CIT v. Goyal M.G. Gases (P) Ltd.

242 ITR 22High Court2000#4487 most cited

What is CIT v. Goyal M.G. Gases (P) Ltd. authority for?

No notional interest can be added to the income of an assessee on interest-free advances given by them, as there is no provision in the Income Tax Act permitting such an addition.

26

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2010 to 2024.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Goyal M.G. Gases · interest-free advance · notional interest · income addition · Section 69 · Section 143(3) · no provision

Sections most often in play

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 69Section 69A

Issues it is cited on

penalty u/s 271(1)(c)section 69section 271(1)(c)section 153section 153asection 15previous yearsection 143(3)indiadocumentinterestbusiness

Judgments citing CIT v. Goyal M.G. Gases (P) Ltd.

SIMOCO SYSTEMS AND INFRASTRUCTURE SOLUTIONS LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. ITO WARD 2 (1), KOLKATA

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

ITA 123/KOL/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata29 Nov 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishraassessment Year: 2018-19

For Appellant: Indranil Banerjee, ARFor Respondent: Ankur Goyal, JCIT, Sr. DR
Section 115JSection 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 250

…to the income of assessee qua interest-free advance given by assessee There is no provision under the IT Act permitting such addition Assessee. 144 has no application since assessment was made under s. 143(3)-B & A Plantations & Industries Ltd. vs. CIT (2000) 242 ITR 22 (Gau) relied on (Para 6 to 8) Conclusion: No notional interest can be added to the income of assessee qua interest-free advance given by assessee. 3. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. DLF UNIVERSAL LTD. HIGH COURT OF DELHI: 378 ITR 197 (Del): "5. The AO added back the sum of Rs.47,85,650 during the assessment year on the ground that the assessee had…

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 26 , NEW DELHI vs. KRISHAN KUMAR MODI, NEW DELHI

The Appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 4554/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Nov 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.Ita No. 4554/Del/2018, (A.Y.2014-15)

Section 132Section 143(3)

…n held that no addition on account of interest can be made where no interest has in fact been charged by the parties within the terms of funds/loan advanced. • CIT vs. Goyal M.G. Gases (P) Ltd.: 303 ITR 159 (Del.) • B & A Plantations and Industries vs. CIT: 242 ITR 22 (Gau.) • KeshrichandJaisukhlal vs. CIT: 248 ITR 47 (Gau.) • Highways Construction Co. Pvt. Ltd vs. CIT: 199 ITR 702 (Gau.) • Jwala Prasad Radha Krishna vs. CIT [1992]: 198 ITR 415(All) • CIT vs. Punjab Financial Corpn. Ltd.: 295 ITR 510 (P&H HC) • CIT vs. South India Corpn. (Agencies) Ltd.: 293 ITR 237 (Chennai HC) • CIT vs. Sanghi Finance a…

M/S. STANDARD CHARTERED BANK,MUMBAI vs. THE ACIT (IT)1(3), MUMBAI

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

ITA 803/MUM/2009[1999-2000]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Sept 2022AY 1999-2000

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Blestandard Chartered Bank V. Acit – Range-1(3) Taxation Department, 23-25 Scindia House, Ballard Estate M.G. Road, 3Rd Floor N.M. Marg, Mumbai - 400038 Fort, Mumbai - 400001 Pan: Aabcs4681D (Appellant) (Respondent) Adit (It)– 2(3) V. Standard Chartered Bank Room No. 120, 1St Floor Taxation Department, 23-25 Scindia House, Ballard Estate M.G. Road, 3Rd Floor N.M. Marg, Mumbai - 400038 Fort, Mumbai - 400001 Pan: Aabcs4681D (Appellant) (Respondent) Shri P.J. Pardiwala & Assessee Represented By : Shri Fenil Bhatt Shri Soumendu Kumar Dash Department Represented By :

Section 115JSection 14ASection 90Section 90(2)

