CIT v. Kamdhenu Steel & Alloys Ltd.

361 ITR 220High Court2014#233 most cited

What is CIT v. Kamdhenu Steel & Alloys Ltd. authority for?

When making an addition under section 68, the creditworthiness or financial strength of an investor contributing share capital or share application money can be proved by producing their bank statements showing sufficient balance for the investment. The Supreme Court dismissed the SLP against this decision.

328

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2013 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Kamdhenu Steel & Alloys Ltd. · Section 68 · creditworthiness of creditor · share application money · share capital · bank statement as proof · financial strength of investor · unexplained cash credit · addition under section 68

Also reported as

248 CTR 3319 Taxmann.com 2668 DTR 38

Sections most often in play

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

Issues it is cited on

share capital and share premiumsource of sourcepaper companycreditworthiness of the creditorsection 31live linksection 251(2)share application moneyaddition u/s 68section 251(1)(a)entry operatoradmission of additional evidence

Judgments citing CIT v. Kamdhenu Steel & Alloys Ltd.

Dwarkadish Spinners Limited, New Delhi vs. DCIT Circle-7(2), New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 7861/DEL/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Oct 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Gargassessment Year 2012-13 Dwarkadish Spinners Limited, Dcit, 1, Kouli Majra, Lalru, Vs Circle-7(2), Patiala – 140 501 Punjab.Pan: Aabcd0202D New Delhi. (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Ravi Pratap Mall, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Anuj Garg, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 32Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH : SMC : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA MOHAN GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year 2012-13 Dwarkadish Spinners Limited, DCIT, 1, Kouli Majra, Lalru, vs Circle-7(2), Patiala – 140 501 Punjab.PAN: AABCD0202D New Delhi. (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Shri Ravi Pratap Mall, Advocate For Revenue : Shri Anuj Garg, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 30.09.2022 Date of Pronouncement : 14.10.2022 ORDER This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 16.07.2019 of the CIT(A)-34, New Delhi, relating to Assessment Year 2012-13. 2. Briefly stated facts o…

Shri Gyanendra Singh Jadon, Indore vs. DCIT 1(1), Bhopal

In the result, this appeal of assessee is partly allowed

ITA 40/IND/2020[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Indore24 Aug 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri B.M. Biyani(Conducted Through Virtual Court) Assessment Year: 2009-10 Shri Gyanendra Singh Jadon Dcit-1(1) M-4, Radio Colony, Bhopal बनाम Indore /Vs. (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent / Revenue) Pan: Aespj9459E Assessee By Shri Anil Kamal Garg & Arpit Gaur, Ars Revenue By Shri Aditya Shukla, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 06.07.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 24.08.2022

Section 143(3)Section 147

…mere suspicion, without having any reason to believe as required by section 147. Ld. AR has further relied upon following decisions to claim that no action can be taken on the basis of mere “reason to suspect”: (a) CIT Vs. Kamdhenu Steel & Alloys Ltd. (2012) 248 CTR 33 (Del HC) (b) CIT Vs. Multiplex Trading & Industrial Co. Ltd. (2015) 128 DTR 217 (Delhi HC) (c) ITO Vs. Lakhmani Mewal Das (1976) 103 ITR 437 (SC) With these submissions, Ld. AR argued that the action of Ld. AO in issuing notice u/s 148 and thereby make assessment u/s 147 does not fulfil the requirement of law. Therefore, the proceeding must be…

Mahotsav Creation Pvt. Ltd., Surat vs. Pr. Commission of Income Tax, -1, Surat

In the result, Both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 50/SRT/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Surat22 Aug 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.49 & 50/Srt/2021 Assessment Years: (2010-11 & 2011-12) (Virtual Court Hearing) Mahotsav Creation Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Principal Commissioner Of 101-102, 1St Floor, Sakar Textile Income-Tax-1, Aayakar Bhawan, Market, Ring Road, Surat-395002. Majura Gate, Surat-395001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaecm2394Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Hardik Vora, Advocate Respondent By Shri H. P. Meena, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 28/06/2022 22/08/2022 Date Of Pronouncement

Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 148Section 151(1)Section 263Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, SURAT BENCH, SURAT BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JM & DR. A. L. SAINI, AM आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.49 & 50/SRT/2021 Assessment Years: (2010-11 & 2011-12) (Virtual Court Hearing) Mahotsav Creation Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Principal Commissioner of 101-102, 1st Floor, Sakar Textile Income-Tax-1, Aayakar Bhawan, Market, Ring Road, Surat-395002. Majura Gate, Surat-395001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: AAECM2394Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Shri Hardik Vora, Advocate Respondent by Shri H. P. Meena, CIT(DR) Date of Hearing 28/06/2022 22/08/2022 Date of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R PE…

Mahotsav Creation Pvt. Ltd., Surat vs. Pr. Commission of Income Tax, -1, Surat

In the result, Both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 49/SRT/2021[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Surat22 Aug 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.49 & 50/Srt/2021 Assessment Years: (2010-11 & 2011-12) (Virtual Court Hearing) Mahotsav Creation Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Principal Commissioner Of 101-102, 1St Floor, Sakar Textile Income-Tax-1, Aayakar Bhawan, Market, Ring Road, Surat-395002. Majura Gate, Surat-395001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaecm2394Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Hardik Vora, Advocate Respondent By Shri H. P. Meena, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 28/06/2022 22/08/2022 Date Of Pronouncement

Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 148Section 151(1)Section 263Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, SURAT BENCH, SURAT BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JM & DR. A. L. SAINI, AM आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.49 & 50/SRT/2021 Assessment Years: (2010-11 & 2011-12) (Virtual Court Hearing) Mahotsav Creation Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Principal Commissioner of 101-102, 1st Floor, Sakar Textile Income-Tax-1, Aayakar Bhawan, Market, Ring Road, Surat-395002. Majura Gate, Surat-395001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: AAECM2394Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Shri Hardik Vora, Advocate Respondent by Shri H. P. Meena, CIT(DR) Date of Hearing 28/06/2022 22/08/2022 Date of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R PE…

The Income Tax Officer -1, Raigarh, Raigarh(Cg) vs. Shri Shri Parmanand Gupta, Raigarh, Raigarh(Cg)

ITA 82/BIL/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur04 Aug 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 82/Rpr/2017 Co. No. 02/Rpr/2022 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2008-09 The Income Tax Officer-1, Raigarh (C.G.) .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. Shri Parmanand Gupta, Alochan Agrawal, L/H. Of Late Shri Parmanand Gupta, Prop. M/S. Balaji Handloom, 19/48, Palace Road, Raigarh (C.G.) Pan : Afdpg4961L ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri R.B Doshi, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147

…reasons for initiating reassessment proceedings in the absence of anything to show that the A.O had independently applied his mind to arrive at a belief that income has escaped assessment. Also in the case of CIT Vs. Kamdhenu Steel & Alloys Ltd. &Ors. (2014) 361 ITR 220 (Del), it was observed by the High Court that where the A.O had acted mechanically on the information supplied by the Directorate of IT(Inv.) about the alleged bogus/ accommodation entries provided by certain individuals/companies without applying his own mind, he was not justified in invoking jurisdiction under Sec. 147. 9. As observed by us at…

Shri.J M Vrushabendraiah, Hospet vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-1, Bellary

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 299/BANG/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 Jul 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Srihari Kutsa, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Narayana K.R., D.R
Section 147Section 148Section 153CSection 250

…ailed submissions of the Assessee. i. It has been held by the Delhi High Court that a notice issued mechanically merely on the information supplied by the Investigation Wing has unjustified in the case of CIT v. Kamadhenu Steel Alloys Ltd., reported in [2014] 361 ITR 220 (Delhi). j. The Delhi High court in re Mrs.Vinita Jain v. ITO 158 Taxman Magazine 167 (Del) has held that where the AO reopened assessment merely because the DDIT (Inv) believed that the transaction of capital gains shown by the Assessee was bogus and no separate reason disclosing satisfaction of the assessing officer for formation of belief that…

Brijesh Gupta HUF, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward-31(4), New Delhi

