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.

Ebro India Pvt.Ltd., Delhi vs. ACIT Circle-7(1), Delhi

In the result, the ground no 4 raised by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1291/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: HeardITAT Delhi09 Sept 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144CSection 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘I’: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER and SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S., ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Ebro India Pvt. Ltd., vs. ACIT, Circle 7 (1), 807, New Delhi House, Delhi. Barakhamba Road, Connaught Place, New Delhi – 110 001. (PAN : AAECT5502H) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : Shri Rohit Jain, Advocate Shri Deepesh Jain, CA REVENUE BY : Shri Rajesh Kumar, CIT DR Date of Hearing : 11.06.2024 Date of Order : 09.09.2024 ORDER PER S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : This appeal has been filed by the assessee against the final assessment order dated…

Padmavati Agrico (India) Pvt Ltd, Ajmer vs. ACIT Circle - 1, Ajmer

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 702/JPR/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur05 Sept 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Tarun Mittal (CA)For Respondent: Sh. Anoop Singh (Addl. CIT)
Section 143Section 147

…r consideration is not in accordance with law and deserves to be deleted. In this regard reliance is being place on the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax – 1 vs. M/s Gagandeep Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. reported in 394 ITR 680, wherein it is held as under— “(e) We find that the proviso to Section 68 of the Act has been introduced by the Finance Act 2012 with effect from 1st April, 2013. Thus it would be effective only from the Assessment Year 2013-14 onwards and not for the subject Assessment Year. In fact, before the Tribunal, it was not even the case of the Revenue t…

ITO, Ward- 1)1), Nagpur vs. Axykno Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., Nagpur

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 47/NAG/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur02 Sept 2024AY 2012-13

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

For Appellant: Shri Kapil Hirani a/wFor Respondent: Shri Kailash C. Kanojiya
Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 68

…he Act, the question of establishing the source of source in respect of share capital and share premium did not arise. This fact has been supported by the decision of the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in CIT v/s Gagandeep Infrastructures Pvt. Ltd., [2017] 394 ITR 680 (Bom.). Prior to insertion of provisions, as per the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Lovely Exports (supra), if the Assessing Officer regards the share premium as bogus, he has to assessee the shareholders but cannot assess the same as the unexplained cash credit of the company issuing share capital. 15. The assessee has relied upon plet…

Decent Industries P. Ltd., Bhopal vs. ITO-1(2), Bhopal

Appeal is partly allowed

ITA 356/IND/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Indore20 Aug 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani(Virtual Hearing) Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/S Decent Industries Ito-1(2), Private Ltd, Bhopal 5Th Floor, Corporate Park, बनाम/ Db City Area Hills, Vs. Opp. M.P. Nagar Zone I, Bhopal (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent) Pan: Aaeca6271G Assessee By Ms. Shilpa Gupta & Shri N.K. Gupta Revenue By Shri V.K. Singh, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 04.06.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 20.08.2024

Section 133ASection 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 14ASection 68

…herefore not applicable to AY 2012-13 under consideration. Before introduction of this Proviso, which is the case of assessee, there was no requirement to prove “source of source”. It is further held by Hon’ble Courts, M/s Gagandeep Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. 394 ITR 680 (Bom) to quote one such decision, that the new proviso is prospective and not retrospective in application. When it is so, the lower-authorities are legally wrong in making/upholding addition on the allegations with respect to the “source of source” i.e. the source/companies from which “A” & “J” received moneys for making investment in assess…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Aurangabad vs. Vista Nirman Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

ITA 1340/PUN/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune05 Aug 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Jaiprakash BairagraFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Kumar Keshari
Section 132Section 133(6)Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151(1)

…e premium received by Appellant during AY 2011-12. Similarly the amendment to Sec 68 by addition of proviso was made subsequent to AY 2012-13 and cannot be invoked. The Hon'bleJurisdictional Bombay High Court in CIT vs Mis Gagandeep Infrastructure (P) Ltd. in 394 ITR 680 (Born) dated 20.03.2017 held that proviso to Sec 68 will have prospective effect only from AY 2013-14 onwards. Thus, in view of above facts the share premium received by Appellant of Rs. 24,11,50,0001- during AY 2011-12 cannot be considered as 'Income' of Appellant as it was considered as capital receipt in FY 2010-11 and addition uls 68 cannot…

Rapti Premises Private Limited, Mumbai vs. ITO, Ward 11(1)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 303/MUM/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jul 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Vishnu Agarwal, CAFor Respondent: Smt Mahita Nair, Sr. D.R
Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 250