…- 148 ITR 99 (Bom) (ix). Bhagat Industries Corporation - 126 ITR 645 (P&H) (x). Girdhari Dass & Sons - 105 ITR 339 (All) (xi). Assam Bengal Cement Co Ltd. - 27 ITR 34 (SC) (xii). Ooty Dasaprakash - 237 ITR 902 (Mad) (xiii). B and A Plantation and Industries - 242 ITR 22 (Gau) (xiv). HEDE Consultancy P Ltd. - 258 ITR 380 (Bom) Software: (xv). CIT vs. Raychem RPG Ltd. 346 ITR 138 (Bom) 12. Ld.DR relied on the orders of the Assessing Officer. 13. Considered the rival submissions and material placed on record, we observed that Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Madras Auto Services Pvt. Ltd., (supra) on similar i…

SHYAM SUNDER JINDAL,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 30, NEW DELHI

In the result the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 6298/DEL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Jun 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Kuldip Singh

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Prakash Dubey, Sr. DR
Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)Section 69

…en held that no addition on account of interest can be made where no interest has in fact been charged by the parties within the terms of funds/loan advanced. • CIT vs. Goyal M.G. Gases (P) Ltd.: 303 ITR 159 (Del.) • B & A Plantations and Industries vs. CIT: 242 ITR 22 (Gau.) • KeshrichandJaisukhlal vs. CIT: 248 ITR 47 (Gau.) • Highways Construction Co. Pvt. Ltd vs. CIT: 199 ITR 702 (Gau.) • Jwala Prasad Radha Krishna vs. CIT [1992]: 198 ITR 415 (All) • CIT vs. Punjab Financial Corpn. Ltd.: 295 ITR 510 (P&H HC) • CIT vs. South India Corpn. (Agencies) Ltd.: 293 ITR 237 (Chennai HC) • CIT vs. Sanghi Finance and In…

SHYAM SUNDER JINDAL,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 30, NEW DELHI

In the result the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 6297/DEL/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Jun 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Kuldip Singh

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Prakash Dubey, Sr. DR
Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)Section 69

…en held that no addition on account of interest can be made where no interest has in fact been charged by the parties within the terms of funds/loan advanced. • CIT vs. Goyal M.G. Gases (P) Ltd.: 303 ITR 159 (Del.) • B & A Plantations and Industries vs. CIT: 242 ITR 22 (Gau.) • KeshrichandJaisukhlal vs. CIT: 248 ITR 47 (Gau.) • Highways Construction Co. Pvt. Ltd vs. CIT: 199 ITR 702 (Gau.) • Jwala Prasad Radha Krishna vs. CIT [1992]: 198 ITR 415 (All) • CIT vs. Punjab Financial Corpn. Ltd.: 295 ITR 510 (P&H HC) • CIT vs. South India Corpn. (Agencies) Ltd.: 293 ITR 237 (Chennai HC) • CIT vs. Sanghi Finance and In…

SHYAM SUNDER JINDAL,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 30, NEW DELHI

In the result the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 6296/DEL/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Jun 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Kuldip Singh

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Prakash Dubey, Sr. DR
Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)Section 69

…en held that no addition on account of interest can be made where no interest has in fact been charged by the parties within the terms of funds/loan advanced. • CIT vs. Goyal M.G. Gases (P) Ltd.: 303 ITR 159 (Del.) • B & A Plantations and Industries vs. CIT: 242 ITR 22 (Gau.) • KeshrichandJaisukhlal vs. CIT: 248 ITR 47 (Gau.) • Highways Construction Co. Pvt. Ltd vs. CIT: 199 ITR 702 (Gau.) • Jwala Prasad Radha Krishna vs. CIT [1992]: 198 ITR 415 (All) • CIT vs. Punjab Financial Corpn. Ltd.: 295 ITR 510 (P&H HC) • CIT vs. South India Corpn. (Agencies) Ltd.: 293 ITR 237 (Chennai HC) • CIT vs. Sanghi Finance and In…

SHYAM SUNDER JINDAL,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 30, NEW DELHI

In the result the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 6295/DEL/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Jun 2021AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Kuldip Singh

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Prakash Dubey, Sr. DR
Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)Section 69

