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 367,154 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 147Section 68Section 131Section 132(4)Section 37(1)Section 69A

Issues it is cited on

creditworthiness of the creditorbogus share capitalretraction of statementretracted statementsource of sourceshare capital and share premiumshare application moneypermanent account numberaddition u/s 68genuineness of the transactionaddition under section 68section 131

Judgments citing CIT v. Creative World Telefilms Ltd.

DCIT- 10 (3)(1), Mumbai vs. Opera Infra Projects Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 5606/MUM/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Jun 2021AY 2010-11
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 68

…Respectfully following, the Hon. Supreme Court judgement in the case of CIT V. Lovely exports Pvt. Ltd. reported in [2009] 319 ITR (St.) 5. (SC) and relied upon by The Hon. Jurisdictional High court in the case of CIT v. Creative World Telefilms Ltd. [2011] 333 ITR 100 (Bom.HC), Gagandeep Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. (2017) 80 taxmann.com 272 (Bom HC), PCIT Vs. Paradise Inland Shipping P. Ltd. (2017) 84 taxmann.com 58 (Bom HC) wherein Hon. Courts have consistently held that when the details about identity of loan creditor namely Prabhav Industries Ltd having CIN No. L45200GJ1995PLC28373 and ISIN No. INE 538J01012 w…

Asst CC 1 (3), Mumbai vs. M/S Neminath Associates, Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 8043/MUM/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Jun 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri M. Balaganesh, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Ms. Hema SharmaFor Respondent: Shri Tharian Oommen
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 271(1)(c)Section 68

…it cannot be termed as "bogus". The controversy is covered by the judgements rendered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Lovely Exports Pvt Ltd, vs. CIT, (2008) 216 CTR (SC) 195, as also by this Court in CIT vs. Creative World Tele films Ltd, (2011) 333 ITR 100 (Bom). In such circumstances, we are of the view that the Tribunal's finding that there is no justification in the addition made under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act,, 1961 neither suffers from any perversity nor gives rise to any substantial question of law." CIT vs. Creative World Tele films Ltd (2011) 333 ITR 100 (Born-High Court) "The quest…

Asst CIT CC 1 (3), Mumbai vs. M/S Neminath Associates, Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 8035/MUM/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Jun 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri M. Balaganesh, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Ms. Hema SharmaFor Respondent: Shri Tharian Oommen
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 271(1)(c)Section 68

…it cannot be termed as "bogus". The controversy is covered by the judgements rendered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Lovely Exports Pvt Ltd, vs. CIT, (2008) 216 CTR (SC) 195, as also by this Court in CIT vs. Creative World Tele films Ltd, (2011) 333 ITR 100 (Bom). In such circumstances, we are of the view that the Tribunal's finding that there is no justification in the addition made under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act,, 1961 neither suffers from any perversity nor gives rise to any substantial question of law." CIT vs. Creative World Tele films Ltd (2011) 333 ITR 100 (Born-High Court) "The quest…

Asst CIT CC 1 (3), Mumbai vs. M/S Neminath Associates, Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 8034/MUM/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Jun 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri M. Balaganesh, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Ms. Hema SharmaFor Respondent: Shri Tharian Oommen
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 271(1)(c)Section 68

…it cannot be termed as "bogus". The controversy is covered by the judgements rendered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Lovely Exports Pvt Ltd, vs. CIT, (2008) 216 CTR (SC) 195, as also by this Court in CIT vs. Creative World Tele films Ltd, (2011) 333 ITR 100 (Bom). In such circumstances, we are of the view that the Tribunal's finding that there is no justification in the addition made under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act,, 1961 neither suffers from any perversity nor gives rise to any substantial question of law." CIT vs. Creative World Tele films Ltd (2011) 333 ITR 100 (Born-High Court) "The quest…

Asst CIT CC 1 (3), Mumbai vs. M/S M/S Neminath Homes P Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 8028/MUM/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Jun 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri M. Balaganesh, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Prakash JunjunwalaFor Respondent: Shri Tharian Oommen
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 271(1)(c)Section 68