…ns along with creditworthiness of these parties. 5 M/s. Rapti Premises Private Limited (4) Amendment to section 56(vii)(b) of the Act was introduced w.e.f. 01.04.2013. 2.5 The Assessee also relied the decisions in the case of Gagandeep Infrastructure P. Ltd. 394 ITR 680, Apeak Infotech 397 ITR 148 and Orchid Industries P. Ltd. 397 ITR 136 (Bombay High Court). 2.6 The AO though considered the aforesaid submissions of the Assessee but found not acceptable for the following reasons: “Though the provisions of section 56(vii)(b) of the Act are not applicable to the case, however opined that the present issue revolve…

Veenapani Investments Private Limited, Mumbai vs. ITO 13(3)(1), Mumbai

ITA 193/MUM/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Jul 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri Girish Agrawalito 13(3)(1), Veenapani Investments Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, Private Limted, Mumbai.400020. Flat No. 302, B–Wing, Garden Court Co–Op Society Ltd, Amrutwani Road, Bhayender (W), Mumbai-401101. Pan/Gir No. Aaccv1684Q (अपीलाथ"/Applicant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 271(1)(c)Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, “F” BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITO 13(3)(1), Veenapani Investments Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, Private Limted, Mumbai.400020. Flat no. 302, B–Wing, Garden Court Co–Op Society Ltd, Amrutwani Road, Bhayender (W), Mumbai-401101. PAN/GIR No. AACCV1684Q (अपीलाथ"/Applicant) (""यथ"/Respondent) Assessee by Ms.Ridhisha Jain and Shri.Karan Jain.AR Revenue by Ms.Rajeshwari Menon. Sr.DR सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date of Hearing 30.05.2024 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date of Pronouncement 25.07.2024 ORDER PER PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JM: “ The asse…

Balaka Vinimay Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-2(1), Kolkata

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 161/KOL/2024[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Jun 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg, Hon’Ble & Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 160 & 161/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2008-09 Balaka Vinimay Pvt. Ltd. Income Tax Officer, Ward – 2(1), 9/12, Lal Bazar Street Vs Kolkata Kolkata - 700001 [Pan : Aadcb2610B] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri A.K. Tibrewal, A/R & Saurav Gupta, A/R Revenue By : Shri Abhijit Kundu, Cit, Sr. D/R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 09/04/2024 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 21/06/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Dr. Manish Borad: The Instant Appeals Are Directed At The Instance Of The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, (Hereinafter The “Ld. Cit(A)”). Ita No. 160/Kol/2024 Is Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A) Dt. 29/11/2023, Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter ‘The Act’) Arising Out Of The Penalty Order Passed By The Ld. Assessing Officer U/S 271(1)(C) Of The Act & Ita No. 161/Kol/2023, Is Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A) Dt. 28/11/2023, Arising Out Of The Order Of The Ld. Assessing Officer Passed U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 254 Of The Act, For Assessment Year 2008-09. 2. Though The Assessee Has Raised Various Grounds In Both These Appeals, But The Effective Issue Raised In Ita No. 161/Kol/2024 Is Against The Addition Made U/S 68 Of The Act For Unexplained Share Capital Confirmed By The Ld. Cit(A) & In Ita No. 160/Kol/2024 Is Against The Levy Of Penalty U/S 271(1)(C) Of The Act On The Addition Made

For Appellant: Shri A.K. Tibrewal, A/R and Saurav Gupta, A/RFor Respondent: Shri Abhijit Kundu, CIT, Sr. D/R
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 263Section 271(1)(c)Section 68

…| आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण "यायपीठ, कोलकाता | IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI SANJAY GARG, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER & DR. MANISH BORAD, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No. 160 & 161/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2008-09 Balaka Vinimay Pvt. Ltd. Income Tax Officer, Ward – 2(1), 9/12, Lal Bazar Street Vs Kolkata Kolkata - 700001 [PAN : AADCB2610B] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri A.K. Tibrewal, A/R and Saurav Gupta, A/R Revenue by : Shri Abhijit Kundu, CIT, Sr. D/R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date of Hearing : 09/04/2024 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date of Pronouncement: 21/06/2024…

Balaka Vinimay Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-2(1), Kolkata