…en held that no addition on account of interest can be made where no interest has in fact been charged by the parties within the terms of funds/loan advanced. • CIT vs. Goyal M.G. Gases (P) Ltd.: 303 ITR 159 (Del.) • B & A Plantations and Industries vs. CIT: 242 ITR 22 (Gau.) • KeshrichandJaisukhlal vs. CIT: 248 ITR 47 (Gau.) • Highways Construction Co. Pvt. Ltd vs. CIT: 199 ITR 702 (Gau.) • Jwala Prasad Radha Krishna vs. CIT [1992]: 198 ITR 415 (All) • CIT vs. Punjab Financial Corpn. Ltd.: 295 ITR 510 (P&H HC) • CIT vs. South India Corpn. (Agencies) Ltd.: 293 ITR 237 (Chennai HC) • CIT vs. Sanghi Finance and In…

DCIT,CIRCLE, SRIGANGANAGAR vs. M/S. KANDA EDIBLE OIL P. LTD. , SRIGANGANAGAR

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed and CO of the assessee is allowed

ITA 191/JODH/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur01 Feb 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwald.C.I.T. Vs. M/S Kanda Edible Oil Pvt. Ltd. Circle, E 173, Udyog Vihar Sriganganagar. Sriganganagar. Pan No. Aacck 7754 Q

Section 36(1)(iii)

…CO 17/Jodh/2019 DCIT Vs M/s Kanda Edible Oil P Ltd.. he referred to the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of CIT Vs. Shoorji Vallabhdas And Co. (1962) 46 ITR 144 and Hon’ble Gauhati High Court in case of B and A Plantations and Industries Ltd. Vs. CIT 242 ITR 22. This party is not related to assessee. Accordingly he deleted the addition made by the AO. 6. The Ld. D/R has relied on the order of AO. 7. On the contrary, the Ld. A/R appearing on behalf of the assessee has reiterated the same arguments as were raised before the ld. CIT(A) and also filed a written submission and submitted that the advance giv…

DCIT,CIRCLE, SRIGANGANAGAR vs. M/S. KANDA EDIBLE OIL P. LTD. , SRIGANGANAGAR

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed and CO of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 190/JODH/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur01 Feb 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwald.C.I.T. Vs. M/S Kanda Edible Oil Pvt. Ltd. Circle, E 173, Udyog Vihar Sriganganagar. Sriganganagar. Pan No. Aacck 7754 Q

Section 36(1)(iii)Section 40A(2)(b)

…Notional interest cannot be brought to tax for which he referred to the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of CIT Vs. Shoorji Vallabhdas And Co. (1962) 46 ITR 144 and Hon’ble Gauhati High Court in case of B and A Plantations and Industries Ltd. Vs. CIT 242 ITR 22. Accordingly, he deleted the addition made by the AO. 6. The Ld. A.R appearing on behalf of the assessee has reiterated the same arguments as were raised before the ld. CIT(A) and also filed a written submission and has further submitted that the advance given to the 5 ITA 190/Jodh/2019 & CO 16/Jodh/2019 DCIT Vs M/s Kanda Edible Oil P Ltd.. above…

DCIT, CIRCLE- 62(1), NEW DELHI vs. L&T SUCG JV CC27, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Department is dismissed

ITA 4457/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Jul 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kant

For Appellant: Shri Saurabh Goel, C.As And Shri Nirbhay MehtaFor Respondent: Shri J.K. Mishra, CIT-DR

…ies below and submitted that net interest could be considered in the matter. 67. We have considered the rival submissions and do not sustain the orders of the authorities below. The Hon’ble Gauhati High Court in the case B & A Plantation and Industries Ltd., 242 ITR 22 (Gau.) held that “there is no provision in Income Tax Act empowering the ITO to include in the income of the assessee interest which was not due or collected.” The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of A. Raman & Co. 67 ITR 11 (SC) held that “Law does not oblige 124 ITA.No.4351 & 4457/Del./2018 L & T SUCG JV CC 27, New Delhi. a trader to make maxi…

L&T SUCG JV CC27,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL.CIT, RANGE-62, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Department is dismissed

ITA 4351/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Jul 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kant

For Appellant: Shri Saurabh Goel, C.As And Shri Nirbhay MehtaFor Respondent: Shri J.K. Mishra, CIT-DR

