CIT v. Divine Leasing & Finance Ltd.

299 ITR 268High Court2008#164 most cited

What is CIT v. Divine Leasing & Finance Ltd. authority for?

An assessee introducing share capital or share premium must establish the identity, genuineness of the transaction, and creditworthiness of the immediate investor or creditor; the burden does not extend to proving the 'source of source' or the financial capacity of the investor's sub-creditors.

426

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2008 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Divine Leasing & Finance Ltd. · Section 68 Income Tax Act · cash credit addition · creditworthiness of creditor · source of source · share application money · genuineness of transaction · burden of proof assessee · sub-creditors funds · 299 ITR 268

Also reported as

158 Taxmann 440207 CTR 38

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 68Section 133(6)Section 147Section 69ASection 1961Section 131Section 132(4)

Issues it is cited on

creditworthiness of the creditorsource of sourceshare capital and share premiumpaper companyshare application moneyaddition u/s 68live linkadmission of additional evidenceentry operatorgenuineness of the transactionaddition under section 68rule 46a

Judgments citing CIT v. Divine Leasing & Finance Ltd.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI vs. M/S VESTIGE MARKETING PRIVATE LIMITED, DELHI

ITA 7842/DEL/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Mar 2026AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Before Shri Satbeer Singh Godarabefore Shri Before Shri Satbeer Singh Godarasatbeer Singh Godara & Satbeer Singh Godara & And & Shri Naveen Chandra Shri Naveen Chandra, , , Shri Naveen Chandra Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Amit Goel and Shri Pranav Yadav, Advocate
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 147Section 37Section 37(1)Section 69A

…pplied] ii) 297 ITR 441 (SC) Anish Ahmed & So 297 ITR 441 (SC) Anish Ahmed & Sons v. CIT 297 ITR 441 (SC) Anish Ahmed & So 297 ITR 441 (SC) Anish Ahmed & So ns v. CIT ns v. CIT ns v. CIT DELHI HIGH COURT DELHI HIGH COURT DELHI HIGH COURT DELHI HIGH COURT i) 299 ITR 268 (Delhi) CIT v Divine Leasing and Finance (P) Ltd. 299 ITR 268 (Delhi) CIT v Divine Leasing and Finance (P) Ltd. 299 ITR 268 (Delhi) CIT v Divine Leasing and Finance (P) Ltd. 299 ITR 268 (Delhi) CIT v Divine Leasing and Finance (P) Ltd. “It was specifically observed in the context of share capital u/s 68 that if relevant details of the address add…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI vs. M/S VESTIGE MARKETING PRIVATE LIMITED, DELHI

ITA 7841/DEL/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Mar 2026AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Naveen Chandra

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

…unreasonable or perverse or based on no evidence. If the conclusion is based on some evidence on which a conclusion could be arrived at, no question of law as such arises.” [Emphasis supplied] ii) 297 ITR 441 (SC) Anish Ahmed & Sons v. CIT DELHI HIGH COURT i) 299 ITR 268 (Delhi) CIT v Divine Leasing and Finance (P) Ltd. "It was specifically observed in the context of share capital u/s 68 that if relevant details of the address or PAN identity of the creditor/subscriber are furnished to the Department alongwith copies of the shareholders register, share application forms. it would constitute acceptable proof or ac…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI vs. M/S VESTIGE MARKETING PRIVATE LIMITED, DELHI

ITA 7840/DEL/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Mar 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Before Shri Satbeer Singh Godarabefore Shri Before Shri Satbeer Singh Godarasatbeer Singh Godara & Satbeer Singh Godara & And & Shri Naveen Chandra Shri Naveen Chandra, , , Shri Naveen Chandra Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Amit Goel and Shri Pranav Yadav, Advocate
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 147Section 37Section 37(1)Section 69A