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 160/KOL/2024[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Jun 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg, Hon’Ble & Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 160 & 161/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2008-09 Balaka Vinimay Pvt. Ltd. Income Tax Officer, Ward – 2(1), 9/12, Lal Bazar Street Vs Kolkata Kolkata - 700001 [Pan : Aadcb2610B] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri A.K. Tibrewal, A/R & Saurav Gupta, A/R Revenue By : Shri Abhijit Kundu, Cit, Sr. D/R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 09/04/2024 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 21/06/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Dr. Manish Borad: The Instant Appeals Are Directed At The Instance Of The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, (Hereinafter The “Ld. Cit(A)”). Ita No. 160/Kol/2024 Is Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A) Dt. 29/11/2023, Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter ‘The Act’) Arising Out Of The Penalty Order Passed By The Ld. Assessing Officer U/S 271(1)(C) Of The Act & Ita No. 161/Kol/2023, Is Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A) Dt. 28/11/2023, Arising Out Of The Order Of The Ld. Assessing Officer Passed U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 254 Of The Act, For Assessment Year 2008-09. 2. Though The Assessee Has Raised Various Grounds In Both These Appeals, But The Effective Issue Raised In Ita No. 161/Kol/2024 Is Against The Addition Made U/S 68 Of The Act For Unexplained Share Capital Confirmed By The Ld. Cit(A) & In Ita No. 160/Kol/2024 Is Against The Levy Of Penalty U/S 271(1)(C) Of The Act On The Addition Made

For Appellant: Shri A.K. Tibrewal, A/R and Saurav Gupta, A/RFor Respondent: Shri Abhijit Kundu, CIT, Sr. D/R
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 263Section 271(1)(c)Section 68

…| आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण "यायपीठ, कोलकाता | IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI SANJAY GARG, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER & DR. MANISH BORAD, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No. 160 & 161/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2008-09 Balaka Vinimay Pvt. Ltd. Income Tax Officer, Ward – 2(1), 9/12, Lal Bazar Street Vs Kolkata Kolkata - 700001 [PAN : AADCB2610B] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri A.K. Tibrewal, A/R and Saurav Gupta, A/R Revenue by : Shri Abhijit Kundu, CIT, Sr. D/R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date of Hearing : 09/04/2024 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date of Pronouncement: 21/06/2024…

M/S Wisley Real Estate Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-11(3), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 55/KOL/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata06 Jun 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A. No. 55/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2012-2013 M/S. Wisley Real Estate Pvt. Ltd.,…..........Appellant 86C, Viswakarma, 1St Floor, Topsia Road, Tiljala, Kolkata-700046 [Pan:Aakcs8704L] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,……..........................Respondent Ward-11(3), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata-700069 Appearances By: Shri A.K. Tulsyan, Fca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri P.P. Barman, Addl. Cit, Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing : 18Th March, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: June 6Th , 2024 O R D E R

Section 131Section 133(6)Section 234BSection 68

…ITA No.55/KOL/2024 Assessment Year: 2012-2013 M/s. Wisley Real Estate Pvt. Ltd. IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘B’ BENCH, KOLKATA Before Shri Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member & Dr. Manish Borad, Accountant Member I.T.A. No. 55/KOL/2024 Assessment Year: 2012-2013 M/s. Wisley Real Estate Pvt. Ltd.,…..........Appellant 86C, Viswakarma, 1st Floor, Topsia Road, Tiljala, Kolkata-700046 [PAN:AAKCS8704L] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,……..........................Respondent Ward-11(3), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata-700069 Appearances by: Shri A.K. Tulsyan, FCA, appeared on behalf of the assess…

M/S Devbhumi Vinimay Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir. 5(1), Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1393/KOL/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata14 May 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: DR. MANISH BORAD, HON’BLE (Accountant Member), SHRI SANJAY GARG, HON’BLE (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Surana, A/RFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Paul, Addl. CIT, D/R
Section 131Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 68

…| आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण "यायपीठ, कोलकाता | IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH, KOLKATA BEFORE DR. MANISH BORAD, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI SANJAY GARG, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No. 1393/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/s. Devbhumi Vinimay Pvt. Ltd. The Deputy Commissioner of 2nd Floor, Room No. 10 Vs Income Tax, Circle-5(1), Kolkata 3, Synagogue Street Kolkata - 700001 [PAN : AADCD6145R] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Sunil Surana, A/R Revenue by : Shri Sanjay Paul, Addl. CIT, D/R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date of Hearing : 20/02/2024 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date of Pronounc…

ITO-13(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Sethia Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is allowed

ITA 2739/MUM/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 May 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya, Hon'Ble & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Hon'Bleito-13(2)(1) V. Sethia Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd 701, Central Plaza 147, 1St Floor, Aayakar Bhavan Daftari Road, Malad (East) M. K. Marg, Mumbai Mumbai, Maharashtra -400097 Maharashtra-400020 Pan: Aalcs9354B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented By : Jaiprakash Bairaga & Rupa Nanda Department Represented By : Dr. Kishor Dhule