…ies below and submitted that net interest could be considered in the matter. 67. We have considered the rival submissions and do not sustain the orders of the authorities below. The Hon’ble Gauhati High Court in the case B & A Plantation and Industries Ltd., 242 ITR 22 (Gau.) held that “there is no provision in Income Tax Act empowering the ITO to include in the income of the assessee interest which was not due or collected.” The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of A. Raman & Co. 67 ITR 11 (SC) held that “Law does not oblige 124 ITA.No.4351 & 4457/Del./2018 L & T SUCG JV CC 27, New Delhi. a trader to make maxi…

ACIT, CC- 26, , NEW DELHI vs. KRISHAN KUMAR MODI, NEW DELHI

In the result, the assessee's appeal is allowed

ITA 3956/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Jul 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawal & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year: 2006-07 Assessment Year: 2006-07 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Krishan Kumar Modi, Acit, A-1, Maharani Bagh, Central Circle – 2, New Delhi. New Delhi. Vs (Pan: Aanpm0159M)

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri J.K. Mishra, C.I.T. DR
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 139(1)Section 69A

…en held that no addition on account of interest can be made where no interest has in fact been charged by the parties within the terms of funds/loan advanced. • CIT vs. Goyal M.G. Gases (P) Ltd.: 303 ITR 159 (Del.) • B & A Plantations and Industries vs. CIT: 242 ITR 22 (Gau.) • KeshrichandJaisukhlal vs. CIT: 248 ITR 47 (Gau.) • Highways Construction Co. Pvt. Ltd vs. CIT: 199 ITR 702 (Gau.) • Jwala Prasad Radha Krishna vs. CIT [1992]: 198 ITR 415 (All) • CIT vs. Punjab Financial Corpn. Ltd.: 295 ITR 510 (P&H HC) • CIT vs. South India Corpn. (Agencies) Ltd.: 293 ITR 237 (Chennai HC) • CIT vs. Sanghi Finance and In…

ACIT, CC- 26, , NEW DELHI vs. KRISHAN KUMAR MODI, NEW DELHI

In the result, the assessee's appeal is allowed

ITA 3955/DEL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Jul 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawal & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year: 2006-07 Assessment Year: 2006-07 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Krishan Kumar Modi, Acit, A-1, Maharani Bagh, Central Circle – 2, New Delhi. New Delhi. Vs (Pan: Aanpm0159M)

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri J.K. Mishra, C.I.T. DR
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 139(1)Section 69A

…en held that no addition on account of interest can be made where no interest has in fact been charged by the parties within the terms of funds/loan advanced. • CIT vs. Goyal M.G. Gases (P) Ltd.: 303 ITR 159 (Del.) • B & A Plantations and Industries vs. CIT: 242 ITR 22 (Gau.) • KeshrichandJaisukhlal vs. CIT: 248 ITR 47 (Gau.) • Highways Construction Co. Pvt. Ltd vs. CIT: 199 ITR 702 (Gau.) • Jwala Prasad Radha Krishna vs. CIT [1992]: 198 ITR 415 (All) • CIT vs. Punjab Financial Corpn. Ltd.: 295 ITR 510 (P&H HC) • CIT vs. South India Corpn. (Agencies) Ltd.: 293 ITR 237 (Chennai HC) • CIT vs. Sanghi Finance and In…

ACIT, CC- 26, , NEW DELHI vs. KRISHAN KUMAR MODI, NEW DELHI

In the result, the assessee's appeal is allowed

ITA 3954/DEL/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Jul 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawal & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year: 2006-07 Assessment Year: 2006-07 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Krishan Kumar Modi, Acit, A-1, Maharani Bagh, Central Circle – 2, New Delhi. New Delhi. Vs (Pan: Aanpm0159M)

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri J.K. Mishra, C.I.T. DR
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 139(1)Section 69A

…en held that no addition on account of interest can be made where no interest has in fact been charged by the parties within the terms of funds/loan advanced. • CIT vs. Goyal M.G. Gases (P) Ltd.: 303 ITR 159 (Del.) • B & A Plantations and Industries vs. CIT: 242 ITR 22 (Gau.) • KeshrichandJaisukhlal vs. CIT: 248 ITR 47 (Gau.) • Highways Construction Co. Pvt. Ltd vs. CIT: 199 ITR 702 (Gau.) • Jwala Prasad Radha Krishna vs. CIT [1992]: 198 ITR 415 (All) • CIT vs. Punjab Financial Corpn. Ltd.: 295 ITR 510 (P&H HC) • CIT vs. South India Corpn. (Agencies) Ltd.: 293 ITR 237 (Chennai HC) • CIT vs. Sanghi Finance and In…

