CIT v. Divine Leasing & Finance Ltd.

299 ITR 268High Court2008#169 most cited

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

The Assessing Officer cannot add share capital or share premium amounts if the assessee provides the identity and creditworthiness of the subscriber and establishes the genuineness of the transaction. The court may admit additional evidence under Rule 46A, such as the PAN identity of the creditor.

426

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2008 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Divine Leasing & Finance Ltd. · section 68 · share capital · share premium · creditworthiness of creditor · source of source · genuineness of transaction · addition u/s 68 · PAN identity · Rule 46A

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.

ACIT Cir-6(3)(2), Mumbai vs. Shri Mohit Deepak Kamboj, Mumbai

ITA 801/MUM/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Sept 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.4285/Mum/2019 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.6384/Mum/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Dcit-4(3)(1) बिधम/ Shri Mohit Deepak Room No. 649, 6Th Floor, Kamboj Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai- A-15, Venus Co-Op. 400020. Society, R. G. Thandani Marg, Mumbai-400018. & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.801/Mum/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Acit, Cir-6(3)(2) बिधम/ Shri Mohit Deepak R. No. 522, 5Th Floor, Kamboj Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, M. K. A-15, Venus Co-Op. Road, Mumbai-400020. Society, R. G. Thandani Marg, Mumbai-400018 स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Alckp2213G (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Satyaprakash Singh Revenue By: Shri P. R. Mane सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 15/07/2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 28/09/2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm:

For Appellant: Shri Satyaprakash SinghFor Respondent: Shri P. R. Mane
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 2(22)(e)Section 23Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI ABY T. VARKEY, JM AND SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, AM आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.4285/Mum/2019 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.6384/Mum/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) DCIT-4(3)(1) बिधम/ Shri Mohit Deepak Room No. 649, 6th Floor, Kamboj Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai- A-15, Venus Co-op. 400020. Society, R. G. Thandani Marg, Mumbai-400018. & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.801/Mum/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2012-13) ACIT, Cir-6(3)(2) बिधम/ Shri Mohit Deepak R. No. 522, 5th Floor, Kamboj Vs. Aayakar Bhavan…

DCIT 4 (3)(1), Mumbai vs. Mohit Deepak Kamboj, Mumbai

ITA 6384/MUM/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Sept 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.4285/Mum/2019 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.6384/Mum/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Dcit-4(3)(1) बिधम/ Shri Mohit Deepak Room No. 649, 6Th Floor, Kamboj Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai- A-15, Venus Co-Op. 400020. Society, R. G. Thandani Marg, Mumbai-400018. & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.801/Mum/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Acit, Cir-6(3)(2) बिधम/ Shri Mohit Deepak R. No. 522, 5Th Floor, Kamboj Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, M. K. A-15, Venus Co-Op. Road, Mumbai-400020. Society, R. G. Thandani Marg, Mumbai-400018 स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Alckp2213G (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Satyaprakash Singh Revenue By: Shri P. R. Mane सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 15/07/2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 28/09/2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm:

For Appellant: Shri Satyaprakash SinghFor Respondent: Shri P. R. Mane
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 2(22)(e)Section 23Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI ABY T. VARKEY, JM AND SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, AM आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.4285/Mum/2019 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.6384/Mum/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) DCIT-4(3)(1) बिधम/ Shri Mohit Deepak Room No. 649, 6th Floor, Kamboj Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai- A-15, Venus Co-op. 400020. Society, R. G. Thandani Marg, Mumbai-400018. & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.801/Mum/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2012-13) ACIT, Cir-6(3)(2) बिधम/ Shri Mohit Deepak R. No. 522, 5th Floor, Kamboj Vs. Aayakar Bhavan…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-4(1), Central Range-4, Mumbai vs. M/S.Runwal Projects Private Limited, Mumbai

Accordingly, the additions in all the 3 assessment years deleted by Ld. CIT (A) are confirmed and the grounds raised by the revenue are dismissed

