Section 131 Section 132(4)Section 37(1)Section 69A

Issues it is cited on

creditworthiness of the creditor bogus share capital retraction of statement retracted statement source of source share capital and share premium share application money permanent account number addition u/s 68 genuineness of the transaction addition under section 68 section 131

Judgments citing CIT v. Creative World Telefilms Ltd.

Mundhra Construction P Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-10(2), Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 807/KOL/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata13 Aug 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Manish Borad, Accountant Member Shri Sonjoy Sarma (Judicial Member)

Section 124(3)(a)Section 131Section 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 68

…the Tribunal below and answer the questions formulated by the Division Bench in the affirmative and against the Revenue. The appeal is, thus, dismissed." iii) Decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT v. Creative World Telefilms P. Ltd. (2011) 333 ITR 100 (Bom) wherein it was held as under: “In the case in hand, it was not disputed that the assessee had given the details of name and address of the shareholder, their PAN/GIR number and had also given the cheque number, name of the bank. It was expected on the part of the Assessing Officer to make proper investigation and reach the shareholders. Th…

Multiventure Estates Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 10(2)(4), Mumbai

ITA 510/MUM/2024[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jul 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri Girish Agrawal

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 68

…atement that the investing company has sufficient funds available with it to make investment in the assessee. 14. It is relevant to quote the decision of Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court of Bombay in the case of CIT v. Creative World Telefilms P. Ltd. (2011) 333 ITR 100 (Bom) wherein it was held as under: “In the case in hand, it was not disputed that the assessee had given the details of name and address of the shareholder, their PAN/GIR number and had also given the cheque number, name of the bank. It was expected on the part of the Assessing Officer to make proper investigation and reach the shareholders. The…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Airindia Building, Nariman Point, Mumbai vs. Fateh Granite Limited, Andheri, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3484/MUM/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Jul 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

For Appellant: Shri Prakash JhunjhunwalaFor Respondent: Ms. Rajeshwari Menon, Sr.DR

Section 131Section 143(3)Section 68

…isclosed funds introduced by the appellant in garb of share capital/premium. The Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court of Bombay in the case of CIT v. Orchid Industries Pvt Ltd reported in 397 ITR 136 and in case of CIT v. Creative World Telefilms Ltd reported in 333 ITR 100 and in case of CIT vs. Nikunj Eximp Pvt Ltd reported in 35 Taxmann.com 384had decided that that mere non service and non-compliance of notice u/s 131 would not disprove the transactions, particularly when the transactions are entered through banking channel. The AO had accepted the fact that the money had been received by the appellant through ba…

Wellman Logistice Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ACIT(OSD), Ward-4(1), Kolkata.

ITA 694/KOL/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata02 May 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Sonjoy Sarma

Section 143(2)Section 250Section 6Section 68

…instead of adopting such course, the Assessing officer himself could not enter into the return of the creditor and brand the same as unworthy of credence.” ii) Decision of Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of CIT v. Creative World Telefilms P. Ltd. (2011) 333 ITR 100 (Mad) wherein it was held as under: “In the case in hand, it was not disputed that the assessee had given the details of name and address of the shareholder, their PAN/GIR number and had also given the cheque number, name of the bank. It was expected on the part of the Assessing Officer to make proper investigation and reach the shareholders. The…

Sharda Ferro Works(P)Ltd, Howrah vs. DCIT, Asansol

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 954/KOL/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata14 Mar 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Surana, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri P. P. Barman, Addl. CIT

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 68

…Ferro Works Pvt. Ltd., AY 2012-13 questions formulated by the Division Bench in the affirmative and against the Revenue. The appeal is, thus, dismissed." iii) Decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT v. Creative World Telefilms P. Ltd. (2011) 333 ITR 100 (Bom) wherein it was held as under: “In the case in hand, it was not disputed that the assessee had given the details of name and address of the shareholder, their PAN/GIR number and had also given the cheque number, name of the bank. It was expected on the part of the Assessing Officer to make proper investigation and reach the shareholders. Th…