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 68

…On merits, Ld. CIT(A) was of the opinion that share premium being a capital receipt cannot be added as income of the assessee and further, heavily relied upon the decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of M/s. Gagandeep Infrastructure P. Ltd., [394 ITR 680], M/s. Green Infrea Ltd., in ITA No. 7762/MUM/2012 dated 23.08.2013 and Vodafone India Services Pvt., Ltd., in W.P. 871/2014 and CBDT Instruction No. 2/2015 dated 29.01.2015, the First Appellate Authority went on to delete the additions made by the Assessing Officer. Page No. 16 Sethia Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd 22. We will address to the very basi…

M/S Monk Akarshala Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Dy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(2)(1), Mumbai

ITA 4151/MUM/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 May 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya, Hon'Ble & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh, Hon'Blem/S. Monk Akarshala Private Limited V. Dcit – Circle – 2(2)(1) 4116 Oberoi Garden Estate Room No. 545 Chandivli Vlg Farm Road Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Near Chandivli Studio, Saki Naka Mumbai - 400020 Mumbai City - 400072 Pan: Aagcm4703K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented By : Shri Ajay Wadhwa & Ms. Manasi Vyas Department Represented By : Smt Mahita Nair

Section 234B

…on, i.e., 2009-10, there would be no basis for the AO to form a reason to believe that income had escaped assessment for the said assessment year.” 29. The Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court of Bombay in the case of CIT v. Gagandeep Infrastructure (P.) Ltd., [394 ITR 680] had an occasion to consider the similar situation and held as under: - “The proviso to section 68 has been introduced by the Finance Act, 2012 with effect from 1-4-2013. Thus, it would be effective only from the assessment year 2013-14 onwards and not for the subject assessment year. In fact, before the Tribunal, it was not even the case of the…

Soubhik Exports Limited., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir-8(2), Kolkata / N E-Assessment Centre, Delhi.

ITA 1243/KOL/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata19 Mar 2024AY 2018-19

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

For Appellant: Shri P.K. Singh, A/RFor Respondent: Shri Rakesh Kumar Das, CIT, D/R
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 14ASection 250Section 68

…| आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण "यायपीठ, कोलकाता | IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH, KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI SANJAY GARG, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER & DR. MANISH BORAD, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No. 1242 & 1243/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2012-13 & 2018-19 Soubhik Exports Limited Deputy Commissioner of Income “Lords”, 7/1, Lord Sinha Road Vs Tax, Circle – 8(2), Kolkata 4th Floor, Room No. 409 Kolkata - 700071 [PAN : AAECS4250K] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri P.K. Singh, A/R Revenue by : Shri Rakesh Kumar Das, CIT, D/R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date of Hearing : 31/01/2024 घोषणा क" तारीख /D…

Soubhik Exports Limited., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir-8(2), Kolkata.

ITA 1242/KOL/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata19 Mar 2024AY 2012-13

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

For Appellant: Shri P.K. Singh, A/RFor Respondent: Shri Rakesh Kumar Das, CIT, D/R
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 14ASection 250Section 68

…| आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण "यायपीठ, कोलकाता | IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH, KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI SANJAY GARG, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER & DR. MANISH BORAD, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No. 1242 & 1243/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2012-13 & 2018-19 Soubhik Exports Limited Deputy Commissioner of Income “Lords”, 7/1, Lord Sinha Road Vs Tax, Circle – 8(2), Kolkata 4th Floor, Room No. 409 Kolkata - 700071 [PAN : AAECS4250K] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri P.K. Singh, A/R Revenue by : Shri Rakesh Kumar Das, CIT, D/R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date of Hearing : 31/01/2024 घोषणा क" तारीख /D…

True-Man Consultants Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-7(2), Kolkata.