ITA 5970/MUM/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Aug 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Jm & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am 1. आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 5970/Mum/2017 (ननधधारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2009-10) 2. आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 634/Mum/2018 (ननधधारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) 3. आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 6027/Mum/2017 (ननधधारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2012-13)

For Respondent: Shri Jayant Jhaveri, Ld. DR
Section 132Section 139Section 143(3)Section 68

…l. The source of the said money thus stands proven. As has been held in several decisions of superior judicial authorities {MurlidharLahorimal v CIT [28O ITR 512 (guj)],LabhchandBohra v ITO [219 ITr 571 (Raj)] and CIT v Dwarkadhish Investment Private Limited [299 ITR 268 (Del)], the assessee cannot be called upon to prove the source of the source of this money. 19. Regarding the issue of having charged very high premium, it has been brought to my notice by the AR that it is the potential in the development and in turn the profitability of the project that was the key in this case which got the investor to invest…

Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1, Anantapur vs. Saveera Hospital Private Limited, Anantapur

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are accordingly allowed and consequently the cross objections preferred by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 296/HYD/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad18 Jul 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri K.Narasimha Chary

For Appellant: Shri D.V.Anjaneyulu, ARFor Respondent: 01/06/2022
Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 148Section 68

…ions, the Revenue is before us in these appeals contending that the primary onus to prove the shareholders creditworthiness lies on the assessee in view of the judgement of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of CIT Vs. Lovely Exports Private Limited (P) Ltd., 299 ITR 268 (Del) and it is only the assessee that Page 5 of 33 ITA Nos.295 & 296/Hyd/2019 C.O.Nos.12 & 13/Hyd/2019 has to offer the explanation in support of the identity and creditworthiness of the parties and the genuineness of transaction and then only the burden shifts to the learned Assessing Officer. According to the Ld. DR the assessee company has n…

Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1, Anantapur vs. Saveera Hospital Private Limited, Anantapur

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are accordingly allowed and consequently the cross objections preferred by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 295/HYD/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad18 Jul 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri K.Narasimha Chary

For Appellant: Shri D.V.Anjaneyulu, ARFor Respondent: 01/06/2022
Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 148Section 68

…ions, the Revenue is before us in these appeals contending that the primary onus to prove the shareholders creditworthiness lies on the assessee in view of the judgement of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of CIT Vs. Lovely Exports Private Limited (P) Ltd., 299 ITR 268 (Del) and it is only the assessee that Page 5 of 33 ITA Nos.295 & 296/Hyd/2019 C.O.Nos.12 & 13/Hyd/2019 has to offer the explanation in support of the identity and creditworthiness of the parties and the genuineness of transaction and then only the burden shifts to the learned Assessing Officer. According to the Ld. DR the assessee company has n…

Jay Nanda Mataji Co.Op. Credit Society Lte, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer WD 31(2) (1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statisti...

ITA 257/MUM/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jun 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2017-18 Jay Nanda Mataji Co-Operative Income Tax Officer Ward 31(2)(1), Credit Society Limited, R. No. 615, 6Th Floor, Kautilya Shop No. 153/5/6, General Vs. Bhavan, C-41 To C-43, G Block, Arunkumar Vaidya Marg, Bandra Kurla Complex, Goregaon (East), Bandra (East), Mumbai-400065. Mumbai-400051. Pan No. Aaaaj 5397 E Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. G.C. Lalka, ARFor Respondent: Mr. Kiran P. Unavekar, DR
Section 69A

…5 lender, as held in CIT vs. Precision Finance Pvt. Ltd.: 208 ITR 465 lender, as held in CIT vs. Precision Finance Pvt. Ltd.: 208 ITR 465 Jay Nanda Mataji Co Jay Nanda Mataji Co-operative Credit 5 Society Limited (Cal), Divine Leasing and Finance Ltd. & Ors: 299 ITR 268 and (Cal), Divine Leasing and Finance Ltd. & Ors: 299 ITR 268 and (Cal), Divine Leasing and Finance Ltd. & Ors: 299 ITR 268 and affirmed in CIT v. Lovely Export (P) Ltd.: 319 ITR (st.) 5 (SC). This has d in CIT v. Lovely Export (P) Ltd.: 319 ITR (st.) 5 (SC). This has d in CIT v. Lovely Export (P) Ltd.: 319 ITR (st.) 5 (SC). This has also been re…

Uppal Shah Prop-J K Sugars, Kolhapur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle - 2, Kolhapur

In the result, the cross appeal of the Revenue in ITA

ITA 1954/PUN/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune16 Jun 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravisl.