ITO 28 (1)(1), Mumbai vs. Gahlot Construction, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the revenue & CO of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 2475/MUM/2021[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Feb 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Br Baskaran, Am & Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T. A. No. 2475/Mum/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2008-09) Ito-28(1)(1) बिधम/ M/S. Gahlot Construction Room No. 329, Tower No. Plot No-28A, Gahlot Vs. 6, 3Rd Floor, Vashi Railway Complex, Sector-10, Station, Navi Mumbai- Nerul, Navi Mumbai- 400703. 400703. Cross Objection No. 82/Mum/2023 Arising Out Of I.T.A. No.2475/Mum/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2008-09) M/S. Gahlot Construction बिधम/ Ito-28(1)(1) Plot No-28A, Gahlot Room No. 329, Tower Vs. No. 6, 3Rd Floor, Vashi Complex, Sector-10, Nerul, Navi Mumbai-400703. Railway Station, Navi Mumbai-400703. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaofm5698J (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Ms. Ritika Agarwal Revenue By: Shri Raj Singh Meel (Sr. Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 30/01/2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 23/02/2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: This Is An Appeal Preferred By The Revenue; & The Assessee Has Filed A Cross Objection (Co) Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)/Nfac, Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Cit(A)”] Dated 30.10.2021 For The Ay. 2008-09. 2. The Main Grievance Of The Revenue Is Against The Action Of The Ld. Cit(A) Deleting The Addition Of Rs.5 Cr Which Was Added By The

For Appellant: Ms. Ritika AgarwalFor Respondent: Shri Raj Singh Meel (Sr. AR)

Section 132Section 139Section 147Section 151Section 153CSection 68

…on such loans were not includible in the total income of the assessee u/s 68 of the Act. ITA. No.2475/M/21 CO. No.82/M/2023 A.Y No. 2008-09 Gehlot Construction 18. The decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Creative World Telefilm Ltd (333 ITR 100) being relevant is reproduced here-under: - “Held, dismissing the appeal of revenue that there was no dispute that the assessee had given the details of names and addresses of the share-holders, their PAN/GIR number and had also given the cheque numbers, name of the bankers. The assessing officer ought to have found out the details through PAN c…

D.C.I.T., CC-1(3), Kolkata vs. M/S. Navin Construction & Credit Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed and cross- objection of the assessee is allowed

ITA 580/KOL/2022[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Jan 2024AY 2015-2016

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg, Hon’Ble & Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri Akkal Dudhewala, A/RFor Respondent: Shri Abhijit Kundu, CIT, D/R

Section 133(6)Section 14ASection 250Section 35Section 35(1)Section 68

…is free to proceed to reopen their individual assessments in accordance with law but it cannot be regarded as undisclosed income of assessee company". 7.8 On similar facts, Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT Vs Creative World Telefilms Ltd (2011) (333 ITR 100.) (Bombay) has relied on the Apex Court decision in case of CIT Vs Lovely Exports (supra) and held as under:- "In the case in hand, it is not disputed that the assessee had given the details of name and address of the shareholder, their PAN/GIR number and had also given the cheque number, name of the bank. It was expected on the part of the Asses…

ITO, WD. -4(1), Kolkata vs. Rajshree Integrated Cold Chain Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 40/KOL/2021[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata01 Jan 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri P. P. Barman, Addl. CIT, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Shri Miraj D. Shah, Advocate

Section 131Section 143(3)Section 68

M/S Saket Developers Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-2(4), Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed as per terms indicated above

ITA 683/KOL/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 Oct 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg, Hon’Ble & Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri S. Jhajharia, A/RFor Respondent: Shri Abhijit Kundu, CIT, D/R

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 234BSection 250Section 68

…(Bom.)  Pr. CIT vs. Chain House International Pvt. Ltd. (2018) 408 ITR 561 (MP)  CIT vs. Kamdhenu Steel and Alloys Ltd. (2014) 361 ITR 220 (Del.)  CIT vs. Orissa Corporation Pvt. Ltd. (1986) 159 ITR 78 (SC)  CIT vs. Creative World Telefilms P. Ltd. (2011) 333 ITR 100 (Mad.)  Pranav foundations Ltd. (2015) 229 Taxman 58 (Mad.) 8. The ld. D/R, on the other hand, stated that the assessee did not avail the opportunity given by the Assessing Officer and no such details were filed to explain the nature and source of the alleged sum. Further he submitted that even before the ld. CIT(A), though the details were fil…

ITO, WD.-4(1), Kolkata vs. M/S Moonview Conclave Pvt Ltd, Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 34/KOL/2021[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Aug 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Manoj Kataruka, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Subhendu Datta, CIT, DR