…it cannot be termed as "bogus". The controversy is covered by the judgements rendered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Lovely Exports Pvt Ltd, vs. CIT, (2008) 216 CTR (SC) 195, as also by this Court in CIT vs. Creative World Tele films Ltd, (2011) 333 ITR 100 (Bom). In such circumstances, we are of the view that the Tribunal's finding that there is no justification in the addition made under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act,, 1961 neither suffers from any perversity nor gives rise to any substantial question of law." CIT vs. Creative World Tele films Ltd (2011) 333 ITR 100 (Born-High Court) "The quest…

Asst CIT CC 1 (3), Mumbai vs. M/S Neminath Enterprises, Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 7989/MUM/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Jun 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri M. Balaganesh, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Ms. Hema SharmaFor Respondent: Shri Tharian Oommen
Section 147Section 68

…it cannot be termed as "bogus". The controversy is covered by the judgements rendered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Lovely Exports Pvt Ltd, vs. CIT, (2008) 216 CTR (SC) 195, as also by this Court in CIT vs. Creative World Tele films Ltd, (2011) 333 ITR 100 (Bom). In such circumstances, we are of the view that the Tribunal's finding that there is no justification in the addition made under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act,, 1961 neither suffers from any perversity nor gives rise to any substantial question of law." CIT vs. Creative World Tele films Ltd (2011) 333 ITR 100 (Born-High Court) "The quest…

Asst CIT CC 1 (3), Mumbai vs. M/S Neminath Enterprises, Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 7988/MUM/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Jun 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri M. Balaganesh, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Ms. Hema SharmaFor Respondent: Shri Tharian Oommen
Section 147Section 68

…it cannot be termed as "bogus". The controversy is covered by the judgements rendered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Lovely Exports Pvt Ltd, vs. CIT, (2008) 216 CTR (SC) 195, as also by this Court in CIT vs. Creative World Tele films Ltd, (2011) 333 ITR 100 (Bom). In such circumstances, we are of the view that the Tribunal's finding that there is no justification in the addition made under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act,, 1961 neither suffers from any perversity nor gives rise to any substantial question of law." CIT vs. Creative World Tele films Ltd (2011) 333 ITR 100 (Born-High Court) "The quest…

M/S Shri Shyam Sunder Infrastructure (P) Ltd., Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Assessee allowed

ITA 2106/DEL/2013[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 May 2021AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri N.K. Billaiya

For Appellant: Shri Vinod Kumar Bindal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Prakash Dubey, Sr. DR
Section 131Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES “G” : DELHI BEFORE SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI N.K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA.No.2106/Del./2013 Assessment Year 2003-2004 Shri Shyam Sunder Infrastructure (P) Ltd., [Formerly known as M/s. The Income Tax Officer, Shalom Exim (P) Ltd., and then as Mamram vs. Ward – 8 (3), Developers P. Ltd.,] G-18 & 19, Mamram Majesty New Delhi. Mall Plot, Road No.43, Guru Harkishan Marg, Pitampura, Delhi – 034 PAN AAHCS2266E (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Shri Vinod Kumar Bindal, CA For Revenue : Shri Prakash Dubey, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 12.…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-4(1), Central Range-4, Mumbai vs. Sahakar Global Limited, Mumbai

Appeal stand partly allowed

ITA 5341/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Mar 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am (Hearing Through Video Conferencing Mode) 1. आयकरअपील िं./ I.T.A. No 5125/Mum/2017 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2009-10) & 2. आयकरअपील िं./ I.T.A. No 5126/Mum/2017 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & 3. आयकरअपील िं./ I.T.A. No 5127/Mum/2017 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2011-12) & 4. आयकरअपील िं./ I.T.A. No 5128/Mum/2017 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Sahakar Global Ltd. Dcit-Cc-4(1) B-10, 1St Floor, Kanakia Space, Room No.1916,19Th Floor बिाम/ Western Edge Ii Air India Building Vs. W.E.Highway, Boriwali(East) Nariman Point Mumbai-400 066 Mumbai-400 021 स्थायीलेखा िं./ जीआइआर िं./ Pan/Gir No. Aaecs-3575-R (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : & 5. आयकरअपील िं./ I.T.A. No 5340/Mum/2017 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & 6. आयकरअपील िं./ I.T.A. No 5968/Mum/2017 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2011-12) & 7. आयकरअपील िं./ I.T.A. No 5341/Mum/2017 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Dcit-Cc-4(1) Sahakar Global Ltd. Room No.1916,19Th Floor B-10, 1St Floor, Kanakia बिाम/ Air India Building Space, Western Edge Ii Vs. Nariman Point W.E.Highway, Boriwali(East) Mumbai-400 021 Mumbai-400 066 स्थायीलेखा िं./ जीआइआर िं./ Pan/Gir No. Aaecs-3575-R