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil S. PathakFor Respondent: Shri Shivraj B. Morey &
Section 131(1)(d)Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 41(1)Section 68

…worthiness. These observations sound the death-knell for the contentions raised on behalf of the Department in the present batch of appeals.” 11. The same ratio was followed by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Divine Leasing & Finance Ltd., 299 ITR 268 (Delhi). In the present case, though the Department is in possession all full particulars of loan creditors, such as bank passbook, etc, nothing more than mere issue notice u/s 131 of the Act was done by the Assessing Officer. There was no effort made to pursue the creditors. Even the Assessing Officer granted unreasonably short time to produce t…

Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle - 2, Kolhapur vs. Uppal Jitendra Shah, Kolhapur

In the result, the cross appeal of the Revenue in ITA

ITA 1893/PUN/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune16 Jun 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravisl.

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil S. PathakFor Respondent: Shri Shivraj B. Morey &
Section 131(1)(d)Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 41(1)Section 68

…worthiness. These observations sound the death-knell for the contentions raised on behalf of the Department in the present batch of appeals.” 11. The same ratio was followed by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Divine Leasing & Finance Ltd., 299 ITR 268 (Delhi). In the present case, though the Department is in possession all full particulars of loan creditors, such as bank passbook, etc, nothing more than mere issue notice u/s 131 of the Act was done by the Assessing Officer. There was no effort made to pursue the creditors. Even the Assessing Officer granted unreasonably short time to produce t…

Jagruti Hitesh Mehta, Mumbai vs. ITO 25(2) (1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 67/MUM/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 May 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh () & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale () Assessment Year: 2011-12 & Assessment Year: 2012-13 & Assessment Year: 2013-14 & Assessment Year: 2014-15 Jagruti Hitesh Mehta, Ito-25(2)(1), G 601, Rustomjee Elements, C-41 To C-43, Kautilya S.N. 106 Cts 195 Part 5, Near Vs. Bhavan, G Block, Bandra Ymc A New D N Nagar, Azad Kurla Complex, Bandra Nagar, Andheri West, (East), Mumbai-400053. Mumbai-400051. Pan No. Afwpm6786L Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. Himanshu Gandhi. Ar : Ms. Samruddhi Hande. Dr Revenue By Date Of Hearing : 26/05/2022 : 30/05/2022 Date Of Pronouncement Order

For Appellant: Mr. Himanshu Gandhi. AR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “SMC” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI M. BALAGANESH (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) AND SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE (JUDICIAL MEMBER) Assessment Year: 2011-12 & Assessment Year: 2012-13 & Assessment Year: 2013-14 & Assessment Year: 2014-15 Jagruti Hitesh Mehta, ITO-25(2)(1), G 601, Rustomjee Elements, C-41 to C-43, Kautilya S.N. 106 CTS 195 Part 5, Near Vs. Bhavan, G Block, Bandra YMC A New D N Nagar, Azad Kurla Complex, Bandra Nagar, Andheri West, (East), Mumbai-400053. Mumbai-400051. PAN No. AFWPM6786L Appellant Respondent Assessee by : Mr. Himanshu Gandhi. AR : Ms. Samruddhi Hande. DR Reve…

Jagruti Hitesh Mehta, Mumbai vs. ITO 25(2) (1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 66/MUM/2022[2013-14`]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 May 2022

