CIT v. Gagandeep Infrastructure (P.) Ltd.

394 ITR 680High Court2017#259 most cited

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

Under Section 68, an assessee is only required to prove the identity and creditworthiness of the immediate creditor or share subscriber and the genuineness of the transaction. The assessee is not obligated to establish the 'source of the source' of funds or the creditworthiness of sub-lenders, as this information may not be within the assessee's special knowledge.

303

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,005 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Gagandeep Infrastructure (P.) Ltd. · Gagandeep Infrastructure · 394 ITR 680 · Section 68 · unexplained cash credit · source of source · share capital · share premium · creditworthiness · genuineness of transaction · assessee's onus · burden of proof

Also reported as

80 Taxmann.com 272247 Taxmann 245

Sections most often in play

Section 68Section 143(3)Section 131Section 148Section 142(1)Section 147Section 133(6)Section 143(2)

Issues it is cited on

source of sourceshare capital and share premiumcreditworthiness of the creditorsummons under section 131share application moneypermanent account numbersection 56(2)(viib)paper companyaddition under section 68genuineness of the transactionaddition u/s 68unexplained cash credit

Judgments citing CIT v. Gagandeep Infrastructure (P.) Ltd.

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi vs. M/S. Shrish Enterprises Private Limited, Delhi

ITA 5315/DEL/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Aug 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Naveen Chandradcit, Room No. 225E, Cr Vs. M/S Shrish Enterprise Building, 2Nd Floor, Private Limited, Hall No. Ip Estate, 3 & 4, M-27/2, Badli New Delhi - 110002 Industrial Estate, Badli, Delhi – 110042 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aafcs0684N Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Sh. Nitin Gulati, Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. Manish Gupta, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 68

…P a g e | 1 DCIT Vs. M/s Shrish Enterprise Pvt. Ltd. (AY: 2018-19) THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “G” BENCH, DELHI BEFORE MS. MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI NAVEEN CHANDRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DCIT, Room No. 225E, CR Vs. M/s Shrish Enterprise Building, 2nd Floor, Private Limited, Hall No. IP Estate, 3 & 4, M-27/2, Badli New Delhi - 110002 Industrial Estate, Badli, Delhi – 110042 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No: AAFCS0684N Appellant .. Respondent Appellant by : Sh. Nitin Gulati, Adv. & Sh. Shyam Jain, Adv. Respondent by : Sh. Manish Gupta, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 04.08.2025 Date of Pronouncement 21.…

Ambey Laboratories Limited, Delhi vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi

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

ITA 2334/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri S.Rifaur Rahmanambey Laboratories Limited, Vs. Acit, Circle 2(2), Ground Floor, Property No.555, Delhi. Tarla Mohalla Ghitorni, Delhi – 110 030. (Pan : Aaaca4317R) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Ms. Apoorva Bhardwaj, Ca Revenue By : Shri Ashish Tripathi, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 24.04.2025 Date Of Order : 27.06.2025 O R D E R Per S.Rifaur Rahman: 1. This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Ld. Cit (A)] Dated 31.01.2024 For Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are, Assessee Filed Its Return Of Income On 04.11.2017 Declaring Loss Of Rs.15,30,39,,439/-. The Case Was Selected For Scrutiny Under Cass & Notices Under Section 143(2) & 142(1) Of The Income-Tax

For Appellant: Ms. Apoorva Bhardwaj, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ashish Tripathi, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(2)Section 68

…effect from 1st April 2023 i.e. relevant to AY 2023-24. a. ITO vs Sh. Balwan Singh, ITA No. 2869/Dell2019, A.Y. 2014-15, Date of Pronouncement: 07.08.2023, ITAT - Delhi [Please refer Page No. 51-55 of Case Law Compilation] b. Gagandeep Infrastructure (P) Ltd. 394 ITR 680 (Bombay High Court) c. M/s Mall Hotels Ltd. V. CIT, ITA No. 2688/Dell2014, Date of Order: 31/05/2022, ITAT - Delhi [Please refer Page No. 56-61 of Case Law Compilation] 8. Under section 68, the Lender's creditworthiness has to be judged vis-a-vis transactions, which have taken place between assessee and the Lender, and it is not business of asses…