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

ITA 7437/DEL/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 May 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad, S.M.C. आ.अ.सं./ I.T.A No. 5711/Del/2019. िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2011-12 R. C. Gupta (Huf) Income Tax Officer, बनाम C/O. Raj Kumar & Associates,Cas. Ward : 31 (4), Vs. L-7A(Lgf) South Extension,Part-Ii New Delhi. New Delhi – 110 049. Pan No. Aaghr9088D A N D आ.अ.सं./ I.T.A No. 7437/Del/2019. िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2011-12 Brijesh Gupta (Huf) Income Tax Officer, बनाम C/O. Raj Kumar & Associates,Cas. Ward : 31 (4), Vs. L-7A(Lgf) South Extension,Part-Ii New Delhi. New Delhi – 110 049. Pan No. Aaehb2833G A N D आ.अ.सं./ I.T.A No. 5474/Del/2019. िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2011-12 Bithal Nath Gupta (Huf) Income Tax Officer, बनाम C/O. Raj Kumar & Associates,Cas. Ward : 31 (4), Vs. L-7A(Lgf) South Extension,Part-Ii New Delhi. New Delhi – 110 049. Pan No. Aaehb2834G A N D आ.अ.सं./ I.T.A No. 5475/Del/2019. िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2011-12 Amit Gupta (Huf) Income Tax Officer, बनाम C/O. Raj Kumar & Associates,Cas. Ward : 31 (4), Vs. L-7A(Lgf) South Extension,Part-Ii New Delhi. New Delhi – 110 049. Pan No. Aahha3209G

For Appellant: Shri J. P. Sharma, A. RFor Respondent: Shri Om Parkash, Sr. D. R
Section 10(38)Section 147Section 151Section 68Section 69C

…ent which is not valid in law. He submitted that when the reopening is based on wrong appreciation of facts, such reopening is held to be invalid in view of the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs Kamdhenu Steel & Alloys reported in 248 CTR 33(Del.), in the case of CIT vs Sh. Atul Jain and Vinit Jain reported in 292 ITR 383(Del.) and in the case of Pr. CIT vs Rmg Polyvinyl (I) Ltd. reported in 396 ITR 5 (Del.). 7. The learned counsel for the assessee submitted that as per notice u/s 148, the case of the assessee was reopened after getting approval from the Pr.CIT-11, New Delhi. The ass…

Ganesh Gupta HUF, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward 31(4), New Delhi

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

ITA 5813/DEL/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 May 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad, S.M.C. आ.अ.सं./ I.T.A No. 5711/Del/2019. िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2011-12 R. C. Gupta (Huf) Income Tax Officer, बनाम C/O. Raj Kumar & Associates,Cas. Ward : 31 (4), Vs. L-7A(Lgf) South Extension,Part-Ii New Delhi. New Delhi – 110 049. Pan No. Aaghr9088D A N D आ.अ.सं./ I.T.A No. 7437/Del/2019. िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2011-12 Brijesh Gupta (Huf) Income Tax Officer, बनाम C/O. Raj Kumar & Associates,Cas. Ward : 31 (4), Vs. L-7A(Lgf) South Extension,Part-Ii New Delhi. New Delhi – 110 049. Pan No. Aaehb2833G A N D आ.अ.सं./ I.T.A No. 5474/Del/2019. िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2011-12 Bithal Nath Gupta (Huf) Income Tax Officer, बनाम C/O. Raj Kumar & Associates,Cas. Ward : 31 (4), Vs. L-7A(Lgf) South Extension,Part-Ii New Delhi. New Delhi – 110 049. Pan No. Aaehb2834G A N D आ.अ.सं./ I.T.A No. 5475/Del/2019. िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2011-12 Amit Gupta (Huf) Income Tax Officer, बनाम C/O. Raj Kumar & Associates,Cas. Ward : 31 (4), Vs. L-7A(Lgf) South Extension,Part-Ii New Delhi. New Delhi – 110 049. Pan No. Aahha3209G

For Appellant: Shri J. P. Sharma, A. RFor Respondent: Shri Om Parkash, Sr. D. R
Section 10(38)Section 147Section 151Section 68Section 69C