For Appellant: Shri Prakash Jhujhunwala-Ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri Hemant Kumar Leuva-Ld. CIT-DR
Section 68

…ount and the wisdom and freedom of the shareholder to subscribe at particular share premium. 4.8 Reliance was placed on the various decisions to assail impugned additions u/s 68. The Hon‟ble Bombay High Court in CIT V/s Creative World Telefilms Limited (2011 333 ITR 100) held that once 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 Assessing Officer did nothing except issuing summons which was ultimat…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-4(1), Central Range-4, Mumbai vs. Sahakar Global Limited, Mumbai

Appeal stand partly allowed

ITA 5340/MUM/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Mar 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am (Hearing Through Video Conferencing Mode) 1. आयकरअपील िं./ I.T.A. No 5125/Mum/2017 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2009-10) & 2. आयकरअपील िं./ I.T.A. No 5126/Mum/2017 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & 3. आयकरअपील िं./ I.T.A. No 5127/Mum/2017 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2011-12) & 4. आयकरअपील िं./ I.T.A. No 5128/Mum/2017 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Sahakar Global Ltd. Dcit-Cc-4(1) B-10, 1St Floor, Kanakia Space, Room No.1916,19Th Floor बिाम/ Western Edge Ii Air India Building Vs. W.E.Highway, Boriwali(East) Nariman Point Mumbai-400 066 Mumbai-400 021 स्थायीलेखा िं./ जीआइआर िं./ Pan/Gir No. Aaecs-3575-R (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : & 5. आयकरअपील िं./ I.T.A. No 5340/Mum/2017 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & 6. आयकरअपील िं./ I.T.A. No 5968/Mum/2017 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2011-12) & 7. आयकरअपील िं./ I.T.A. No 5341/Mum/2017 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Dcit-Cc-4(1) Sahakar Global Ltd. Room No.1916,19Th Floor B-10, 1St Floor, Kanakia बिाम/ Air India Building Space, Western Edge Ii Vs. Nariman Point W.E.Highway, Boriwali(East) Mumbai-400 021 Mumbai-400 066 स्थायीलेखा िं./ जीआइआर िं./ Pan/Gir No. Aaecs-3575-R

For Appellant: Shri Prakash Jhujhunwala-Ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri Hemant Kumar Leuva-Ld. CIT-DR
Section 68

…ount and the wisdom and freedom of the shareholder to subscribe at particular share premium. 4.8 Reliance was placed on the various decisions to assail impugned additions u/s 68. The Hon‟ble Bombay High Court in CIT V/s Creative World Telefilms Limited (2011 333 ITR 100) held that once 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 Assessing Officer did nothing except issuing summons which was ultimat…

Sahakar Global Limited, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-4(1), Mumbai