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

ITA 1158/KOL/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 Feb 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Sri Rajpal Yadav & Dr. Manish Borad

Section 131Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250Section 68

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण कोलकाता 'बी' पीठ, कोलकाता में IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA ‘B’ BENCH, KOLKATA श्री राजपाल यादव, उपाध्यक्ष (कोलकाता क्षेत्र) एवं डॉ. मनीष बोरड, लेखा सदस्य के समक्ष Before SRI RAJPAL YADAV, VICE PRESIDENT & DR. MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No.: 1158/KOL/2023 Assessment Year: 2012-13 True-Man Consultants Pvt. Ltd.................................Appellant [PAN: AAACT 9862 G] Vs. ITO, Ward-7(2), Kolkata.....………….......................Respondent Appearances: Assessee represented by: Sh. V.N. Dube, AR. Department represented by: Sh. Abhijit Kundu, CIT. Date of concluding the…

Vish Realty Solutions Private Limited, Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward-5(3), Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 250/KOL/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Feb 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg, Hon’Ble & Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 250/Kol/2020 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Vish Realty Solutions Private Limited Income Tax Officer, Ward-5(3), 55, Ezra Street Vs Kolkata 2Nd Floor Kolkata - 700001 [Pan : Aadcv9938N] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri S. Jhajharia, A/R Revenue By : Shri Vineet Kumar, Addl. Cit, D/R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 16/01/2024 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 21/02/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Dr. Manish Borad: The Present Appeal Is Directed At The Instance Of The Assessee Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) -10 (Hereinafter The “Ld. Cit(E)”) Dt. 02/12/2019, Passed U/S 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act”) For The Assessment Year 2012-13. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:- “1. That The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-Io, Kolkata Erred In Passing An Order Dated 2Nd Of December, 2019 Under Section 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Dismissing The Appeal Of The Appellant Without Allowing Reasonable Opportunity Of Being Heard. 2. That The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) - 10, Kolkata Erred In Confirming The Addition Of Share Application Money Ofrs. 5,86,00,000/- Made By The Assessing Officer Under Section 68 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 On Irrelevant Considerations & Arbitrary Grounds.

For Appellant: Shri S. Jhajharia, A/RFor Respondent: Shri Vineet Kumar, Addl. CIT, D/R
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 263Section 68

…| आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण "यायपीठ, कोलकाता | IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH, KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI SANJAY GARG, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER & DR. MANISH BORAD, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No. 250/Kol/2020 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Vish Realty Solutions Private Limited Income Tax Officer, Ward-5(3), 55, Ezra Street Vs Kolkata 2nd Floor Kolkata - 700001 [PAN : AADCV9938N] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri S. Jhajharia, A/R Revenue by : Shri Vineet Kumar, Addl. CIT, D/R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date of Hearing : 16/01/2024 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date of Pronouncement: 21/02/2024 आदेश/O R D E…

Reliance Corporation, Mumbai vs. Dy. CIT Central Circle - 1, Thane

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 2725/MUM/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Feb 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail (Jm)

Section 147Section 68

…he case of the Assessee. The judgment in case of Gagandeep Infrastructure (P.) Ltd. (supra) would be applicable in the facts and circumstances of the present case.” 19. Similarly honourable Bombay High Court in the case of Gagandeep Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. (394 ITR 680) has held as under:- …………. (ii) Further it was a submission on behalf of the Revenue that such large amount of share premium gives rise to suspicion on the genuineness (identity) of the shareholders i.e. they are bogus. The Apex Court in CIT v/s. Lovely Exports (P)Ltd. 317 ITR 218 in the context to the preamended Section 68 of the Act has held th…

Reliance Corporation, Mumbai vs. Dy. CIT Central Circle - 1, Thane

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 2724/MUM/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Feb 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail (Jm)

Section 147Section 68

…he case of the Assessee. The judgment in case of Gagandeep Infrastructure (P.) Ltd. (supra) would be applicable in the facts and circumstances of the present case.” 19. Similarly honourable Bombay High Court in the case of Gagandeep Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. (394 ITR 680) has held as under:- …………. (ii) Further it was a submission on behalf of the Revenue that such large amount of share premium gives rise to suspicion on the genuineness (identity) of the shareholders i.e. they are bogus. The Apex Court in CIT v/s. Lovely Exports (P)Ltd. 317 ITR 218 in the context to the preamended Section 68 of the Act has held th…

Reliance Corporation, Mumbai vs. Dy. CIT, Central Circle - 1, Thane

ITA 2723/MUM/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Feb 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail (Jm)

Section 147Section 68

…the case of the Assessee. The judgment in case of Gagandeep Infrastructure (P.) Ltd. (supra) would be applicable in the facts and circumstances of the present case.” 19. Similarly honourable Bombay High Court in the case of Gagandeep Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. (394 ITR 680) has held as under:- (ii) Further it was a submission on behalf of the Revenue that such large amount of share premium gives rise to suspicion on the genuniness (identity) of the shareholders i.e. they are bogus. The Apex Court in CIT v/s. Lovely Exports (P)Ltd. 317 ITR 218 in the context to the preamended Section 68 of the Act has held that wher…