…ent which is not valid in law. He submitted that when the reopening is based on wrong appreciation of facts, such reopening is held to be invalid in view of the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs Kamdhenu Steel & Alloys reported in 248 CTR 33(Del.), in the case of CIT vs Sh. Atul Jain and Vinit Jain reported in 292 ITR 383(Del.) and in the case of Pr. CIT vs Rmg Polyvinyl (I) Ltd. reported in 396 ITR 5 (Del.). 7. The learned counsel for the assessee submitted that as per notice u/s 148, the case of the assessee was reopened after getting approval from the Pr.CIT-11, New Delhi. The ass…

Rc Gupta (HUF), New Delhi vs. ITO Ward - 31(4), New Delhi

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

ITA 5711/DEL/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 May 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad, S.M.C. आ.अ.सं./ I.T.A No. 5711/Del/2019. िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2011-12 R. C. Gupta (Huf) Income Tax Officer, बनाम C/O. Raj Kumar & Associates,Cas. Ward : 31 (4), Vs. L-7A(Lgf) South Extension,Part-Ii New Delhi. New Delhi – 110 049. Pan No. Aaghr9088D A N D आ.अ.सं./ I.T.A No. 7437/Del/2019. िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2011-12 Brijesh Gupta (Huf) Income Tax Officer, बनाम C/O. Raj Kumar & Associates,Cas. Ward : 31 (4), Vs. L-7A(Lgf) South Extension,Part-Ii New Delhi. New Delhi – 110 049. Pan No. Aaehb2833G A N D आ.अ.सं./ I.T.A No. 5474/Del/2019. िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2011-12 Bithal Nath Gupta (Huf) Income Tax Officer, बनाम C/O. Raj Kumar & Associates,Cas. Ward : 31 (4), Vs. L-7A(Lgf) South Extension,Part-Ii New Delhi. New Delhi – 110 049. Pan No. Aaehb2834G A N D आ.अ.सं./ I.T.A No. 5475/Del/2019. िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2011-12 Amit Gupta (Huf) Income Tax Officer, बनाम C/O. Raj Kumar & Associates,Cas. Ward : 31 (4), Vs. L-7A(Lgf) South Extension,Part-Ii New Delhi. New Delhi – 110 049. Pan No. Aahha3209G

For Appellant: Shri J. P. Sharma, A. RFor Respondent: Shri Om Parkash, Sr. D. R
Section 10(38)Section 147Section 151Section 68Section 69C

…ent which is not valid in law. He submitted that when the reopening is based on wrong appreciation of facts, such reopening is held to be invalid in view of the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs Kamdhenu Steel & Alloys reported in 248 CTR 33(Del.), in the case of CIT vs Sh. Atul Jain and Vinit Jain reported in 292 ITR 383(Del.) and in the case of Pr. CIT vs Rmg Polyvinyl (I) Ltd. reported in 396 ITR 5 (Del.). 7. The learned counsel for the assessee submitted that as per notice u/s 148, the case of the assessee was reopened after getting approval from the Pr.CIT-11, New Delhi. The ass…

Amit Gupta (HUF), New Delhi vs. ITO Ward - 31(4), New Delhi

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

ITA 5475/DEL/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 May 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad, S.M.C. आ.अ.सं./ I.T.A No. 5711/Del/2019. िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2011-12 R. C. Gupta (Huf) Income Tax Officer, बनाम C/O. Raj Kumar & Associates,Cas. Ward : 31 (4), Vs. L-7A(Lgf) South Extension,Part-Ii New Delhi. New Delhi – 110 049. Pan No. Aaghr9088D A N D आ.अ.सं./ I.T.A No. 7437/Del/2019. िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2011-12 Brijesh Gupta (Huf) Income Tax Officer, बनाम C/O. Raj Kumar & Associates,Cas. Ward : 31 (4), Vs. L-7A(Lgf) South Extension,Part-Ii New Delhi. New Delhi – 110 049. Pan No. Aaehb2833G A N D आ.अ.सं./ I.T.A No. 5474/Del/2019. िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2011-12 Bithal Nath Gupta (Huf) Income Tax Officer, बनाम C/O. Raj Kumar & Associates,Cas. Ward : 31 (4), Vs. L-7A(Lgf) South Extension,Part-Ii New Delhi. New Delhi – 110 049. Pan No. Aaehb2834G A N D आ.अ.सं./ I.T.A No. 5475/Del/2019. िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2011-12 Amit Gupta (Huf) Income Tax Officer, बनाम C/O. Raj Kumar & Associates,Cas. Ward : 31 (4), Vs. L-7A(Lgf) South Extension,Part-Ii New Delhi. New Delhi – 110 049. Pan No. Aahha3209G