Appeal stand partly allowed

ITA 5128/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Mar 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am (Hearing Through Video Conferencing Mode) 1. आयकरअपील िं./ I.T.A. No 5125/Mum/2017 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2009-10) & 2. आयकरअपील िं./ I.T.A. No 5126/Mum/2017 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & 3. आयकरअपील िं./ I.T.A. No 5127/Mum/2017 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2011-12) & 4. आयकरअपील िं./ I.T.A. No 5128/Mum/2017 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Sahakar Global Ltd. Dcit-Cc-4(1) B-10, 1St Floor, Kanakia Space, Room No.1916,19Th Floor बिाम/ Western Edge Ii Air India Building Vs. W.E.Highway, Boriwali(East) Nariman Point Mumbai-400 066 Mumbai-400 021 स्थायीलेखा िं./ जीआइआर िं./ Pan/Gir No. Aaecs-3575-R (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : & 5. आयकरअपील िं./ I.T.A. No 5340/Mum/2017 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & 6. आयकरअपील िं./ I.T.A. No 5968/Mum/2017 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2011-12) & 7. आयकरअपील िं./ I.T.A. No 5341/Mum/2017 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Dcit-Cc-4(1) Sahakar Global Ltd. Room No.1916,19Th Floor B-10, 1St Floor, Kanakia बिाम/ Air India Building Space, Western Edge Ii Vs. Nariman Point W.E.Highway, Boriwali(East) Mumbai-400 021 Mumbai-400 066 स्थायीलेखा िं./ जीआइआर िं./ Pan/Gir No. Aaecs-3575-R

For Appellant: Shri Prakash Jhujhunwala-Ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri Hemant Kumar Leuva-Ld. CIT-DR
Section 68

…ount and the wisdom and freedom of the shareholder to subscribe at particular share premium. 4.8 Reliance was placed on the various decisions to assail impugned additions u/s 68. The Hon‟ble Bombay High Court in CIT V/s Creative World Telefilms Limited (2011 333 ITR 100) held that once 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 Assessing Officer did nothing except issuing summons which was ultimat…

Sahakar Global Limited, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-4(1), Mumbai

Appeal stand partly allowed

ITA 5127/MUM/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Mar 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am (Hearing Through Video Conferencing Mode) 1. आयकरअपील िं./ I.T.A. No 5125/Mum/2017 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2009-10) & 2. आयकरअपील िं./ I.T.A. No 5126/Mum/2017 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & 3. आयकरअपील िं./ I.T.A. No 5127/Mum/2017 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2011-12) & 4. आयकरअपील िं./ I.T.A. No 5128/Mum/2017 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Sahakar Global Ltd. Dcit-Cc-4(1) B-10, 1St Floor, Kanakia Space, Room No.1916,19Th Floor बिाम/ Western Edge Ii Air India Building Vs. W.E.Highway, Boriwali(East) Nariman Point Mumbai-400 066 Mumbai-400 021 स्थायीलेखा िं./ जीआइआर िं./ Pan/Gir No. Aaecs-3575-R (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : & 5. आयकरअपील िं./ I.T.A. No 5340/Mum/2017 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & 6. आयकरअपील िं./ I.T.A. No 5968/Mum/2017 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2011-12) & 7. आयकरअपील िं./ I.T.A. No 5341/Mum/2017 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Dcit-Cc-4(1) Sahakar Global Ltd. Room No.1916,19Th Floor B-10, 1St Floor, Kanakia बिाम/ Air India Building Space, Western Edge Ii Vs. Nariman Point W.E.Highway, Boriwali(East) Mumbai-400 021 Mumbai-400 066 स्थायीलेखा िं./ जीआइआर िं./ Pan/Gir No. Aaecs-3575-R

For Appellant: Shri Prakash Jhujhunwala-Ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri Hemant Kumar Leuva-Ld. CIT-DR
Section 68

…ount and the wisdom and freedom of the shareholder to subscribe at particular share premium. 4.8 Reliance was placed on the various decisions to assail impugned additions u/s 68. The Hon‟ble Bombay High Court in CIT V/s Creative World Telefilms Limited (2011 333 ITR 100) held that once 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 Assessing Officer did nothing except issuing summons which was ultimat…

Sahakar Global Limited, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-4(1), Mumbai