…pplied] ii) 297 ITR 441 (SC) Anish Ahmed & So 297 ITR 441 (SC) Anish Ahmed & Sons v. CIT 297 ITR 441 (SC) Anish Ahmed & So 297 ITR 441 (SC) Anish Ahmed & So ns v. CIT ns v. CIT ns v. CIT DELHI HIGH COURT DELHI HIGH COURT DELHI HIGH COURT DELHI HIGH COURT i) 299 ITR 268 (Delhi) CIT v Divine Leasing and Finance (P) Ltd. 299 ITR 268 (Delhi) CIT v Divine Leasing and Finance (P) Ltd. 299 ITR 268 (Delhi) CIT v Divine Leasing and Finance (P) Ltd. 299 ITR 268 (Delhi) CIT v Divine Leasing and Finance (P) Ltd. “It was specifically observed in the context of share capital u/s 68 that if relevant details of the address add…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI vs. M/S VESTIGE MARKETING PRIVATE LIMITED, DELHI

ITA 7838/DEL/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Mar 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Amit Goel andFor Respondent: Ms. Monika Singh, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 37Section 37(1)Section 69A

…unreasonable or perverse or based on no evidence. If the conclusion is based on some evidence on which a conclusion could be arrived at, no question of law as such arises.” [Emphasis supplied] ii) 297 ITR 441 (SC) Anish Ahmed & Sons v. CIT DELHI HIGH COURT i) 299 ITR 268 (Delhi) CIT v Divine Leasing and Finance (P) Ltd. "It was specifically observed in the context of share capital u/s 68 that if relevant details of the address or PAN identity of the creditor/subscriber are furnished to the Department alongwith copies of the shareholders register, share application forms. it would constitute acceptable proof or ac…

VESTIGE MARKETING PVT LTD,DELHI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE -05 , DELHI

ITA 5521/DEL/2025[2024-25]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Mar 2026AY 2024-25

Bench: Shri Before Shri Satbeer Singh Godarabefore Shri Before Shri Satbeer Singh Godarasatbeer Singh Godara & Satbeer Singh Godara & And & Shri Naveen Chandra Shri Naveen Chandra, , , Shri Naveen Chandra Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Amit Goel and Shri Pranav Yadav, Advocate
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 147Section 37Section 37(1)Section 69A

…pplied] ii) 297 ITR 441 (SC) Anish Ahmed & So 297 ITR 441 (SC) Anish Ahmed & Sons v. CIT 297 ITR 441 (SC) Anish Ahmed & So 297 ITR 441 (SC) Anish Ahmed & So ns v. CIT ns v. CIT ns v. CIT DELHI HIGH COURT DELHI HIGH COURT DELHI HIGH COURT DELHI HIGH COURT i) 299 ITR 268 (Delhi) CIT v Divine Leasing and Finance (P) Ltd. 299 ITR 268 (Delhi) CIT v Divine Leasing and Finance (P) Ltd. 299 ITR 268 (Delhi) CIT v Divine Leasing and Finance (P) Ltd. 299 ITR 268 (Delhi) CIT v Divine Leasing and Finance (P) Ltd. “It was specifically observed in the context of share capital u/s 68 that if relevant details of the address add…

VESTIGE MARKETING PVT LTD,DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-05, DELHI

ITA 5520/DEL/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Mar 2026AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Naveen Chandra

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

…unreasonable or perverse or based on no evidence. If the conclusion is based on some evidence on which a conclusion could be arrived at, no question of law as such arises.” [Emphasis supplied] ii) 297 ITR 441 (SC) Anish Ahmed & Sons v. CIT DELHI HIGH COURT i) 299 ITR 268 (Delhi) CIT v Divine Leasing and Finance (P) Ltd. "It was specifically observed in the context of share capital u/s 68 that if relevant details of the address or PAN identity of the creditor/subscriber are furnished to the Department alongwith copies of the shareholders register, share application forms. it would constitute acceptable proof or ac…

VESTIGE MARKETING PVT LTD,DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-05, DELHI

ITA 5517/DEL/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Mar 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Naveen Chandra

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

…unreasonable or perverse or based on no evidence. If the conclusion is based on some evidence on which a conclusion could be arrived at, no question of law as such arises.” [Emphasis supplied] ii) 297 ITR 441 (SC) Anish Ahmed & Sons v. CIT DELHI HIGH COURT i) 299 ITR 268 (Delhi) CIT v Divine Leasing and Finance (P) Ltd. "It was specifically observed in the context of share capital u/s 68 that if relevant details of the address or PAN identity of the creditor/subscriber are furnished to the Department alongwith copies of the shareholders register, share application forms. it would constitute acceptable proof or ac…