Mahesh Dyeing and Printing Mills Pvt. Ltd., Surat vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle -1(1)(1), Surat

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

ITA 281/SRT/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Surat11 Jun 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Ms Suchitra Raghunath Kamble & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.281/Srt/2023 Assessment Year: (2014-15) (Hybrid Hearing) Mahesh Dyeing & Printing Mills Vs. Dcit, Pvt. Ltd., Circle – 1(1)(1), 104, 105, 107 Shivanand Nagar Surat Ind. Estate, Village – Tati Thaiya, Surat – 394221, Gujarat "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aabcm9282E (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri Rasesh Shah, Ca Respondent By Shri Ajay Uke, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 02/06/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 11/06/2025

Section 250Section 68

…IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, SURAT BENCH, SURAT BEFORE MS SUCHITRA RAGHUNATH KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI BIJAYANANDA PRUSETH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.281/SRT/2023 Assessment Year: (2014-15) (Hybrid hearing) Mahesh Dyeing and Printing Mills Vs. DCIT, Pvt. Ltd., Circle – 1(1)(1), 104, 105, 107 Shivanand Nagar Surat Ind. Estate, Village – Tati Thaiya, Surat – 394221, Gujarat "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No: AABCM9282E (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Shri Rasesh Shah, CA Respondent by Shri Ajay Uke, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 02/06/2025 Date of Pronouncement 11/06/2025 आदेश / O R D E R…

Navansh Vinimay Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward - 8(2), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 724/KOL/2022[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata30 May 2025AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 142(1)Section 143Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 250

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण कोलकाता 'सी' पीठ, कोलकाता में IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA ‘C’ BENCH, KOLKATA श्री जॉजज माथान, न्याधयक सदस्य एवं श्री राकेश धमश्रा, लेखा सदस्य के समक्ष Before SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI RAKESH MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No.: 724/KOL/2022 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Navansh Vinimay Pvt. Ltd. I.T.O., Ward-8(2), Kolkata Vs. (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN: AACCN9210E Appearances: Assessee represented by : None. Department represented by : Yogesh Mehare, Sr. DR. Date of concluding the hearing : March 5th, 2025 Date of pronouncing the order : May 30th, 2025 ORDER PER…

DCIT-CC-4(3), Mumbai vs. Era Realtors Private Limited, Mumbai

In the result, the ground No

ITA 3096/MUM/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 May 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Hon'Bleshri Girish Agrawal, Hon'Ble

Section 132Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 254(1)Section 92C

…received for convertible means CCD and equity shares as the provisions of amended section of 68 were effective from 1 April 2013. To support such contention the assessee relied upon the decision in case of CIT versus Gagandeep Infrastructure Private Limited (394 ITR 680). On the basis of aforesaid submission, the learned CIT(Appeals) recorded that it is the contention of assessee that they have proved identity, creditworthiness of subscriber and genuineness of transaction and no addition could be made under section 68 in respect of amount received from CCD and equity shares. In support of such submission the ass…

Income Tax Officer-Ward-6(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Kohinoor Planet Constructions Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

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

ITA 1495/MUM/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Apr 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm & Smt. Renu Jauhri, Am & Kohinoor Planet Constructions Pvt. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Ltd. Tax, Circle 6(3)(1) 506, 5Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Kohinoor Corporate Office, Senapati Vs. Bapat Marg, Dadar West, Mumbai – Maharishi Karve Road, Mumbai – 400028. 400020. Pan/Gir No. Aabcr6994E (Assessee) : (Respondent) & Income Tax Officer, Ward-6(3)(1) Kohinoor Planet Constructions Room No. 524, 5Th Floor, Aayakar Pvt. Ltd. Bhavan, M. K. Road, Mumbai – 3, Kohinoor Corporate Office, Vs. 400020. Senapati Bapat Marg, Dadar West, Mumbai – 400028. Pan/Gir No. Aabcr6994E (Assessee) : (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri. Jayesh Dadia : Shri. Biswanath Das – Cit Dr. Respondent By : 30.01.2025 Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement : 29.04.2025 O R D E R Per Bench: These Are Cross Appeals Filed By The Assessee & Revenue, Challenging The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Delhi (‘Ld. Cit(A)’ For Short)