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh () & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale () Assessment Year: 2011-12 & Assessment Year: 2012-13 & Assessment Year: 2013-14 & Assessment Year: 2014-15 Jagruti Hitesh Mehta, Ito-25(2)(1), G 601, Rustomjee Elements, C-41 To C-43, Kautilya S.N. 106 Cts 195 Part 5, Near Vs. Bhavan, G Block, Bandra Ymc A New D N Nagar, Azad Kurla Complex, Bandra Nagar, Andheri West, (East), Mumbai-400053. Mumbai-400051. Pan No. Afwpm6786L Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. Himanshu Gandhi. Ar : Ms. Samruddhi Hande. Dr Revenue By Date Of Hearing : 26/05/2022 : 30/05/2022 Date Of Pronouncement Order

For Appellant: Mr. Himanshu Gandhi. AR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “SMC” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI M. BALAGANESH (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) AND SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE (JUDICIAL MEMBER) Assessment Year: 2011-12 & Assessment Year: 2012-13 & Assessment Year: 2013-14 & Assessment Year: 2014-15 Jagruti Hitesh Mehta, ITO-25(2)(1), G 601, Rustomjee Elements, C-41 to C-43, Kautilya S.N. 106 CTS 195 Part 5, Near Vs. Bhavan, G Block, Bandra YMC A New D N Nagar, Azad Kurla Complex, Bandra Nagar, Andheri West, (East), Mumbai-400053. Mumbai-400051. PAN No. AFWPM6786L Appellant Respondent Assessee by : Mr. Himanshu Gandhi. AR : Ms. Samruddhi Hande. DR Reve…

Jagruti Hitesh Mehta, Mumbai vs. ITO 25(2) (1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 65/MUM/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 May 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh () & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale () Assessment Year: 2011-12 & Assessment Year: 2012-13 & Assessment Year: 2013-14 & Assessment Year: 2014-15 Jagruti Hitesh Mehta, Ito-25(2)(1), G 601, Rustomjee Elements, C-41 To C-43, Kautilya S.N. 106 Cts 195 Part 5, Near Vs. Bhavan, G Block, Bandra Ymc A New D N Nagar, Azad Kurla Complex, Bandra Nagar, Andheri West, (East), Mumbai-400053. Mumbai-400051. Pan No. Afwpm6786L Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. Himanshu Gandhi. Ar : Ms. Samruddhi Hande. Dr Revenue By Date Of Hearing : 26/05/2022 : 30/05/2022 Date Of Pronouncement Order

For Appellant: Mr. Himanshu Gandhi. AR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “SMC” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI M. BALAGANESH (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) AND SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE (JUDICIAL MEMBER) Assessment Year: 2011-12 & Assessment Year: 2012-13 & Assessment Year: 2013-14 & Assessment Year: 2014-15 Jagruti Hitesh Mehta, ITO-25(2)(1), G 601, Rustomjee Elements, C-41 to C-43, Kautilya S.N. 106 CTS 195 Part 5, Near Vs. Bhavan, G Block, Bandra YMC A New D N Nagar, Azad Kurla Complex, Bandra Nagar, Andheri West, (East), Mumbai-400053. Mumbai-400051. PAN No. AFWPM6786L Appellant Respondent Assessee by : Mr. Himanshu Gandhi. AR : Ms. Samruddhi Hande. DR Reve…

Jagruti Hitesh Mehta, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer 25(2) (1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 64/MUM/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 May 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh () & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale () Assessment Year: 2011-12 & Assessment Year: 2012-13 & Assessment Year: 2013-14 & Assessment Year: 2014-15 Jagruti Hitesh Mehta, Ito-25(2)(1), G 601, Rustomjee Elements, C-41 To C-43, Kautilya S.N. 106 Cts 195 Part 5, Near Vs. Bhavan, G Block, Bandra Ymc A New D N Nagar, Azad Kurla Complex, Bandra Nagar, Andheri West, (East), Mumbai-400053. Mumbai-400051. Pan No. Afwpm6786L Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. Himanshu Gandhi. Ar : Ms. Samruddhi Hande. Dr Revenue By Date Of Hearing : 26/05/2022 : 30/05/2022 Date Of Pronouncement Order