ACIT, CC- 26, , NEW DELHI vs. KRISHAN KUMAR MODI, NEW DELHI

In the result, the assessee's appeal is allowed

ITA 3953/DEL/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Jul 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawal & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year: 2006-07 Assessment Year: 2006-07 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Krishan Kumar Modi, Acit, A-1, Maharani Bagh, Central Circle – 2, New Delhi. New Delhi. Vs (Pan: Aanpm0159M)

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri J.K. Mishra, C.I.T. DR
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 139(1)Section 69A

…en held that no addition on account of interest can be made where no interest has in fact been charged by the parties within the terms of funds/loan advanced. • CIT vs. Goyal M.G. Gases (P) Ltd.: 303 ITR 159 (Del.) • B & A Plantations and Industries vs. CIT: 242 ITR 22 (Gau.) • KeshrichandJaisukhlal vs. CIT: 248 ITR 47 (Gau.) • Highways Construction Co. Pvt. Ltd vs. CIT: 199 ITR 702 (Gau.) • Jwala Prasad Radha Krishna vs. CIT [1992]: 198 ITR 415 (All) • CIT vs. Punjab Financial Corpn. Ltd.: 295 ITR 510 (P&H HC) • CIT vs. South India Corpn. (Agencies) Ltd.: 293 ITR 237 (Chennai HC) • CIT vs. Sanghi Finance and In…

ACIT, CC- 26, , NEW DELHI vs. KRISHAN KUMAR MODI, NEW DELHI

In the result, the assessee's appeal is allowed

ITA 3952/DEL/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Jul 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawal & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year: 2006-07 Assessment Year: 2006-07 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Krishan Kumar Modi, Acit, A-1, Maharani Bagh, Central Circle – 2, New Delhi. New Delhi. Vs (Pan: Aanpm0159M)

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri J.K. Mishra, C.I.T. DR
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 139(1)Section 69A

…en held that no addition on account of interest can be made where no interest has in fact been charged by the parties within the terms of funds/loan advanced. • CIT vs. Goyal M.G. Gases (P) Ltd.: 303 ITR 159 (Del.) • B & A Plantations and Industries vs. CIT: 242 ITR 22 (Gau.) • KeshrichandJaisukhlal vs. CIT: 248 ITR 47 (Gau.) • Highways Construction Co. Pvt. Ltd vs. CIT: 199 ITR 702 (Gau.) • Jwala Prasad Radha Krishna vs. CIT [1992]: 198 ITR 415 (All) • CIT vs. Punjab Financial Corpn. Ltd.: 295 ITR 510 (P&H HC) • CIT vs. South India Corpn. (Agencies) Ltd.: 293 ITR 237 (Chennai HC) • CIT vs. Sanghi Finance and In…

ACIT, CC- 26, , NEW DELHI vs. KRISHAN KUMAR MODI, NEW DELHI

In the result, the assessee's appeal is allowed

ITA 3951/DEL/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Jul 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawal & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year: 2006-07 Assessment Year: 2006-07 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Krishan Kumar Modi, Acit, A-1, Maharani Bagh, Central Circle – 2, New Delhi. New Delhi. Vs (Pan: Aanpm0159M)

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri J.K. Mishra, C.I.T. DR
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 139(1)Section 69A

…en held that no addition on account of interest can be made where no interest has in fact been charged by the parties within the terms of funds/loan advanced. • CIT vs. Goyal M.G. Gases (P) Ltd.: 303 ITR 159 (Del.) • B & A Plantations and Industries vs. CIT: 242 ITR 22 (Gau.) • KeshrichandJaisukhlal vs. CIT: 248 ITR 47 (Gau.) • Highways Construction Co. Pvt. Ltd vs. CIT: 199 ITR 702 (Gau.) • Jwala Prasad Radha Krishna vs. CIT [1992]: 198 ITR 415 (All) • CIT vs. Punjab Financial Corpn. Ltd.: 295 ITR 510 (P&H HC) • CIT vs. South India Corpn. (Agencies) Ltd.: 293 ITR 237 (Chennai HC) • CIT vs. Sanghi Finance and In…

