How many judgments cite CIT v. Green Infra Ltd.?

56 judgments on BharatTax cite CIT v. Green Infra Ltd. (78 Taxmann.com 340), spanning 2017 to 2025.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does CIT v. Green Infra Ltd. come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 68, Section 142(1), Section 115JB, Section 143(2), Section 14A, Section 36(1)(iii).

CIT v. Green Infra Ltd.

78 Taxmann.com 340High Court2017#2058 most cited

What is CIT v. Green Infra Ltd. authority for?

The valuation of shares is not relevant for determining the genuineness of a transaction under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act. Interest income earned on the deposit of surplus funds is taxable as business income.

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2025.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Green Infra Ltd. · Section 68 · valuation of shares · genuineness of transaction · Section 56(2)(viia) · Section 56(2)(viib) · business income · interest income · surplus funds

Also reported as

392 ITR 7292 CTR 233

Sections most often in play

Section 68 Section 142(1)Section 115JB Section 143(2)Section 14A Section 36(1)(iii)Section 37 Section 43CA

Issues it is cited on

section 56(2)(viia)section 56(1)dcf method section 56(2)(viib)valuation of shares section 43ca share capital and share premium source of source strategic investment section 36(2)interest free advances transfer of capital asset

Judgments citing CIT v. Green Infra Ltd.

Sejal Jewellers Pvt. Ltd., Surat vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(1)(2), Surat

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 435/AHD/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Surat28 Feb 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shripawan Singh, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.435/Ahd/2017 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2012-13) (Virtual Court Hearing) Sejal Jewellers Pvt. Ltd, Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(1)(2), V Ug-4/5 Rangila Park, Ghod Dod Surat, Aaykar Bhavan, Majura Gate, S. Road, Surat-395007 Surat "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaqcs 8686 P (Appellant ) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Rasesh Shah, CAFor Respondent: Shri H.P. Meena– CIT-DR

Section 131Section 131(1)(d)Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, SURAT BENCH, SURAT BEFORE SHRIPAWAN SINGH, JM &DR. A.L.SAINI, AM आयकरअपीलसं./ITA No.435/AHD/2017 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2012-13) (Virtual Court Hearing) Sejal Jewellers Pvt. Ltd, Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(1)(2), V UG-4/5 Rangila Park, Ghod Dod Surat, Aaykar Bhavan, Majura Gate, s. Road, Surat-395007 Surat "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: AAQCS 8686 P (Appellant ) (Respondent) Assessee by :Shri Rasesh Shah, CA Respondent by :Shri H.P. Meena– CIT-DR सुनवाईकीतारीख/ Date of Hearing : 21/01/2022 घोषणाकीतारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 28/02/2022 आदेश / O R D E R PER DR…

ITO 6 (2)(1), Mumbai vs. M/S Confiance Trading Pvt Ltd., Mumbai

ITA 199/MUM/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jan 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Amarjit Singhassessment Year: 2012-13 Ito 6(2)(1), M/S. Confiance Trading 5Th Floor, Pvt. Ltd., Room No.510, 308, Adharu Industrial Aaykar Bhavan, Vs. Estate, M.K. Road, Sun Mill Compound, Mumbai – 400 020 Lower Parel, Mumbai – 400 013 Pan: Aaccc4316L (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee By : Shri Dharmvir, A.R. Revenue By : Shri Gaurav Kabra, D.R. Date Of Hearing : 10.11.2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 24.01.2022 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Dharmvir, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Gaurav Kabra, D.R

Section 143(1)Section 56(2)(viib)Section 68

…f Co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal in the case of ITO vs. M/s. Shripal Polyfilm Ltd. (2019) 104 taxman.com 172 wherein the co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal by following the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Green Infra Ltd. (2017) 392 ITR 7 wherein it has been held that the valuation of share is not relevant for determining the genuineness of the transaction for the purpose of section 68 of the Act. The Ld. CIT(A) also referred to the decision of Vodafone India Services Ltd. vs. UOI 368 ITR 1 wherein it has been held that share premium is not an income of the assessee. The Ld. CIT(A)…