Appeal stand partly allowed

ITA 5126/MUM/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Mar 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am (Hearing Through Video Conferencing Mode) 1. आयकरअपील िं./ I.T.A. No 5125/Mum/2017 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2009-10) & 2. आयकरअपील िं./ I.T.A. No 5126/Mum/2017 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & 3. आयकरअपील िं./ I.T.A. No 5127/Mum/2017 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2011-12) & 4. आयकरअपील िं./ I.T.A. No 5128/Mum/2017 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Sahakar Global Ltd. Dcit-Cc-4(1) B-10, 1St Floor, Kanakia Space, Room No.1916,19Th Floor बिाम/ Western Edge Ii Air India Building Vs. W.E.Highway, Boriwali(East) Nariman Point Mumbai-400 066 Mumbai-400 021 स्थायीलेखा िं./ जीआइआर िं./ Pan/Gir No. Aaecs-3575-R (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : & 5. आयकरअपील िं./ I.T.A. No 5340/Mum/2017 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & 6. आयकरअपील िं./ I.T.A. No 5968/Mum/2017 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2011-12) & 7. आयकरअपील िं./ I.T.A. No 5341/Mum/2017 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Dcit-Cc-4(1) Sahakar Global Ltd. Room No.1916,19Th Floor B-10, 1St Floor, Kanakia बिाम/ Air India Building Space, Western Edge Ii Vs. Nariman Point W.E.Highway, Boriwali(East) Mumbai-400 021 Mumbai-400 066 स्थायीलेखा िं./ जीआइआर िं./ Pan/Gir No. Aaecs-3575-R

For Appellant: Shri Prakash Jhujhunwala-Ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri Hemant Kumar Leuva-Ld. CIT-DR
Section 68

…ount and the wisdom and freedom of the shareholder to subscribe at particular share premium. 4.8 Reliance was placed on the various decisions to assail impugned additions u/s 68. The Hon‟ble Bombay High Court in CIT V/s Creative World Telefilms Limited (2011 333 ITR 100) held that once 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 Assessing Officer did nothing except issuing summons which was ultimat…

Sahakar Global Limited, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-4(1), Mumbai

Appeal stand partly allowed

ITA 5125/MUM/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Mar 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am (Hearing Through Video Conferencing Mode) 1. आयकरअपील िं./ I.T.A. No 5125/Mum/2017 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2009-10) & 2. आयकरअपील िं./ I.T.A. No 5126/Mum/2017 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & 3. आयकरअपील िं./ I.T.A. No 5127/Mum/2017 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2011-12) & 4. आयकरअपील िं./ I.T.A. No 5128/Mum/2017 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Sahakar Global Ltd. Dcit-Cc-4(1) B-10, 1St Floor, Kanakia Space, Room No.1916,19Th Floor बिाम/ Western Edge Ii Air India Building Vs. W.E.Highway, Boriwali(East) Nariman Point Mumbai-400 066 Mumbai-400 021 स्थायीलेखा िं./ जीआइआर िं./ Pan/Gir No. Aaecs-3575-R (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : & 5. आयकरअपील िं./ I.T.A. No 5340/Mum/2017 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & 6. आयकरअपील िं./ I.T.A. No 5968/Mum/2017 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2011-12) & 7. आयकरअपील िं./ I.T.A. No 5341/Mum/2017 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Dcit-Cc-4(1) Sahakar Global Ltd. Room No.1916,19Th Floor B-10, 1St Floor, Kanakia बिाम/ Air India Building Space, Western Edge Ii Vs. Nariman Point W.E.Highway, Boriwali(East) Mumbai-400 021 Mumbai-400 066 स्थायीलेखा िं./ जीआइआर िं./ Pan/Gir No. Aaecs-3575-R

For Appellant: Shri Prakash Jhujhunwala-Ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri Hemant Kumar Leuva-Ld. CIT-DR
Section 68

…ount and the wisdom and freedom of the shareholder to subscribe at particular share premium. 4.8 Reliance was placed on the various decisions to assail impugned additions u/s 68. The Hon‟ble Bombay High Court in CIT V/s Creative World Telefilms Limited (2011 333 ITR 100) held that once 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 Assessing Officer did nothing except issuing summons which was ultimat…

ITO, Ward- 7(3), New Delhi vs. Direct Mercantile Company Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

The appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 5221/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Mar 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamble(Through Video Conferencing)