For Appellant: Shri. Jayesh DadiaFor Respondent: 30.01.2025
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 36(2)Section 37Section 43CSection 68

…entity and creditworthiness of the party and the genuineness of the transaction. The ld. AR relied on the catena of decision for the same which are mentioned as below: a. Decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Gagandeep Infrastructure (P.) Ltd. (394 ITR 680) b. Decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Veedhata Tower Pvt. Ltd. (403 ITR 415) c. Decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of ITO vs. Gaurav Triyugi Singh (121 taxmann.com 86) d. Decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Green Infra Ltd. (78 taxmann.com 340) 9. The learned Departmental Representative (…

Income Tax Officer Ward-6(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Kohinoor Planet Constructions Private Limited, Mumbai

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

ITA 1493/MUM/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Apr 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm & Smt. Renu Jauhri, Am & Kohinoor Planet Constructions Pvt. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Ltd. Tax, Circle 6(3)(1) 506, 5Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Kohinoor Corporate Office, Senapati Vs. Bapat Marg, Dadar West, Mumbai – Maharishi Karve Road, Mumbai – 400028. 400020. Pan/Gir No. Aabcr6994E (Assessee) : (Respondent) & Income Tax Officer, Ward-6(3)(1) Kohinoor Planet Constructions Room No. 524, 5Th Floor, Aayakar Pvt. Ltd. Bhavan, M. K. Road, Mumbai – 3, Kohinoor Corporate Office, Vs. 400020. Senapati Bapat Marg, Dadar West, Mumbai – 400028. Pan/Gir No. Aabcr6994E (Assessee) : (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri. Jayesh Dadia : Shri. Biswanath Das – Cit Dr. Respondent By : 30.01.2025 Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement : 29.04.2025 O R D E R Per Bench: These Are Cross Appeals Filed By The Assessee & Revenue, Challenging The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Delhi (‘Ld. Cit(A)’ For Short)

For Appellant: Shri. Jayesh DadiaFor Respondent: 30.01.2025
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 36(2)Section 37Section 43CSection 68

…entity and creditworthiness of the party and the genuineness of the transaction. The ld. AR relied on the catena of decision for the same which are mentioned as below: a. Decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Gagandeep Infrastructure (P.) Ltd. (394 ITR 680) b. Decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Veedhata Tower Pvt. Ltd. (403 ITR 415) c. Decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of ITO vs. Gaurav Triyugi Singh (121 taxmann.com 86) d. Decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Green Infra Ltd. (78 taxmann.com 340) 9. The learned Departmental Representative (…

Kohinoor Planet Constructions Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 6(3)(2), Mumbai

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

ITA 1159/MUM/2024[AY 2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Apr 2025

Bench: Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm & Smt. Renu Jauhri, Am & Kohinoor Planet Constructions Pvt. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Ltd. Tax, Circle 6(3)(1) 506, 5Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Kohinoor Corporate Office, Senapati Vs. Bapat Marg, Dadar West, Mumbai – Maharishi Karve Road, Mumbai – 400028. 400020. Pan/Gir No. Aabcr6994E (Assessee) : (Respondent) & Income Tax Officer, Ward-6(3)(1) Kohinoor Planet Constructions Room No. 524, 5Th Floor, Aayakar Pvt. Ltd. Bhavan, M. K. Road, Mumbai – 3, Kohinoor Corporate Office, Vs. 400020. Senapati Bapat Marg, Dadar West, Mumbai – 400028. Pan/Gir No. Aabcr6994E (Assessee) : (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri. Jayesh Dadia : Shri. Biswanath Das – Cit Dr. Respondent By : 30.01.2025 Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement : 29.04.2025 O R D E R Per Bench: These Are Cross Appeals Filed By The Assessee & Revenue, Challenging The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Delhi (‘Ld. Cit(A)’ For Short)

For Appellant: Shri. Jayesh DadiaFor Respondent: 30.01.2025
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 36(2)Section 37Section 43CSection 68

…entity and creditworthiness of the party and the genuineness of the transaction. The ld. AR relied on the catena of decision for the same which are mentioned as below: a. Decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Gagandeep Infrastructure (P.) Ltd. (394 ITR 680) b. Decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Veedhata Tower Pvt. Ltd. (403 ITR 415) c. Decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of ITO vs. Gaurav Triyugi Singh (121 taxmann.com 86) d. Decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Green Infra Ltd. (78 taxmann.com 340) 9. The learned Departmental Representative (…