SH. KRISHAN KUMAR MODI,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the assessee's appeal is allowed

ITA 2894/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Jul 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawal & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year: 2006-07 Assessment Year: 2006-07 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Krishan Kumar Modi, Acit, A-1, Maharani Bagh, Central Circle – 2, New Delhi. New Delhi. Vs (Pan: Aanpm0159M)

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri J.K. Mishra, C.I.T. DR
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 139(1)Section 69A

…en held that no addition on account of interest can be made where no interest has in fact been charged by the parties within the terms of funds/loan advanced. • CIT vs. Goyal M.G. Gases (P) Ltd.: 303 ITR 159 (Del.) • B & A Plantations and Industries vs. CIT: 242 ITR 22 (Gau.) • KeshrichandJaisukhlal vs. CIT: 248 ITR 47 (Gau.) • Highways Construction Co. Pvt. Ltd vs. CIT: 199 ITR 702 (Gau.) • Jwala Prasad Radha Krishna vs. CIT [1992]: 198 ITR 415 (All) • CIT vs. Punjab Financial Corpn. Ltd.: 295 ITR 510 (P&H HC) • CIT vs. South India Corpn. (Agencies) Ltd.: 293 ITR 237 (Chennai HC) • CIT vs. Sanghi Finance and In…

SH. KRISHAN KUMAR MODI,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the assessee's appeal is allowed

ITA 2893/DEL/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Jul 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawal & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year: 2006-07 Assessment Year: 2006-07 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Krishan Kumar Modi, Acit, A-1, Maharani Bagh, Central Circle – 2, New Delhi. New Delhi. Vs (Pan: Aanpm0159M)

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri J.K. Mishra, C.I.T. DR
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 139(1)Section 69A

…en held that no addition on account of interest can be made where no interest has in fact been charged by the parties within the terms of funds/loan advanced. • CIT vs. Goyal M.G. Gases (P) Ltd.: 303 ITR 159 (Del.) • B & A Plantations and Industries vs. CIT: 242 ITR 22 (Gau.) • KeshrichandJaisukhlal vs. CIT: 248 ITR 47 (Gau.) • Highways Construction Co. Pvt. Ltd vs. CIT: 199 ITR 702 (Gau.) • Jwala Prasad Radha Krishna vs. CIT [1992]: 198 ITR 415 (All) • CIT vs. Punjab Financial Corpn. Ltd.: 295 ITR 510 (P&H HC) • CIT vs. South India Corpn. (Agencies) Ltd.: 293 ITR 237 (Chennai HC) • CIT vs. Sanghi Finance and In…

SH. KRISHAN KUMAR MODI,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the assessee's appeal is allowed

ITA 2892/DEL/2017[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Jul 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawal & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year: 2006-07 Assessment Year: 2006-07 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Krishan Kumar Modi, Acit, A-1, Maharani Bagh, Central Circle – 2, New Delhi. New Delhi. Vs (Pan: Aanpm0159M)

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri J.K. Mishra, C.I.T. DR
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 139(1)Section 69A

…en held that no addition on account of interest can be made where no interest has in fact been charged by the parties within the terms of funds/loan advanced. • CIT vs. Goyal M.G. Gases (P) Ltd.: 303 ITR 159 (Del.) • B & A Plantations and Industries vs. CIT: 242 ITR 22 (Gau.) • KeshrichandJaisukhlal vs. CIT: 248 ITR 47 (Gau.) • Highways Construction Co. Pvt. Ltd vs. CIT: 199 ITR 702 (Gau.) • Jwala Prasad Radha Krishna vs. CIT [1992]: 198 ITR 415 (All) • CIT vs. Punjab Financial Corpn. Ltd.: 295 ITR 510 (P&H HC) • CIT vs. South India Corpn. (Agencies) Ltd.: 293 ITR 237 (Chennai HC) • CIT vs. Sanghi Finance and In…

Showing 1–20 of 26 · Page 1 of 2

CIT v. Goyal M.G. Gases (P) Ltd. (242 ITR 22) — Cited in 26 Judgments | BharatTax