For Appellant: Shri J. P. Sharma, A. RFor Respondent: Shri Om Parkash, Sr. D. R
Section 10(38)Section 147Section 151Section 68Section 69C

…ent which is not valid in law. He submitted that when the reopening is based on wrong appreciation of facts, such reopening is held to be invalid in view of the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs Kamdhenu Steel & Alloys reported in 248 CTR 33(Del.), in the case of CIT vs Sh. Atul Jain and Vinit Jain reported in 292 ITR 383(Del.) and in the case of Pr. CIT vs Rmg Polyvinyl (I) Ltd. reported in 396 ITR 5 (Del.). 7. The learned counsel for the assessee submitted that as per notice u/s 148, the case of the assessee was reopened after getting approval from the Pr.CIT-11, New Delhi. The ass…

Bithal Nath Gupta (HUF), New Delhi vs. ITO Ward - 31(4), New Delhi

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

ITA 5474/DEL/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 May 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad, S.M.C. आ.अ.सं./ I.T.A No. 5711/Del/2019. िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2011-12 R. C. Gupta (Huf) Income Tax Officer, बनाम C/O. Raj Kumar & Associates,Cas. Ward : 31 (4), Vs. L-7A(Lgf) South Extension,Part-Ii New Delhi. New Delhi – 110 049. Pan No. Aaghr9088D A N D आ.अ.सं./ I.T.A No. 7437/Del/2019. िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2011-12 Brijesh Gupta (Huf) Income Tax Officer, बनाम C/O. Raj Kumar & Associates,Cas. Ward : 31 (4), Vs. L-7A(Lgf) South Extension,Part-Ii New Delhi. New Delhi – 110 049. Pan No. Aaehb2833G A N D आ.अ.सं./ I.T.A No. 5474/Del/2019. िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2011-12 Bithal Nath Gupta (Huf) Income Tax Officer, बनाम C/O. Raj Kumar & Associates,Cas. Ward : 31 (4), Vs. L-7A(Lgf) South Extension,Part-Ii New Delhi. New Delhi – 110 049. Pan No. Aaehb2834G A N D आ.अ.सं./ I.T.A No. 5475/Del/2019. िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2011-12 Amit Gupta (Huf) Income Tax Officer, बनाम C/O. Raj Kumar & Associates,Cas. Ward : 31 (4), Vs. L-7A(Lgf) South Extension,Part-Ii New Delhi. New Delhi – 110 049. Pan No. Aahha3209G

For Appellant: Shri J. P. Sharma, A. RFor Respondent: Shri Om Parkash, Sr. D. R
Section 10(38)Section 147Section 151Section 68Section 69C

…ent which is not valid in law. He submitted that when the reopening is based on wrong appreciation of facts, such reopening is held to be invalid in view of the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs Kamdhenu Steel & Alloys reported in 248 CTR 33(Del.), in the case of CIT vs Sh. Atul Jain and Vinit Jain reported in 292 ITR 383(Del.) and in the case of Pr. CIT vs Rmg Polyvinyl (I) Ltd. reported in 396 ITR 5 (Del.). 7. The learned counsel for the assessee submitted that as per notice u/s 148, the case of the assessee was reopened after getting approval from the Pr.CIT-11, New Delhi. The ass…

Potent Foods Private Limted, Faridabad vs. ITO Ward-2(1), Faridabad

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 104/DEL/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 May 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda

For Appellant: Shri Shyam SunderFor Respondent: Shri Om Prakash, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 68