DCIT Circle- 6 (3)(2), Mumbai vs. M/S Jostar Orgotech Pvt Ltd, Mumbai

ITA 103/MUM/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Sept 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am (Hearing Through Video Conferencing Mode) आयकरअपील सं./ I.T.A. No. 103/Mum/2020 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Dcit-(6)(3)(2) M/S Jostar Orgotech Pvt. Ltd. बिाम/ Aaykar Bhavan, R. No. 576 A-501, Innova Marathon Next Gen. M.K. Road, Mumbai-400 020. Off. Ganpatrao Kadam Marg Vs. Lower Parel(W), Mumbai-400 008 स्थायीलेखासं./ जीआइआरसं./ Pan/Gir No. Aabcj-2496-H (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : Revenue By : Ms. Usha Gaikwad– Ld. Sr. Dr Assessee By : Shri J. P. Bairagra– Ld. Ar सुनवाई की तारीख/ : 30/08/2021 Date Of Hearing घोषणा की तारीख / : 03/09/2021 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1. Aforesaid Appeal By Revenue For Assessment Year (Ay) 2012-13 Arises Out Of The Order Of Learned Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)-12, Mumbai [Cit(A)], Dated 02/09/2019 In The Matter Of Assessment Framed By Ld. Assessing Officer U/S 143(3) On 28/03/2015. The Sole Ground By The Revenue Read As Under: - On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Ld.Cit(A) Erred In Deleting The Addition Of Rs.5,68,60,000/- Made By The Ao On Account Of Share Application Money/Share Capital & Share Premium Which Is Held As Unexplained

For Appellant: Shri J. P. Bairagra– Ld. ARFor Respondent: Ms. Usha Gaikwad– Ld. Sr. DR

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 68

…f premium would be applicable only from AY 2013-14 and could not apply to this year. The Tribunal in ITO V/s Chiripal Poly films Ltd. (104 Taxmann.com 172), relying upon the decision of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT V/s Green Infra Ltd. (2017; 392 ITR 7) held that valuation of shares would not be relevant for determining genuineness of the transaction for the purpose of Section 68 of the Act. It was held by Hon’ble Bombay High Court that the genuineness of the transaction is proved since the entire transaction has taken place through banking channels. Further, it would be a prerogative of the Boar…

Asst CIT CIT 1, Thane vs. Bayer Sheets India P.Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed

ITA 2170/MUM/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Apr 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Us At The Time Of Hearing. The Same Is Reckoned As A Statement Made From The Bar. Accordingly, The Ground No. 2 Raised By The Revenue Is Allowed.

Section 143(3)Section 56(1)Section 56(2)(viib)Section 78

…al High Court on the addition made u/s.56(1) of the Act though the very same addition was challenged by the revenue u/s.68 of the Act which was admitted by the Hon‟ble High Court. We find that the Hon‟ble Jurisdictional High Court in the said case reported in 392 ITR 7 decided the addition made u/s.68 of the Act in favour of the assessee. 4.9. With regard to yet another observation made by the ld. AO in his order that receipt of premium was akin to gift and hence taxable 10 Covestro India Private Limited (formerly known as Bayer Sheets India Private Limited) u/s.56(1) of the Act, we find that receipt of share…

Digvijay Advisor Pvt. Ltd, Ghaziabad Up vs. ITO Ward-7(3), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4540/DEL/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Apr 2021AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri R.K. Pandaassessment Year : 2008-09

For Appellant: Sh. Akhilesh Kumar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Farat Khan, Sr. DR

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 149Section 68Section 69C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH, ‘SMC-2’: NEW DELHI (Through Video Conferencing) BEFORE SHRI R.K. PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year : 2008-09 Digvijay Advisor Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ITO, C/o-Akhilesh Kumar, Adv. Ward-7(3), 206-207, Ansal Satyam, New Delhi RDC, Ghaziabad-201002 PAN-AAACK5245Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Sh. Akhilesh Kumar, Advocate Respondent by : Sh. Farat Khan, Sr. DR Date of hearing : 04.02.2021 Date of pronouncement : 16.04.2021 ORDER PER R.K. PANDA, AM : This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 11.03.2019 of the learned CIT(A…

Shakti Share Shoppee Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. ITO, WD-13(2)(3), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 4100/MUM/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Dec 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Shri Vishnu Agarwal, A.RFor Respondent: Shri T.S. Khalsa, D.R

Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 56(2)(vii)Section 68

…. In defence of his argument, the Ld. A.R. relied on the following decisions: 1. PCIT, Panji v/s. Paradise Inland Shipping (P.) Ltd. 93 taxmann.com84 (SC) 2. CIT v/s. Gagandeep Infrastructure (P.) Ltd. 80 Taxmann.com 272 (HC-Bom) 3. CIT v/s. Green Infra Ltd. 78 Taxmann.com 340 (HC-Bom) 4. Vodafone India Services (P.) Ltd. v/s. Union of India. 50 Taxmann.com 300 (HC-Bom) 5. CIT v/s. Orchid Industries (P.) Ltd. 88 taxman.com 502 (HC- Bom) 6. CIT v/s. Lovely Exports (P) Ltd. 216CTR195(SC) 7. CIT v/s. Steller Investment Ltd. 115Taxman99(SC) 8. CIT v/s. Creative World Telefilms Ltd. 15 Taxman.com 183 (HC-Bom) 9. CIT…

Income Tax Officer, Bundi vs. M/S Aravali Prime Consultants Pvt. Ltd., Bundi

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed with no order as to cost

ITA 801/JPR/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur14 Sept 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: The Ld. Cit(A) Who After Considering The Case Of Both The Parties

For Appellant: Shri S.L.Poddar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Runi Paul , Addl. CIT -. DR &

Section 143(3)Section 68

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”B” JAIPUR Jh jes’k lh-'kekZ] ys[kk lnL; ,o lanhi xkslkbZ] U;kf;d lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: SHRI RAMESH C SHARMA, AM & SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No.801/JP/2019 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year : 2009-10 cuke The ITO M/s. Aravali Prime Consultants Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Bundi Jajoo Sadan, Khoja Gate Road, Bundi LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AAGCA6396 N vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by: Smt. Runi Paul , Addl. CIT -. DR & Shri B.K. Gupta, CIT – DR fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls…

Ksm Securities & Finance P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. CIT 1, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2980/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Mar 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri G. Manjunatha & Shri Ram Lal Negiksm Securities & Finance Vs. Cit-1 3Rd Floor, Room No.387 Private Limited 2Nd Floor, National Insurance Aaykar Bhawan Building, 204, D.N.Road M.K.Road Fort, Mumbai-400 001 Mumbai-400 020

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 263Section 68

…t be questioned, because the proviso inserted to section 68 of the I.T.Act, 1961 was effective from AY 2013-14 and which is not applicable for the year under consideration as held by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court, in the case of CIT vs Green Infra Ltd. [2017] 392 ITR 7. Insofar as, disallowances of u/s 14A of the Act, the main allegation of the Ld.CIT is that although, the Ld. AO has computed disallowances by invoking Rule 8D, but has excluded shares held as stock in trade contrary to provision of section 14A r.w.Rule 8D of I.T.Rules, 1962. We find that the law as was there at the prevailing time, when the assess…

Shaunak Shailesh Shah, 9, Neelkanth Bunglow, Prahladnagar, Satellite, Ahmedabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward - 15(4), 7Th Floor, Nature View Building, Ashram Road, Ahmedabad 380009

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1421/AHD/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad20 Jan 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 1421/Ahd/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2011-2012 Shaunak Shailesh Shah, I.T.O., 9, Neelkanth Bunglow, Vs. Ward-15(4), Prahladnagar, Ahmedabad. Satellite, Ahmedabad.

For Appellant: Shri Tushar Hemani, with Shri P.B. Parmar A.RsFor Respondent: Shri L.P. Jain, Sr.D.R

Section 131Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 234ASection 271Section 68

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, अहमदाबाद "यायपीठ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘’ C’’ BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER And SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No. 1421/AHD/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2011-2012 Shaunak Shailesh Shah, I.T.O., 9, Neelkanth Bunglow, Vs. Ward-15(4), Prahladnagar, Ahmedabad. Satellite, Ahmedabad. PAN: AHBPS7909L (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Tushar Hemani, with Shri P.B. Parmar A.Rs Revenue by : Shri L.P. Jain, Sr.D.R सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date of Hearing : 08/01/2020 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date of Pronouncement: 20/01/2020 आदेश/O R D E R…

M/S. Vasupujya Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward - 1(3), Kolkata

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

ITA 594/KOL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata11 Dec 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Vice- & Shri A.T. Varkey

Section 68

…vt. Ltd. (2015) 93 CCH 0016 Del. HC CIT vs. Precision Finance Pvt. Ltd. (1994) 208 ITR 465 (Cal) CIT vs. Orissa Corporation Pvt. Ltd.(1986) 159 ITR 0078 ACIT vs Govind Ram Agarwal (2000) 19 CCH 0339 Kol. Trib. CIT vs Green Infra Limited reported in [2017] 392 ITR 7 (Born) Commissioner of Income-tax v. lovely Exports P. Ltd.[299] ITR 268] Nemi Chand Kothari v. Commissioner of Income-tax [264 ITR 254] CIT v . Expo Globe India Ltd. (2014) 361 ITR 147 (Delhi) CIT vs. Oasis Hospitalities Pvt. Ltd. and others (333 ITR 119) Commissioner of Income-tax v. Suresh Kumar Kakar [2010] 324 ITR 0231(Del) CIT- vs. Stel…