For Appellant: Mr. Himanshu Gandhi. AR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “SMC” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI M. BALAGANESH (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) AND SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE (JUDICIAL MEMBER) Assessment Year: 2011-12 & Assessment Year: 2012-13 & Assessment Year: 2013-14 & Assessment Year: 2014-15 Jagruti Hitesh Mehta, ITO-25(2)(1), G 601, Rustomjee Elements, C-41 to C-43, Kautilya S.N. 106 CTS 195 Part 5, Near Vs. Bhavan, G Block, Bandra YMC A New D N Nagar, Azad Kurla Complex, Bandra Nagar, Andheri West, (East), Mumbai-400053. Mumbai-400051. PAN No. AFWPM6786L Appellant Respondent Assessee by : Mr. Himanshu Gandhi. AR : Ms. Samruddhi Hande. DR Reve…

M/S Davalagiri Property Developers Private Limited, Bangalore vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-2(1)(2), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed

ITA 568/BANG/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore11 Apr 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri V. Srinivasan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Priyadarshi Mishra, Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 133(6)Section 234Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment year: 2009-10 M/s. Davalagiri Property Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Developers Pvt. Ltd., of Income Tax, Prerana Chambers, Circle 2[1][2], No.26, 2nd Floor, Bangalore. Nehru Nagar Main Road, Kumara Park West, Bangalore – 560 048. PAN: AACCD 3575A APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : Shri V. Srinivasan, Advocate Respondent by : Shri Priyadarshi Mishra, Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru. Date of hearing : 09.03.2022 Date of Pronouncement : 11.04.2022 O R D E R Per…

Ankit Kapoor, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-63(4), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 7692/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Mar 2022AY 2014-15
For Appellant: Shri Raj Kumar Gupta, CA &For Respondent: Shri Manu Chourasia, Sr. DR
Section 133Section 133(6)

…es issued u/s 133(6) cannot be a reason for disbelieving the genuineness of creditors and consequently for making the addition for the same. 16. Referring to the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Divine Leasing and Finance Ltd., 299 ITR 268, he submitted that the Hon’ble High Court in the said decision has held that if the Revenue merely issues summons u/s 131 of the Act and does not pursue the matter further, the assessee 9 does not become responsible for the same even if the creditors do not appear and addition cannot be made u/s 68 of the Act. Referring to the decision of the P&H…

Panchmukhi Tradecom (P) Ltd., Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward-5(2), Kolkata

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

ITA 317/KOL/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Feb 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Sri Sanjay Garg & Sri Manish Borad)

Section 143(3)Section 68

…income. 3. For that the Ld. CIT(A) ought to have considered that the addition on account of share capital cannot be made in the hands of the company raising the capital in view of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Lovely Exports (P) Ltd 299 ITR 268 (St.) and other legal precedents. 2 I.T.A. No.: 317/Kol/2020 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Panchmukhi Tradecom (P) Ltd. 4. The appellant craves leave to add further grounds of appeal or alter the grounds at the time of hearing.” 3. After hearing rival contentions, we find that the ld. CIT(A) has passed an ex-parte order. He has not disposed off the a…

ACIT, Central Circle-2(1), Mumbai vs. M/S Luxora Realtors P. Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1096/MUM/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Feb 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Amarjit Singh, Hon'Bleacit – Central Circle – 2(1) V. M/S. Luxora Realtors Pvt. Ltd., Room No. 804, 8Th Floor Soham House, Hari Om Nagar Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Opp. Eastern Express Highway Mumbai - 400020 Mulund(E), Mumbai – 400081 Pan: Aabco3197J (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Kishore Dewani Department By : Ms. Shailja Rai

For Appellant: Shri Kishore DewaniFor Respondent: Ms. Shailja Rai
Section 132(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 68

…as also established. In the present case, in the light of the judgment of Lovely Exports (P.) Lid. (supra), only establishment of the identity of the investor is to be seen, The Delhi High Court also, in the case of CIT v. Divine Leasing # Finance Ltd. [2008] 299 ITR 268/[2007] 158' Taxman 440, considering a similar question held that the Assessee- company, having received subscriptions from the public/rights issue through banking channels and furnished complete details of the shareholders, no addition could be made, under section 68 in the absence of any positive material or evidence to indicate that the shareho…