…creditworthiness of the said company especially when the said company is having sufficient funds in its account in shape of share capital and free reserves. 6.5. I find the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs., M/s. Kamdhenu Steel and Alloys Ltd., 361 ITR 220 (Del.) has observed as under : 51 ITA.No.104/Del./2021 M/s. Potent Foods Pvt. Ltd., Sector 20-B, Faridabad, Haryana. 35. The important question which arises at this stage is as to whether on the basis of these facts, could it be said that it is the assessee which has not been able to explain the source and receipt of money. According to the asse…

Kashish Exports Pvt. Ltd., Noida vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 2279/DEL/2017[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Apr 2022AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri G. S. Pannua N D Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad(Through Video Conferencing) आ.अ.सं./ I.T.A No.2279/Del/2017 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2006-07 Kashish Exports Pvt. Ltd., Acit C/O. Sanjiv Suri, बनाम Circle : 5 (1), A–203, Ananda Eldeco, Vs. New Delhi. Sector : 48, Noida [U.P.] Pan : Aacck3350J अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Choudhary, Sr. D. RFor Respondent: 1/04/2022
Section 139(1)Section 143Section 148Section 269SSection 68

…I.T.A. No. 2279/Del/2017 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL [ DELHI BENCH “D” NEW DELHI ] BEFORE SHRI G. S. PANNU, PRESIDENT A N D SHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER (Through Video Conferencing) आ.अ.सं./ I.T.A No.2279/Del/2017 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2006-07 Kashish Exports Pvt. Ltd., ACIT C/o. Sanjiv Suri, बनाम Circle : 5 (1), A–203, Ananda Eldeco, Vs. New Delhi. Sector : 48, Noida [U.P.] PAN : AACCK3350J अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent N o n e; िनधा"रतीक"ओरसे /Assessee by : Shri Vijay Choudhary, Sr. D. R.; राज"वक"ओरसे /Revenue by : 1/04/2022 सुनवाईक"तारीख/ Date of hearing : 29/04/2022 उ"…

DCIT - 14(3)(1), Mumbai vs. M/S Rupa Infotech & Infrastructure P. Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed

ITA 3597/MUM/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Apr 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Amarjit Singh, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Shankarlal JainFor Respondent: Shri T. Shankar
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

…sumed that parties are not available for verification. All the details of companies is available on company law site, particulars of companies identification nos were furnished in affidavits. The High Court of Delhi in the case of Kamadhenu Steel & Alloys Ltd 361 ITR 220 (Delhi), held that merely a notice u/s.131 does not prove non-existence, it is to be conclusively established that no company is in existence after making proper enquiries with Income Tax Returns as available and bank authorities, without making any enquiry it cannot be said that parties are not available, so merely on the belief that party is no…

DCIT 14(3)(1), Mumbai vs. M/S Rupa Properties & Securities P. Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed

ITA 3596/MUM/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Apr 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Amarjit Singh, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Shankarlal JainFor Respondent: Shri T. Shankar
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

…sumed that parties are not available for verification. All the details of companies is available on company law site, particulars of companies identification nos were furnished in affidavits. The High Court of Delhi in the case of Kamadhenu Steel & Alloys Ltd 361 ITR 220 (Delhi), held that merely a notice u/s.131 does not prove non-existence, it is to be conclusively established that no company is in existence after making proper enquiries with Income Tax Returns as available and bank authorities, without making any enquiry it cannot be said that parties are not available, so merely on the belief that party is no…

Mantram Commodities Pvt. Ltd., Faridabad vs. ITO Ward-1(5), Faridabad

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 105/DEL/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Apr 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda

For Appellant: Shri Shyam SunderFor Respondent: Shri Om Prakash, Sr. DR
Section 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 56Section 68

…Mantram Commodities Pvt. Ltd., Sector-20B, Haryana. the said company is having sufficient funds in its account in shape of share capital and free reserves. 7.5. I find the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs., M/s. Kamdhenu Steel and Alloys Ltd., 361 ITR 220 (Del.) has observed as under : 35. The important question which arises at this stage is as to whether on the basis of these facts, could it be said that it is the assessee which has not been able to explain the source and receipt of money. According to the assessee, he had given the required information to explain the source and was not obligate…

ACIT, Central Circle-19, New Delhi vs. M/S K.R. Pulp & Papers Ltd, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is

ITA 5064/DEL/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Mar 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri N.K. Choudhry