Exind Trading P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO 6(2)(4), Mumbai

In the result, this appeal by the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 351/MUM/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Nov 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Ravish Sood: A.Y : 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Dharmesh ShahFor Respondent: Shri Rajeev Gubgotra

Section 234BSection 271(1)(c)Section 68

…that the same was 5 Exind Trading Pvt. Ltd. not justified. In this regard, he referred to a catena of case laws, including that of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of ACIT vs Gagandeep Infrastructure Ltd., 394 ITR 680 (Bom.) and CIT vs Green Infra Ltd., 392 ITR 7 (Bom.). He further submitted that the decision of Kolkata Bench of the Tribunal is not at all applicable. The learned counsel for the assessee further submitted that the issue of applicability of Section 78 of the Companies Act, 1956 has not been considered by the learned CIT(A) and the Assessing Officer. Hence, he claimed that the said issue does…

Mahipal Ishwarlal Sottany, Ahmedabad vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(2)(3), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 996/AHD/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad01 Oct 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 996/Ahd/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2012-2013 Mahipal Ishwarlal Sottany, Income Tax Officer- B-120, Shree Ghantakarma Mahavir, Vs. 4(1)(3), Market, Nr. New Cloth Market, Pratyakshkar Bhawan, Sarangpur, Ahmedabad. Ahmedabad. Pan: Amdps7616P

Section 68

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, अहमदाबाद "यायपीठ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘’SMC’’ BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No. 996/AHD/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2012-2013 Mahipal Ishwarlal Sottany, Income Tax Officer- B-120, Shree Ghantakarma Mahavir, Vs. 4(1)(3), Market, Nr. New Cloth Market, Pratyakshkar Bhawan, Sarangpur, Ahmedabad. Ahmedabad. PAN: AMDPS7616P (Applicant) (Respondent) : Assessee by Shri Chetan Agarwal, A.R : Shri Nilabhra Dasgupta, Sr.D.R Revenue by सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date of Hearing : 29/08/2019 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date…

DCIT, Central Cir-8(4), Mumbai vs. M/S. Amazon Metals Private Limited, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed and cross objection filed by the assessee is also dismissed

ITA 905/MUM/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Aug 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri G. Manjunatha & Shri Ram Lal Negidcit, Cc-8(4) Vs. M/S Acro Exports Trade Room No. 658, 6Th Floor Pvt.Ltd. 5Th Floor, Sunteck Centre, Aaykar Bhawan, M.K.Road Mumbai-400 020 37-40 Subash Road Vile Parle(E) Mumbai-400 057

Section 131Section 147Section 148

…an proceed to re-open the assessment of the creditors, but sum so received from the creditors cannot be regarded as undisclosed income of the assessee. The assessee has further relied upon the following judicial precedents: a) CIT vs. Green Infra Ltd (2017) 292 CTR 233(Bombay) b) CIT vs. Gagandeep Infrastructure Pvt Ltd.(2017) 394 ITR 680(Bombay) c) CIT vs. Goa Sponge and Power Ltd Tax Appeal No. 16 of 2012 (Bombay High Court) d) CIT vs. Creative World Telefilms Ltd 333 ITR 100 (Bom- High Court) e) CIT vs. Lovely Exports (P) Ltd 216 CTR 195 (SC) f) CIT vs. Steller Investment Ltd 251ITR 263 (SC) g) SDB Estate Pv…

Dcie Central Circle-8(4), Mumbai vs. M/S.Pali Fabrics Private Limited, Mumbai

In the result appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 904/MUM/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Aug 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri G. Manjunatha & Shri Ram Lal Negidcit, Cc-8(4) Vs. M/S Pali Fabrics Pvt.Ltd. Room No. 658, 6Th Floor 5Th Floor, Sunteck Centre, Aaykar Bhawan, M.K.Road 37-40 Subash Road Mumbai-400 020 Vile Parle(E) Mumbai-400 057 Pan/Gir No.Aafcp0089G (Appellant) .. Respondent) & C.O. No. 77/Mum/2019 (Arising Out Of Ita No.904/Mum/2018) (Assessment Year: 2009-10) M/S Pali Fabrics Pvt.Ltd. Vs. Dcit, Cc-8(4) 5Th Floor, Sunteck Centre, Room No. 658, 6Th Floor 37-40 Subash Road Aaykar Bhawan, M.K.Road Vile Parle(E) Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai-400 057 Pan/Gir No.Aafcp0089G (Appellant) .. Respondent)