Section 131Section 143(3)Section 68

…rmulated by the Division Bench in the affirmative and against the Revenue. The appeal is, thus, dismissed." 15 Moonview Conclave Pvt. Ltd., AYs: 2012-13 iii) Decision of Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of CIT v. Creative World Telefilms P. Ltd. (2011) 333 ITR 100 (Mad) wherein it was held as under: “In the case in hand, it was not disputed that the assessee had given the details of name and address of the shareholder, their PAN/GIR number and had also given the cheque number, name of the bank. It was expected on the part of the Assessing Officer to make proper investigation and reach the shareholders. Th…

ITO, WD-9(1), Kolkata vs. M/S Trinetra Vincom Pvt Ltd, Kolkata

In the result, both the appeal of the revenue and Cross

ITA 37/KOL/2021[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Aug 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri Miraj D. Shah, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Abhijit Kundu, CIT, DR

Section 131Section 147Section 68

…y the Division Bench in the affirmative and against the Revenue. The appeal is, thus, dismissed." CO No.5/Kol/2023 Trinetra Vincom Pvt. Ltd, AYs: 2009-10 iii) Decision of Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of CIT v. Creative World Telefilms P. Ltd. (2011) 333 ITR 100 (Mad) wherein it was held as under: “In the case in hand, it was not disputed that the assessee had given the details of name and address of the shareholder, their PAN/GIR number and had also given the cheque number, name of the bank. It was expected on the part of the Assessing Officer to make proper investigation and reach the shareholders. Th…

Forever Flourishing Fin. & Inv. Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT (CC)-3(4), Mumbai

In the result, appeal for the assessment year 2012

ITA 6120/MUM/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jul 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal ()

For Appellant: Mr. Ashok Bansal/Ajay DagaFor Respondent: Mr. Ankush Kapoor, CIT-DR

Section 143(2)Section 147

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “F” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) AND MS. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL (JUDICIAL MEMBER) ITA Nos. 6040 & 6120/MUM/2019 Assessment Years: 2012-13 & 2013-14 Forever Flourishing Fin. & DCIT(CC)-3(4), Inv. Pvt. Ltd., Central Circle-3(4), Room No. Vs. A-401, Pearl Arcade, Off J P 1915, 19th floor, Air India Road, Dawood Baug Lane, Building, Nariman Point, Andheri (W), Mumbai-400021. Mumbai-400058. PAN NO. AAACF 4311 Q Appellant Respondent Assessee by : Mr. Ashok Bansal/Ajay Daga Revenue by : Mr. Ankush Kapoor, CIT-DR : Date of Hearing 13/07/2023 Date o…

Forever Flourishing Fin & Inv. Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT-CC-3(4), Mumbai

In the result, appeal for the assessment year 2012

ITA 6040/MUM/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jul 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal ()

For Appellant: Mr. Ashok Bansal/Ajay DagaFor Respondent: Mr. Ankush Kapoor, CIT-DR

Section 143(2)Section 147

Bhandari Gold and Jewellers Private Limited, Mumbai vs. CIT (Appeal), NFAC - Delhi

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

ITA 1619/MUM/2022[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Jul 2023AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Hon'Bledcit – 6(1)(2) V. M/S. Bandari Gold & Jewellers Pvt. Ltd., 407, Bussaudyog Bhavan Room No. 538B, 5Th Floor Tokersi, Jivraj Road, Sewree Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Mumbai - 400015 Mumbai - 400020 Pan: Aadcb1291J (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 68

…bank accounts as unexplained investments of those creditors under s. 69. 2. Bombay High Court The question sought to be has held that in CIT raised in the appeal was also v. creative world raised before the Tribunal tele films ltd (2011) and the Tribunal was 333 ITR 100 pleased to allow the judgment of the apex Court in the case of CIT vs. Lovely Exports(P) Ltd. (2008) 216 CTR (SC) 195. Wherein the apex Court observed that if the share application money is received by the assessee- company from alleged bogusshareholders, whose names are given to the AO, then the Department can always proceed against them and if…

Cy. CIT 6(1) (2), Mumbai vs. M/S. Bhandari Gold & Jewellers Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai

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

ITA 1564/MUM/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Jul 2023AY 2017-18

Section 143(3)Section 68

ITO, Ward-6(1), Kolkata vs. M/S Outcome Buildcon Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