VESTIGE MARKETING PVT. LTD.,DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 05, DELHI

ITA 5515/DEL/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Mar 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Amit Goel andFor Respondent: Ms. Monika Singh, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 37Section 37(1)Section 69A

…unreasonable or perverse or based on no evidence. If the conclusion is based on some evidence on which a conclusion could be arrived at, no question of law as such arises.” [Emphasis supplied] ii) 297 ITR 441 (SC) Anish Ahmed & Sons v. CIT DELHI HIGH COURT i) 299 ITR 268 (Delhi) CIT v Divine Leasing and Finance (P) Ltd. "It was specifically observed in the context of share capital u/s 68 that if relevant details of the address or PAN identity of the creditor/subscriber are furnished to the Department alongwith copies of the shareholders register, share application forms. it would constitute acceptable proof or ac…

SHILPA SHETTY KUNDRA,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, CC-5(2), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

In the result, Assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes, in the above terms

ITA 996/MUM/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Mar 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Prabhash Shankarassessment Year: 2020-21

For Appellant: Ms. Simran Dhawan, Adv. & RaviFor Respondent: Shri Leyaqat Ali Aafaqui, (SR. D.R.)
Section 133(6)Section 194CSection 250

…s and acknowledgement of returns of Donors, no addition could be made in respect of gift amount by taking recourse to provisions of section 68. c. It is submitted that Hon'ble Apex court in the case of CIT Vs Divine Leasing & Finance Ltd. (2007 158 Taxman 440/299 ITR 268) has held that if the relevant details of the address or PAN/identity of the creditor are furnished to the Department it would constitute acceptable proof or acceptable explanation by the assessee. In this case, the creditors existence is recognized as the company is in the records of the IT Department, since the appellant has submitted their PAN…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 4(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. AVIMA EXPORTS PRIVATE LIMITED, KOLKATA

Appeal stands dismissed

ITA 1599/KOL/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Feb 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shripradip Kumar Choubey, Jm

Section 131Section 133ASection 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

…s sought to be reopened, that would have made some sense but we fail to understand as to how this amount of increased share capital could be assessed in the hands of the company itself." 6.2.10. Further, in the case of 'Divine Leasing & Finance Limited [2008] 299 ITR 268 (Delhi)', the Hon'ble Delhi High Court had held the following: "In the context of section 68 of the Income-tax Act the assessee has to prima facie prove: (1). the identity of the creditor/subscriber; (2). the genuineness of the transaction, namely whether it has been transmitted through banking or other indisputable channels; (3). the creditworth…

AMPLEX PROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED,AGARTALA vs. DCIT/ACIT, CIRCLE SILCHAR, SILCHAR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed in above terms

ITA 333/GTY/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati19 Jan 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: the Ld. CIT(A).

For Respondent: Shri Santosh Kumar Karnani, Addl. CIT
Section 1Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 245DSection 245D(4)Section 250

…nexplained cash credit. In support of the above, reliance is being placed on the following judicial pronouncements 11 M/s Amplex Projects Private Limited The Hon'ble Delhi High Court in case of Commissioner of Income-tax v. Lovely Exports P. Ltd reported in [299 ITR 268] held that "In the case of a company the following are the propositions of law under section. 68. The assessee has to prima facie prove (1) the identity of the creditor/subscriber: (2) the genuineness of the transaction namely, whether it has been transmitted through banking or other indisputable channels (3) the creditworthiness or financial str…

DCIT,CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, GUWAHATI vs. SATISH JALAN, SHILLONG

Appeal of the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 62/GTY/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati17 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon'Ble Itat. 3. There Are Currently More Than 300 Time Barred Assessment & 200 Penalty Cases Are Pending In This Office. Due To Shortage Of Manpower It Was Delayed In The Filing Of Appeal Before Hon'Ble Itat.