Section 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 250(4)Section 68

…50(4) of the Income Tax Act. The Ld. AR relied upon the following decisions: 4 " Delhi High Court CIT Vs. Rakam Money Matters Pvt. Ltd. in ITA No. 778 of 2015 dated 13/10/2015 " Bombay High Court in the case of CIT(A) Vs. Creative World Telefilms Ltd. [2011]333 ITR 100 " Delhi Tribunal in the case of ITO Vs. Softline Creations P. Ltd. in ITA No. 744/Del/2012 dated 10/02/2016 " Delhi ITAT in the case of Prayag Polytech Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Addl. CIT, ITA No. 6015/Del/2017, order dated 18.06.2019 " Delhi ITAT in the case of Ito Vs. Computer Home Information Plus Pvt. Ltd. ITA No. 680/del/2016, order dated 24/05/2019.…

DCIT CC 8(1), Mumbai vs. M/S Jainam Investments, Mumbai

In the result, appeals filed by the revenue are hereby dismissed

ITA 4474/MUM/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Feb 2021AY 2016-17
For Appellant: Shri Suchek Anchaliya (AR)For Respondent: Shri Rahul Raman (DR)
Section 143(1)Section 148Section 68

…can be arrived at, no question of law as such arose. The High Court was right in refusing to state a case.” ITA. Nos.4286 & 4474/Mum/2019 A.Ys. 2011-12 & 2016-17 11.2 The decision of Hon. Bombay High Court in the case of CIT v. Creative World Telefilm Ltd. - 333 ITR 100 (Bombay High Court) 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 shareholders, their PAN/GIR numbers and had also given the cheque numbers, name of the bankers. The assessing officer ought to have found out the deta…

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)

…pted the repayment without probing in to the same, hence, this case also deserves the same treatment. 3.2.14 Following are some more important decisions in this regard: The Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. Creative World Telefilms Ltd (2011) 333 ITR 100 (Bom) has held that when the assessee had given the details of name and address of the shareholder, their PAN/GIR Number and had also given cheque number, name of bank, and the AO did nothing except issuing summons which were ultimately returned back with an endorsement "Not Traceable", Tribunal was justified in deleting the addition of cash cred…

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)

…pted the repayment without probing in to the same, hence, this case also deserves the same treatment. 3.2.14 Following are some more important decisions in this regard: The Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. Creative World Telefilms Ltd (2011) 333 ITR 100 (Bom) has held that when the assessee had given the details of name and address of the shareholder, their PAN/GIR Number and had also given cheque number, name of bank, and the AO did nothing except issuing summons which were ultimately returned back with an endorsement "Not Traceable", Tribunal was justified in deleting the addition of cash cred…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Brindavan Agencies Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 5272/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Dec 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri Anil Chaturvedi[Assessment Year: 2012-13]

For Appellant: Sh. Raj Kr. Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Prakash Dube, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 68

…ITA NO. 5272/DEL/2016 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI ‘A’ BENCH, NEW DELHI [THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCE] BEFORE SHRI H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ANIL CHATURVEDI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER [Assessment Year: 2012-13] ACIT, Circle-5(1), vs. M/s Brindavan Agencies Pvt. Ltd. New Delhi AB-16, Community Centre, Room No. 390, CR Building, Safdarjung Enclave, New Delhi New Delhi (PAN AAACB3167C) [Appellant] [Respondent] Revenue by : Sh. Prakash Dube, Sr. DR. Assessee by : Sh. Raj Kr. Gupta, CA ORDER PER H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER, This appeal by the Revenue is preferred against the order of the Ld. CIT…

Shakti Share Shoppee Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. ITO, WD-13(2)(3), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 4100/MUM/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Dec 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Shri Vishnu Agarwal, A.RFor Respondent: Shri T.S. Khalsa, D.R
Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 56(2)(vii)Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH “G”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos.4100 & 4101/M/2017 Assessment Years: 2008-09 & 2009-10 M/s. Shakti Share The Income-Tax Officer, Shoppee Pvt. Ltd., Ward-13(2)(3), B-302, Rangoli Vasant Aayakar Bhavan, Utsav, Vs. Mumbai - 400020 Thakur Village, Kandivali (East), Mumbai – 400 101 PAN: AAACS 9220 K (Appellant) (Respondent) Present for: Assessee by : Shri Vishnu Agarwal, A.R. Revenue by : Shri T.S. Khalsa, D.R. Date of Hearing : 15.12.2020 Date of Pronouncement : 23.12.2020 O R D E R Per Raj…