Section 131Section 139Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148

…an proceed to re-open the assessment of the creditors, but sum so received from the creditors cannot be regarded as undisclosed income of the assessee. The assessee has further relied upon the following judicial precedents: a) CIT vs. Green Infra Ltd (2017) 292 CTR 233(Bombay) 22 ITA.No.904 /Mum/2018 C.O.No. 77/Mum/2019 M/s. Pali Fabrics Pvt.Ltd. & b) CIT vs. Gagandeep Infrastructure Pvt Ltd.(2017) 394 ITR 680(Bombay) c) CIT vs. Goa Sponge and Power Ltd Tax Appeal No. 16 of 2012 (Bombay High Court) d) CIT vs. Creative World Telefilms Ltd 333 ITR 100 (Bom- High Court) e) CIT vs. Lovely Exports (P) Ltd 216 CTR…

DCIT Central Cir-8(4), Mumbai vs. M/S.Acro Exports Trade Private Limited, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed and cross objection filed by the assessee is also dismissed

ITA 903/MUM/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Aug 2019AY 2009-10

Section 131Section 147Section 148

ITO 6(1)(3), Mumbai vs. Atco Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue as well as the Cross Objection filed by the assessee, are dismissed

ITA 49/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jul 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri G. Manjunatha (Am) & Shri Ram Lal Negi (Jm) Assessment Year: 2011-2012 The Income Tax Officer-6(1)(3), M/S Atco Ltd., R. No. 563-B, Aayakar Bhavan, 6A, Lalwani Industrial Estate, M.K. Road, New Marine Lines, 14, G D Ambedkar Road, Wadala, Mumbai - 20 Vs. Mumbai - 400031 Pan: Aadcg7438C (Appellant) (Respondent) Co No. 218/Mum/2017 (Arising Out Of Ita No. 49/Mum/2016) Assessment Year: 2011-2012 M/S Atco Ltd., The Income Tax Officer-6(1)(3), 6A, Lalwani Industrial Estate, R. No. 563-B, Aayakar Bhavan, 14, G D Ambedkar Road, Wadala, M.K. Road, New Marine Lines, Mumbai - 400031 Vs. Mumbai - 20 Pan: Aadcg7438C (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Jayesh Dadia (AR)For Respondent: Shri Anadi Varma (CIT DR)

Section 143Section 143(1)Section 56Section 68

…% subsidiary of the seller company. In view of the aforesaid submissions, the Ld. CIT (A) contended that there is no merit in the revenue’s appeal. The Ld. counsel relied on the judgment of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Green Infra Ltd. 392 ITR 7 (Bom), CIT vs. Gagandeep Infrastructure 394 ITR 680 (Bom), the Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of M/s V.R. Global Energy Pvt. Ltd. vs. ITO tax case (Appeal) No. 246 of 2017, decision of the ITAT, Bangalore in the case of M/s Cornestone Property Investments Pvt. Ltd. vs. ITO ITA No. 665/Bang/2017 to substantiate the claim of the assessee. 8. W…

M/S. Tara Mercantile Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the Appeal filed by the Assessee stands allowed

ITA 1572/DEL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Jul 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri B.R.R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Gautam Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. S.S. Rana, CIT(DR)

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 56(2)(viib)Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “G”, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI B.R.R. KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No. 1572/DEL/2017 A.Y. : 2011-12 M/S TARA MERCANTILE PVT. LTD. VS. DCIT, CIRCLE 16(1), 314-315, PP TOWER, NEW DELHI NETAJI SUBHASH PLACE, PITAMPURA, NEW DELHI – 34 (PAN: AAACT2680C) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) Assessee By : Sh. Gautam Jain, Adv. Department By : Sh. S.S. Rana, CIT(DR) ORDER PER H.S. SIDHU : JM This appeal by the Assessee is directed against the impugned order dated 19.1.2017 passed by the Ld. CIT(A)-9, New Delhi on the following grounds:- 1. The…

Income Tax Officer-4(2)(4), Mumbai vs. M/S.Mayuresh Logistics Private Limited, Mumbai