Kohinoor Planet Constructions Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 6(3)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 1158/MUM/2024[AY 2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Apr 2025

Bench: Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm & Smt. Renu Jauhri, Am & Kohinoor Planet Constructions Pvt. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Ltd. Tax, Circle 6(3)(1) 506, 5Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Kohinoor Corporate Office, Senapati Vs. Bapat Marg, Dadar West, Mumbai – Maharishi Karve Road, Mumbai – 400028. 400020. Pan/Gir No. Aabcr6994E (Assessee) : (Respondent) & Income Tax Officer, Ward-6(3)(1) Kohinoor Planet Constructions Room No. 524, 5Th Floor, Aayakar Pvt. Ltd. Bhavan, M. K. Road, Mumbai – 3, Kohinoor Corporate Office, Vs. 400020. Senapati Bapat Marg, Dadar West, Mumbai – 400028. Pan/Gir No. Aabcr6994E (Assessee) : (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri. Jayesh Dadia : Shri. Biswanath Das – Cit Dr. Respondent By : 30.01.2025 Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement : 29.04.2025 O R D E R Per Bench: These Are Cross Appeals Filed By The Assessee & Revenue, Challenging The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Delhi (‘Ld. Cit(A)’ For Short)

For Appellant: Shri. Jayesh DadiaFor Respondent: 30.01.2025
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 36(2)Section 37Section 43CSection 68

…entity and creditworthiness of the party and the genuineness of the transaction. The ld. AR relied on the catena of decision for the same which are mentioned as below: a. Decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Gagandeep Infrastructure (P.) Ltd. (394 ITR 680) b. Decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Veedhata Tower Pvt. Ltd. (403 ITR 415) c. Decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of ITO vs. Gaurav Triyugi Singh (121 taxmann.com 86) d. Decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Green Infra Ltd. (78 taxmann.com 340) 9. The learned Departmental Representative (…

ACIT-6(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Apollo Design Apparel Parks Limited, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 4040/MUM/2023[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Apr 2025AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 2008-09 Asst. Commissioner Of Income-Tax, M/S. Apollo Design Apparel Circle-6(1)(1),Mumbai Parks Limited 504, 5Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. 382,N.M.Joshi Marg, M K Road, Mumbai-400020. Chincpokli, Mumbai-400011 Pan No. Aahca 0613 R Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Ms. Dinkle HariyaFor Respondent: DR. K. R. Subhash , Sr. DR
Section 133(6)Section 148Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “A” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) AND MS. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL (JUDICIAL MEMBER) Assessment Year: 2008-09 Asst. Commissioner Of Income-Tax, M/s. Apollo Design Apparel Circle-6(1)(1),Mumbai Parks Limited 504, 5th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. 382,N.M.Joshi Marg, M K Road, Mumbai-400020. Chincpokli, Mumbai-400011 PAN NO. AAHCA 0613 R Appellant Respondent Assessee by : Ms. Dinkle Hariya Revenue by : DR. K. R. Subhash , Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 11/03/2025 Date of pronouncement : 25/04/2025 ORDER PER OM PRAKASH KANT, AM This appeal by the Reven…

M/S. Om Shanti Housing, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 20(2)(3), Mumbai

In the result appeal filed by the assesse stands allowed

ITA 672/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Mar 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Shri Girish Agrawal ()

Section 143Section 44A

…urt has been affirmed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, thereby concurred with the findings of the Hon'ble High court. Further, the Hon'ble Bombay High Court, in the case of CIT vs Green Infra Ltd. (2017) 392 ITR 7 and CIT vs. Gagandeep Infrastructure Ltd. (2017) 394 ITR 680 had taken similar view and held that once, the assessee discharges its onus by filing necessary evidences including name and address of creditors, then the department can reopen the assessment of creditors and proceed in accordance with law, but sum so received from the creditors cannot be regarded as undisclosed income of the assesee. A similar…

Shri Sanjay Dhanraj Jain, Nagpur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(3), Nagpur