For Appellant: Ms. Monika Aggarwal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Sunita Singh, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 147Section 80I

…rt of this contention, the Learned Counsel for the Assessee relied upon the following decisions: 1. CIT vs., Value Capital Services Ltd., 307 ITR 334 (Del.) CIT vs., Real Time Marketing (P) Ltd., 306 ITR 55 2. (Del.) CIT vs., Kamdhenu Steel and Alloys Ltd., 361 ITR 220 3. (Del.) CIT vs., Five Vision Promoters (P) Ltd., 380 ITR 289 4. (Del.). 7.2. He submitted that out of the 54 shareholders, response duly accepted as received in the case of 46 shareholders and only in respect of one shareholder notice remained unserved and in case of 07 shareholders no reply was received. Learned Counsel for the Assessee r…

Kalaneedhi Jewellers LLP, Patiala vs. DCIT-CC, Patiala

In the result, appeals of both the assesses are allowed

ITA 311/CHANDI/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh25 Mar 2022AY 2017-18
For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Priyanka Dhar, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)

…under section 69A of the Act. Reliance was placed on the following case laws: • Chuharmal vs CIT (1988) 172 ITR 250 (SC) • Dhakeshwari Cotton Mills; SC in 87 ITR 349 (SC) • Shaw and Bros. vs. CIT (1959) 37 ITR 271 (SC) • CIT vs Kamdhenu Steel and Alloys Ltd. 248 CTR 33 (Del.) • Infomediary India (P) Ltd. and Ors. Vs CIT 206 Taxman 254 • CIT vs. Smt. P. K. Noorjahan 237 ITR 570 (SC) 6.3 It was stated before the Ld. CIT(A) that the A.O. had not disputed, the entire purchase and sales of the assessee, books of accounts, cash memo, purchase details, confirmations, bank statements, expenses, parties from whom the pu…

Ssmt. Charu Aggarwal, Patiala vs. DCIT-CC, Patiala

In the result, appeals of both the assesses are allowed

ITA 310/CHANDI/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh25 Mar 2022AY 2017-18
For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Priyanka Dhar, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)

…under section 69A of the Act. Reliance was placed on the following case laws: • Chuharmal vs CIT (1988) 172 ITR 250 (SC) • Dhakeshwari Cotton Mills; SC in 87 ITR 349 (SC) • Shaw and Bros. vs. CIT (1959) 37 ITR 271 (SC) • CIT vs Kamdhenu Steel and Alloys Ltd. 248 CTR 33 (Del.) • Infomediary India (P) Ltd. and Ors. Vs CIT 206 Taxman 254 • CIT vs. Smt. P. K. Noorjahan 237 ITR 570 (SC) 6.3 It was stated before the Ld. CIT(A) that the A.O. had not disputed, the entire purchase and sales of the assessee, books of accounts, cash memo, purchase details, confirmations, bank statements, expenses, parties from whom the pu…

Surya Manufacturing P.Ltd, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle-24(2), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 6014/DEL/2017[2014-15]Status: HeardITAT Delhi15 Mar 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. Saktijit Deydr. B. R. R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing) Ita No. 6014/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2014-15 M/S Surya Manufacturing Pvt. Ltd. Vs Dcit, 2937/3, Chuna Mandi, 1St Floor, Circle-24(2), Paharganj, New Delhi-110055 New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaccs2412B Assessee By : None Revenue By : Sh. Umesh Takyar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 09.03.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 15.03.2022

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. Umesh Takyar, Sr. DR
Section 131(1)(d)Section 143(2)Section 68

…ely on the following judgments: 23. CIT Vs Gangeshwari Metals 361 ITR 0010- Delhi 24. The other decisions which the assessee seeks to rely are as under:- a) ACIT Vs Divine Infracon 42 CCH 22(Del) 10 Surya Manufacturing Pvt. Ltd. b) CIT Vs Kamdhenu Steels 361 ITR 220(Del):- SLP against this decision has been dismissed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in SLP No. 15640 of 2012. In this case their lordships have observed as under:- 25. It is next submitted that it is once again reiterated that it is not a case wherein there is any investigation wing report or any material has been found in search or any other action u…