ITA 6691/MUM/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jun 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri G. Manjunatha, Am आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 6691/Mum/2017 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year:2009-10) In The Matter Of:

For Appellant: Shri D. G. Pansari, DRFor Respondent: Shri Nitesh Joshi, AR

Section 143(3)Section 68

…y whereof is also not given to the Appellant. 8.12) The Appellant rely on the following decisions: i) CIT v/s Lovely Exports Pvt. Ltd., 216 CTR 195 (SC); ii) CIT v/s Gagandeep Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., 80 taxmann.com 272 (Bombay) Hi) CIT v/s Green Infra Ltd., 392 ITR 7 (Bombay) iv) Pr. CIT v/s Jatin Investment Pvt. Ltd., ITA Nos. 43 & 44 of 2016 (www.itatonline.org) v) Pr. CIT v/s Laxman Industrial Resources Ltd., ITA No. 169 of 2017 (www.itatonline.org). 8.13) A proviso is added to section 68 by Finance Act, 2012 with effect from 1st April, 2013. It is submitted that the proviso is prospective and not retrospect…

D.C.I.T. - 15(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Academy for Global Education Services Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1134/MUM/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 May 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Nk Pradhan, Am Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 1134/Mum/2018 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 2012-13) The Dy. Commissioner Of Academy For Global Income Tax, Circle 15(1)(1) Education Services Pvt. Ltd, Room No. 470, 4Th Floor, C-09, Konark Indraprastha, Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai Sarvoday Nagar, Naur Village, Mulund (W), Mumbai-400 080 .. (P`%Yaqaai- / Respondent) (Apilaaqai- / Appellant) स्थायी लेखा सं./Pan No. Aahca2596F अपीलाथी की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri B. S. Bist, Dr प्रत्यथी की ओर से / Respondent By : Shri Dinesh R. Shah, Ar सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 09-05-2019 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 21-05-2019

For Appellant: Shri B. S. Bist, DRFor Respondent: Shri Dinesh R. Shah, AR

Section 143(3)Section 68

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण “A” न्यायपीठ म ुंबई में। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, MUMBAI श्री महावीर स ुंह, न्याययक दस्य एवुं श्री एन. के. प्रिान लेखा दस्य के मक्ष । BEFORE SRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JM AND SRI NK PRADHAN, AM Aayakr ApIla saM./ ITA No. 1134/Mum/2018 (inaQa-arNa baYa- / Assessment Year 2012-13) The Dy. Commissioner of Academy for Global Income Tax, Circle 15(1)(1) Education Services Pvt. Ltd, Room No. 470, 4th Floor, C-09, Konark Indraprastha, Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai Sarvoday Nagar, Naur Village, Mulund (W), Mumbai-400 080 .. (p`%yaqaaI- / Respondent) (ApIlaaqaI- / Appellant) स्थायी लेखा सं./…

ITO 12(1)(4), Mumbai vs. Consultshah Financial Services P.Ltd, Mumbai

ITA 6893/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 May 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sandeed Gosain () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2011-12 Income Tax Officer- M/S Consultshah 12(1)(4), Room No. 145A, Vs. Financial Services Pvt. Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Ltd., 426, 4Th Floor, Road, Churchgate, Sujata Niketan, Rani Sati Mumbai-400020. Road, Malad East, Mumbai-400097. Pan No. Aadcc3362K Appellant Respondent Revenue By : Mr. Abi Rama Kartikiyen, Dr Assessee By : Dr. Prayag Jha & Mr. Prateek Jha, Ars Date Of Hearing : 21/02/2019 Date Of Pronouncement: 16/05/2019

For Appellant: Dr. Prayag Jha & Mr. Prateek Jha, ARsFor Respondent: Mr. Abi Rama Kartikiyen, DR

Section 143(3)Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “C” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SANDEED GOSAIN (JUDICIAL MEMBER) AND SHRI N.K. PRADHAN (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) Assessment Year: 2011-12 Income Tax Officer- M/s Consultshah 12(1)(4), Room No. 145A, Vs. Financial Services Pvt. Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Ltd., 426, 4th floor, Road, Churchgate, Sujata Niketan, Rani Sati Mumbai-400020. Road, Malad East, Mumbai-400097. PAN No. AADCC3362K Appellant Respondent Revenue by : Mr. Abi Rama Kartikiyen, DR Assessee by : Dr. Prayag Jha & Mr. Prateek Jha, ARs Date of Hearing : 21/02/2019 Date of pronouncement: 16/05/2019 ORDER PER N.K. PRADHAN…