Vijay Steel Corporation P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 13 (3)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the assessee appeal

ITA 6928/MUM/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Jan 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S Rifaur Rahman & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & M/S. Vijay Steel Vs. Dcit 13(3)2 Corporation Pvt Ltd Mumbai.-400020 2 Sabhapati Bhavan, 19 Meena Baugh, Santacruz (West) Mumbai-400054 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaacv3517E Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Mr.Vivek Jain. Ar Respondent By : Mr.Hoshang B Irani. Dr Date Of Hearing 17.12.2021 Date Of Pronouncement 27.01.2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Pavan Kumar Gadale Jm:

For Appellant: Mr.Vivek Jain. ARFor Respondent: Mr.Hoshang B Irani. DR
Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 40A(2)(b)Section 44ASection 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “F” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI S RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER & M/s. Vijay Steel Vs. DCIT 13(3)2 Corporation Pvt Ltd Mumbai.-400020 2 Sabhapati Bhavan, 19 Meena Baugh, Santacruz (West) Mumbai-400054 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. : AAACV3517E Appellant .. Respondent Appellant by : Mr.Vivek Jain. AR Respondent by : Mr.Hoshang B Irani. DR Date of Hearing 17.12.2021 Date of Pronouncement 27.01.2022 आदेश / O R D E R PER PAVAN KUMAR GADALE JM: These are the appeals filed by the assessee against the separate orders of the…

ACIT, Central Circle-15, New Delhi vs. Luxman Builders Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the CO filed by the assessee is allowed and the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 817/DEL/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Dec 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Kul Bharatassessment Year: 2010-11 Acit, Vs Lumax Builders Pvt. Ltd., Central Circle-15, 25, Bazar Lane, New Delhi. Bengali Market, New Delhi. Pan: Aaacl2184R Co No.93/Del/2018 (Ita No.817/Del/2018) Assessment Year: 2010-11 Lumax Builders Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Acit, 25, Bazar Lane, Central Circle-15, Bengali Market, New Delhi New Delhi. Pan: Aaacl2184R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Gautam Jain, Advocate & Shri Lalit Mohan, Advocate Revenue By : Ms Paramita M. Biswas, Cit, Dr Date Of Hearing : 16.09.2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 14.12.2021 Order Per R.K. Panda, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Dated 3Rd November, 2017 Of The Cit(A)-26, New Delhi, Relating To Assessment Year 2010- 11. Co No.93/Del/2018 2. The Assessee Has Filed The Co Against The Appeal Filed By The Revenue. For The Sake Of Convenience, These Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Common Order.

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain, Advocate &For Respondent: Ms Paramita M. Biswas, CIT, DR
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 153A

…nance Ltd. [1994] 205 ITR 98 (FB) (Delhi), CIT vs. Nipuan Auto (P) Ltd. {[2014] 49 taxmann.com 13 (Del.) 361 ITR 155 (Del.), Commissioner of Income- Tax vs Winstral Petrochemicals p. Ltd. 201 1 330 ITR 603 (Del.), CIT v. Divine Leasing and Finance Ltd. [2008] 299 ITR 268 (Delhi), CIT v. Stellar Investments Ltd 192 ITR 287 (Del.) & CIT v. Stellar Investment Ltd 2001 251 ITR 263 (SC) and contented that the appellant duly discharged the initial burden to establish the identity, creditworthiness and genuineness by submitting necessary documentary evidences in respect of the shares application money. Reliance is also…

ACIT, Central Circle- 15, New Delhi vs. Hal Offshore Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, we hold that addition of share capital in the year under consideration has been made without relying on any incriminating material found during the course of search