ITA 652/KOL/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 Jul 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Ble & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri Manoj Kataruka, A/RFor Respondent: Shri G. Hukugha Sema, CIT, D/R

Section 143(2)Section 250Section 68

…instead of adopting such course, the Assessing officer himself could not enter into the return of the creditor and brand the same as unworthy of credence." ii) Decision of Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case of CIT v. Creative World Telefilms P. Ltd. (2011) 333 ITR 100 (Mad) wherein it was held as under: I.T.A. No. 652/Kol/2020 Assessment Years: 2012-13 M/s. Outcome Buildcom Pvt. Ltd. 10 "In the case in hand, it was not disputed that the assessee had given the details of name and address of the shareholder, their PAN/GIR number and had also given the cheque number, name of the bank. It was expected on the part…

M/S. Moontree Niketan Pvt.Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward4(1)., Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 186/KOL/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Jun 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2012-13 Moontree Niketan Pvt. Ltd. Income Tax Officer-4(1), 5, Clive Row, Dalhousie, Vs. Kolkata. Kolkata-700001. (Pan: Aahcm8056A) (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Manoj Kataruka, ARFor Respondent: Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. CIT, DR

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

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B SMC” BENCH KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2012-13 Moontree Niketan Pvt. Ltd. Income Tax Officer-4(1), 5, Clive Row, Dalhousie, Vs. Kolkata. Kolkata-700001. (PAN: AAHCM8056A) (Appellant) (Respondent) Present for: Appellant by : Shri Manoj Kataruka, AR Respondent by : Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. CIT, DR Date of Hearing : 20.04.2023 Date of Pronouncement : 21.06.2023 O R D E R PER GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: This captioned appeal filed by the assessee is against the order of Ld. CIT(A), National…

Hastings Tower Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward - 8(4), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 730/KOL/2022[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Apr 2023AY 2011-2012

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2011-12 Hastings Tower Private Limited Ito, Ward-8(4), Kolkata P-3, New C.I.T. Road, Kolkata- Vs. 700073. Pan: Aabch 5595 D (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Appellant By : Shri Miraj D. Shah, Ar Respondent By : Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. Cit, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 27.03.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 21.04.2023 O R D E R Per Girish Agrawal: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Arising Out Of The Order Of Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi Vide Order No. Itba/Nfac/S/250/2022-23/1046315143(1) Dated 14.10.2022 Against The Assessment Order Passed U/S 143(3) Read With Sections 147 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’).

For Appellant: Shri Miraj D. Shah, ARFor Respondent: Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR

Section 132(4)Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, KOLKATA BENCH “SMC”, KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI SONJOY SARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2011-12 Hastings Tower Private Limited ITO, Ward-8(4), Kolkata P-3, New C.I.T. Road, Kolkata- Vs. 700073. PAN: AABCH 5595 D (Appellant) (Respondent) Present for: Appellant by : Shri Miraj D. Shah, AR Respondent by : Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 27.03.2023 Date of Pronouncement : 21.04.2023 O R D E R PER GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: This appeal by the assessee is arising out of the order of CIT(A), National Faceless…

Aroto Trade India Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward-9(1), Kolkata

ITA 1637/KOL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata11 Apr 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Sonjoy Sarma

Section 131Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 234Section 250Section 68

DCIT Cir 1(4), Mumbai vs. Anandilal & Ganesh Podar Society, Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 1792/MUM/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Mar 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

Section 147

…713/Mum/2020 (A.Y.2011-12) ITA NOs. 1791, 1790, 1792 & 1889/MUM/2021& Other appeals Anandilal and Ganesh Podar Society & other group concerns (ix). CIT Vs. Divine Leasing & Finance Ltd. (2008) 299 ITR 268 (Del) (x). CIT Vs. Creative World Telefilm Ltd. (2011) 333 ITR 100 (Bom) (xi). CIT Vs. Value Capital Services Ltd. (2008) 307 ITR 334 (Del) (xii). DCIT Vs. Rohini Builders (2002) 256 ITR 360 (Guj) (xiii). CIT Vs. Apex Therm Packaging Pvt. Ltd. (2014) 222 Taxman 125 (Guj) (xiv). Orient Trading Co. Ltd. Vs. CIT (1963) 49 ITR 723 (Bom) (xv). CIT Vs. Ranchhod Jivabhai Nakhava (2012) 208 Taxman 35 (Guj) (xvi). PCIT V…