Section 131Section 250Section 68

…compliance by the lender, No response to statutory notices, Pending proceedings against the lender. In this regard, reliance is placed on Judicial precedent, past acceptance does not validate subsequent transactions (CIT v Divine Leasing & Finance Ltd. (2008) 299 ITR 268 (Del)). Further, the lender is facing proceedings under Section 276CC for non-filing of ITRS, indicating dubious financial dealings. The transaction is a colorable device to introduce unaccounted money. In this regard, reliance is placed on – Sumati I.T.A. No. 62/GTY/2025 Satish Jalan Dayal v. CIT (1995) 214 ITR 801 (SC), where unexplained cred…

INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1(1), FARIDABAD, FARIDABAD vs. BHIKSHU PORTFOLIO PRIVATE LIMITED, FARIDABAD

ITA 4252/DEL/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 147

…lders or that of the sub-creditors. If it had any doubts with regard to their creditworthiness, the Revenue could always bring it to lax in the hands of the creditors and/or sub creditors -CIT vs. Divine Leasing and Finance Ld. (2007)207 CTR (Del) 38 : (2008) 299 ITR 268 (Del) and CIT vs. Lovely Exports (P) Ltd. (2008) 216 CTR (SC) 195 : (2008) 6 DTR (SC) 308 relied on.” We may also recall that in the Case of CIT vs M/s Avant Grade Carpets Ltd Appeal no. 141 of 2014 dated 11.08.2014 the Honorable Allahabad High Court has held that; “On perusing the records, it appears that the finding that the assessee was rerout…

INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1(1), FARIDABAD, FARIDABAD vs. BHIKSHU PORTFOLIO PRIVATE LIMITED, FARIDABAD

ITA 4251/DEL/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Nov 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 147

…lders or that of the sub-creditors. If it had any doubts with regard to their creditworthiness, the Revenue could always bring it to lax in the hands of the creditors and/or sub creditors -CIT vs. Divine Leasing and Finance Ld. (2007)207 CTR (Del) 38 : (2008) 299 ITR 268 (Del) and CIT vs. Lovely Exports (P) Ltd. (2008) 216 CTR (SC) 195 : (2008) 6 DTR (SC) 308 relied on.” We may also recall that in the Case of CIT vs M/s Avant Grade Carpets Ltd Appeal no. 141 of 2014 dated 11.08.2014 the Honorable Allahabad High Court has held that; “On perusing the records, it appears that the finding that the assessee was rerout…

INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1(1), FARIDABAD, FARIDABAD vs. BHIKSHU PORTFOLIO PRIVATE LIMITED, FARIDABAD

ITA 4207/DEL/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Nov 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 147

…lders or that of the sub-creditors. If it had any doubts with regard to their creditworthiness, the Revenue could always bring it to lax in the hands of the creditors and/or sub creditors -CIT vs. Divine Leasing and Finance Ld. (2007)207 CTR (Del) 38 : (2008) 299 ITR 268 (Del) and CIT vs. Lovely Exports (P) Ltd. (2008) 216 CTR (SC) 195 : (2008) 6 DTR (SC) 308 relied on.” We may also recall that in the Case of CIT vs M/s Avant Grade Carpets Ltd Appeal no. 141 of 2014 dated 11.08.2014 the Honorable Allahabad High Court has held that; “On perusing the records, it appears that the finding that the assessee was rerout…

INCOME TAX OFFICER, FARIDABAD vs. BHIKSHU PORTFOLIO PRIVATE LIMITED, FARIDABAD

ITA 4206/DEL/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Nov 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 147

…lders or that of the sub-creditors. If it had any doubts with regard to their creditworthiness, the Revenue could always bring it to lax in the hands of the creditors and/or sub creditors -CIT vs. Divine Leasing and Finance Ld. (2007)207 CTR (Del) 38 : (2008) 299 ITR 268 (Del) and CIT vs. Lovely Exports (P) Ltd. (2008) 216 CTR (SC) 195 : (2008) 6 DTR (SC) 308 relied on.” We may also recall that in the Case of CIT vs M/s Avant Grade Carpets Ltd Appeal no. 141 of 2014 dated 11.08.2014 the Honorable Allahabad High Court has held that; “On perusing the records, it appears that the finding that the assessee was rerout…

INCOME TAX OFFICER, FARIDABAD vs. BHIKSHU PORTFOLIO PRIVATE LIMITED, FARIDABAD

ITA 4205/DEL/2025[2013]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Nov 2025