ITA 6956/DEL/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Dec 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Kul Bharatassessment Year: 2015-16 Acit, Vs Hal Offshore Ltd., Central Circle-15, 25, Bazar Lane, New Delhi. Bengali Market, New Delhi. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Gautam Jain, Advocate & Shri Lalit Mohan, Ca Revenue By : Ms Paramita M. Biswas, Cit, Dr Date Of Hearing : 16.09.2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 14.12.2021 Order Per R.K. Panda, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Dated 2Nd August, 2018 Of The Cit(A)-26, New Delhi, Relating To Assessment Year 2015-16. 2. Facts Of The Case, In Brief, Are That The Assessee Is One Of The Group Companies Of Mmg Group & Has Business Interest In Several Segments Like Chartering & Leasing Of Vessels To Ongc & Shipping, Etc. In This Case, A Search & Seizure Operation U/S 132 Of The It Act, 1961 Was Carried Out On 28Th March, 2015. During The Course Of Search, Documents & Data Storage Devices, Etc., Belonging To The Assessee Were Found & Seized. The Assessee Filed Its Return Of Income On 29Th July, 2016 For The Assessment Year 2015-16 Declaring The Total Income At Rs.12,15,49,580/-. Notice U/S 143(2) Was Issued On 20Th May, 2016 Which Was Duly Served On The Assessee. Subsequently, Notice U/S 142(1) Along With A Questionnaire Was Issued To The Assessee Calling For Certain Information. The Assessee Complied To The Said Questionnaire By Filing The Requisite Details.

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain, Advocate &For Respondent: Ms Paramita M. Biswas, CIT, DR
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)

…inance Ltd. [1994] 205 ITR 98 (FB) (Delhi), CIT vs. Nipuan Auto (P) Ltd. {[2014] 49 taxmann.com 13 (Del.) 361 ITR 155 (Del.)}, Commissioner of Income-Tax vs Winstral Petrochemicals p. Ltd. 2011 330 ITR 603 (Del.), CIT v. Divine Leasing and Finance Ltd. [2008] 299 ITR 268 (Delhi), CIT v. Stellar Investments Ltd 192 ITR 287 (Del.) & CIT v. Stellar Investment Ltd 2001 251 ITR 263 (SC) and contented that the appellant duly discharged the initial burden to establish the identity, creditworthiness and genuineness by submitting necessary documentary evidences in respect of the shares application money. Reliance is also…

ACIT, Central Circle- 15, New Delhi vs. Moon Beverages Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, we hold that addition of share capital in the year under consideration has been made without relying on any incriminating material found during the course of search

ITA 6955/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Dec 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Kul Bharatassessment Year: 2014-15 Acit, Vs Moon Beverages Ltd., Central Circle-15, 25, Bazar Lane, New Delhi. Bengali Market, New Delhi. Pan: Aaacm1635J Co No.06/Del/2019 (Ita No.6955/Del/2018) Assessment Year: 2014-15 Moon Beverages Ltd., Vs. Acit, 25, Bazar Lane, Central Circle-15, Bengali Market, New Delhi New Delhi. Pan: Aaacm1635J (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Gautam Jain, Advocate & Shri Lalit Mohan, Ca Revenue By : Ms Paramita M. Biswas, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 16.09.2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 14.12.2021 Order Per R.K. Panda, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Dated 2Nd August, 2018 Of The Cit(A)-26, New Delhi, Relating To Assessment Year 2014-15. Co No.06/Del/2019 The Assessee Has Filed Co Against The Appeal Filed By The Revenue. For The Sake Of Convenience, These Were Heard & Are Being Disposed Of By This Common Order.

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain, Advocate &For Respondent: Ms Paramita M. Biswas, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 153A

…inance Ltd. [1994] 205 ITR 98 (FB) (Delhi), CIT vs. Nipuan Auto (P) Ltd. {[2014] 49 taxmann.com 13 (Del.) 361 ITR 155 (Del.)}, Commissioner of Income-Tax vs Winstral Petrochemicals p. Ltd. 2011 330 ITR 603 (Del.), CIT v. Divine Leasing and Finance Ltd. [2008] 299 ITR 268 (Delhi), CIT v. Stellar Investments Ltd 192 ITR 287 (Del.) & CIT v. Stellar Investment Ltd 2001 251 ITR 263 (SC) and contented that the appellant duly discharged the initial burden to establish the identity, creditworthiness and genuineness by submitting necessary documentary evidences in respect of the shares application money. Reliance is also…