ITA 59/NAG/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur25 Feb 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh LoyaFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke
Section 132Section 133ASection 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 234A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI K.M. ROY, ACCOUNTANT, MEMBER ITA no.53/Nag./2022 (Assessment Year : 2010-11) Shri Sanjay Dhanraj Jain 38, Bajiprabhu Nagar, Ramnagar Nagpur 440 001 PAN – AAGPJ8601G v/s Dy. / Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-1(3), Nagpur Appellant Respondent ITA no.54/Nag./2022 (Assessment Year : 2011-12) Shri Sanjay Dhanraj Jain 38, Bajiprabhu Nagar, Ramnagar Nagpur 440 001 PAN – AAGPJ8601G v/s Dy. / Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-1(3), Nagpur Appellant Respondent ITA no.55/Nag./2022 (Assessment Year…

Shri Sanjay Dhanraj Jain, Nagpur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(3), Nagpur

ITA 58/NAG/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur25 Feb 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh LoyaFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke
Section 132Section 133ASection 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 234A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI K.M. ROY, ACCOUNTANT, MEMBER ITA no.53/Nag./2022 (Assessment Year : 2010-11) Shri Sanjay Dhanraj Jain Appellant 38, Bajiprabhu Nagar, Ramnagar Nagpur 440 001 PAN – AAGPJ8601G v/s Respondent Dy. / Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-1(3), Nagpur ITA no.54/Nag./2022 (Assessment Year : 2011-12) Shri Sanjay Dhanraj Jain Appellant 38, Bajiprabhu Nagar, Ramnagar Nagpur 440 001 PAN – AAGPJ8601G v/s Respondent Dy. / Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-1(3), Nagpur ITA no.55/Nag./2022 (Assessment Year…

Shri Sanjay Dhanraj Jain, Nagpur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(3), Nagpur

ITA 57/NAG/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur25 Feb 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh LoyaFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke
Section 132Section 133ASection 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 234A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI K.M. ROY, ACCOUNTANT, MEMBER ITA no.53/Nag./2022 (Assessment Year : 2010–11) Shri Sanjay Dhanraj Jain 38, Bajiprabhu Nagar, Ramnagar Nagpur 440 001 PAN – AAGPJ8601G v/s Dy. / Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-1(3), Nagpur Appellant Respondent ITA no.54/Nag./2022 (Assessment Year : 2011-12) Shri Sanjay Dhanraj Jain 38, Bajiprabhu Nagar, Ramnagar Nagpur 440 001 PAN – AAGPJ8601G v/s Dy. / Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-1(3), Nagpur Appellant Respondent ITA no.55/Nag./2022 (Assessment Year : 2…

Shri Sanjay Dhanraj Jain, Nagpur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(3), Nagpur

ITA 56/NAG/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur25 Feb 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh LoyaFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke
Section 132Section 133ASection 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 234A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI K.M. ROY, ACCOUNTANT, MEMBER ITA no.53/Nag./2022 (Assessment Year : 2010-11) Shri Sanjay Dhanraj Jain 38, Bajiprabhu Nagar, Ramnagar Nagpur 440 001 PAN – AAGPJ8601G v/s Dy. / Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-1(3), Nagpur Appellant Respondent ITA no.54/Nag./2022 (Assessment Year : 2011-12) Shri Sanjay Dhanraj Jain 38, Bajiprabhu Nagar, Ramnagar Nagpur 440 001 PAN – AAGPJ8601G v/s Dy. / Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-1(3), Nagpur Appellant Respondent ITA no.55/Nag./2022 (Assessment Year : 2…

Shri Sanjay Dhanraj Jain, Nagpur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(3), Nagpur

ITA 55/NAG/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur25 Feb 2025AY 2012-13
Section 132Section 133ASection 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 234A

…of the transactions also finds support on the basis of decision of Hon'ble Jurisdictional Bombay High Court in CIT vs. Orchid Industries (P.) Ltd.[2017] 397 ITR 136 (Bom.) and CIT v/s Gagandeep Infrastructure (P.) Ltd. [2017] 80 taxmann.com 272/247 Taxman 245/394 ITR 680 (Bom.). The Hon'ble Bombay High Court decision in the case of Orient trading Co pvt. Ltd v/s CIT, [1963] 49 ITR 723 (Bom.) has held that as under:- "When, however, in a case where the entry stands in the name of the third party, the assessee satisfies the ITO as to the identity of the third party and also supplies such other evidence which will s…