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 147

…lders or that of the sub-creditors. If it had any doubts with regard to their creditworthiness, the Revenue could always bring it to lax in the hands of the creditors and/or sub creditors -CIT vs. Divine Leasing and Finance Ld. (2007)207 CTR (Del) 38 : (2008) 299 ITR 268 (Del) and CIT vs. Lovely Exports (P) Ltd. (2008) 216 CTR (SC) 195 : (2008) 6 DTR (SC) 308 relied on.” We may also recall that in the Case of CIT vs M/s Avant Grade Carpets Ltd Appeal no. 141 of 2014 dated 11.08.2014 the Honorable Allahabad High Court has held that; “On perusing the records, it appears that the finding that the assessee was rerout…

INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 52(1) NEW DELHI, NEW DELHI vs. M/S NOVEL INFRATECH, NEW DELHI

In the result appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 188/DEL/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Aug 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Sudhir Kumarito, Vs. M/S. Novel Infratech, Ward-52(1), Flat No. 915, Indra Prakash New Delhi Building, 21, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aajfn0187A

For Appellant: Shri Ved Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Kumar Arora, Sr. DR
Section 131(1)(d)Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 68

…directors and shareholders or that of the sub-creditors. If it had any doubts with regard to their credit worthiness, the revenue could always bring it to tax in the hands of the creditors and/or sub-creditors. [See CIT v. Divine Leasing & Finance Ltd. (2008) 299 ITR 268 (Delhi) and CIT v. Lovely Exports (P.) Ltd. (2008) 216 CTR 195 (SC)). M/s. Novel Infratech 39. The Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Vrindavan Farms Pvt. Ltd., etc. ITA. No.71 of 2015 dated 12th August, 2015 held as under: "The sole basis for the Revenue to doubt their creditworthiness was the low income as reflected in their retu…

ITO 41(3)(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. DEEPIKA ANIL AGARWAL, MUMBAI

In the result the appeal filed by the revenue stands\ndismissed

ITA 1885/MUM/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Aug 2025AY 2011-12
Section 10(38)Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143Section 147Section 263Section 68

…34 taxmann.com 32\n(Gujarat):-Expenditure cannot be disallowed on account of 'bogus\npurchase' only on basis of assumption and presumption\n8. View taken in Modi creation Pvt. Ltd. Is also taken in following decision.\ni. CIT v/s Divine Leasing & Finance Ltd. 158 Taxmann 440\n(Delhi) (2007).\nii. Nemichand Kothari V/s CIT (136 Taxman 216) (Gau.) (2004).\niii. CIT V/s Value Capital Services (P) Ltd. 307 ITR 334\n(Delhi)(2008).\nThus, the addition made on the basis of bad-assessment order is also bad-in-law\nand requires to be deleted.\nE. CASE LAWS RELIED BY LD. AO DISTINGUISHED\n1. The Ld. AO in para 12.5pg no 28…

RAJENDRA KUMAR MUNDRA (HUF),MUMBAI vs. NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE (NFAC), DELHI

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 1000/MUM/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Aug 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain& Shri Girish Agrawalrajendra Kumar Mundra Vs. Ito, Ward 24(3)(1) (Huf) Piramal Chamber C-28, Ameya Bldg, Behind Lalbaug, Mumbai – Ymca Dn Nagar Andheri (W) 400012. 400053. Pan/Gir No.Aadh6828J (Applicant) (Respondent)

Section 147Section 148Section 2Section 263Section 68Section 69A

…13] 34 taxmann.com 32 (Gujarat): Expenditure cannot be disallowed on account of 'bogus purchase' only on basis of assumption and presumption 8. View taken in Modi creation Pvt. Ltd. Is also taken in following decision. i. CIT v/s Divine Leasing & Finance Ltd. 158 Taxmann 440 (Delhi) (2007). ii. Nemichand Kothari V/s CIT (136 Taxman 216) (Gau.) (2004). iii. CIT V/s Value Capital Services (P) Ltd. 307 ITR 334 (Delhi)(2008). Thus, the addition made on the basis of bad-assessment order is also bad- in-law and should not be added. HUMBLE PRAYER In view of the aforesaid facts, evidences of the case, judicial proceedin…

Showing 1–20 of 426 · Page 1 of 22

...