Shri Sanjay Dhanraj Jain, Nagpur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(3), Nagpur

ITA 54/NAG/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur25 Feb 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh LoyaFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke
Section 132Section 133ASection 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 234A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI K.M. ROY, ACCOUNTANT, MEMBER ITA no.53/Nag./2022 (Assessment Year : 2010-11) Shri Sanjay Dhanraj Jain 38, Bajiprabhu Nagar, Ramnagar Nagpur 440 001 PAN – AAGPJ8601G Appellant v/s Dy. / Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-1(3), Nagpur Respondent ITA no.54/Nag./2022 (Assessment Year : 2011-12) Shri Sanjay Dhanraj Jain 38, Bajiprabhu Nagar, Ramnagar Nagpur 440 001 PAN – AAGPJ8601G Appellant v/s Dy. / Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-1(3), Nagpur Respondent ITA no.55/Nag./2022 (Assessment Year…

Shri Sanjay Dhanraj Jain, Nagpur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(3), Nagpur

ITA 53/NAG/2022[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur25 Feb 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh LoyaFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke
Section 132Section 133ASection 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 234A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI K.M. ROY, ACCOUNTANT, MEMBER ITA no.53/Nag./2022 (Assessment Year : 2010-11) Shri Sanjay Dhanraj Jain 38, Bajiprabhu Nagar, Ramnagar Nagpur 440 001 PAN – AAGPJ8601G Appellant v/s Respondent Dy. / Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-1(3), Nagpur ITA no.54/Nag./2022 (Assessment Year : 2011-12) Shri Sanjay Dhanraj Jain 38, Bajiprabhu Nagar, Ramnagar Nagpur 440 001 PAN – AAGPJ8601G Appellant v/s Respondent Dy. / Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-1(3), Nagpur ITA no.55/Nag./2022 (Assessment Year : 2…

Ritudhara Distributors Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward - 4(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1103/KOL/2024[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata24 Feb 2025AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm Ito, Ward-4(1), Kolkata Aaykar Bhavan, P-7, Ritudhara Distributors Pvt. Ltd. 5/1, Clive Row, 4 Th Floor, Chowringhee Square, Vs. Kolkata-700001, West Bengal Kolkata-700069, West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aafcr7607A Assessee By : Shri Somitra Choudhury, Ar Revenue By : Shri Subhendu Datta, Dr Date Of Hearing: 10.02.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 24.02.2025

For Appellant: Shri Somitra Choudhury, ARFor Respondent: Shri Subhendu Datta, DR
Section 131Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 6

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM AND SHRI PRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY, JM ITO, Ward-4(1), Kolkata Aaykar Bhavan, P-7, Ritudhara Distributors Pvt. Ltd. 5/1, Clive Row, 4 th Floor, Chowringhee Square, Vs. Kolkata-700001, West Bengal Kolkata-700069, West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN No. AAFCR7607A Assessee by : Shri Somitra Choudhury, AR Revenue by : Shri Subhendu Datta, DR Date of hearing: 10.02.2025 Date of pronouncement : 24.02.2025 O R D E R Per Rajesh Kumar, AM: This is an appeal preferred by the assessee against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Ce…

ACIT Circle-22(1), Mumbai vs. Raheja Legacy Trust, Mumbai

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

ITA 2826/MUM/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jan 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Amarjit Singhassessment Year: 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri Bharat Raichandani & Bhagrati SahuFor Respondent: Smt. Sanyogita Nagpal, CIT/DR
Section 250Section 68

…ection 68 requires the creditor to explain the source of the amounts in his hands and this requirement cannot be made applicable from retrospective effect. The jurisdictional Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the cases of CIT vs. Gangadeep Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd, 394 ITR 680 and PCIT vs. Veedhata Tower Pvt. Ltd. (ITA No. 819 of 2015 dated 17-4-2018) has held that provisions inserted under the law imposing additional burden on the assessee cannot be made applicable with retrospective effect. Duly following this decision, I hold that the JAO has erred in considering the non-availability of explanation on source of mone…