CIT v. Kapoor Chand Mangesh Chand

Garv Associates, Faridabad vs. ITO Ward-1(3), Faridabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri Pradip Kumar Kediaassessment Year: 2012-13 M/S. Garv Associates, Ito Ward -1(3), Faridabad B/105, Green Field Colony, Sarai Khawaja, Faridabad, Haryana 121010 Vs. Pan Aajfg 5926 E (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Shri Dinesh Kumar Aggarwal, Ca Revenue For : Shri Om Prakash, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 08.06.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 28.07.2023 Order Per Chandra Mohan Garg, J.M. This Appeal Has Been Filed Against The Order Of Ld. Nfac, New Delhi Dated 08.03.2023 For Ay 2012-13. 2. The Ld. Assessee’S Representative Submitted That The Assessee, Except Ground No. 10, Does Not Want To Press Other Grounds Of Appeal Hence, Other Grounds Of Appeal Are Dismissed. Remaining Sole Effective Ground No. 10 Reads As Follows:- 10) The Ld. Cit (A) Has Erred In Interpreting Provision Of Section 68 After Considering Facts & Circumstances Of The Matter In Respect Of Unsecured Loans Of Rs. 40,00,000/-, Raising The Following Questions:- I. Whether, 'First Proviso' Of 'Section 68' Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Is Squarely Covered Transaction In The Nature Of Unsecured Loans' Or Shall Restricted To Credits On Account Of 'Share Application Money', 'Share Capital', Share Premium Etc.? Ii. Whether, As Per Provisions Of Section 68 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961, The Assessee Has Not Discharged Its Initial Onus To Prove: (1) Identity Of The Creditor Lenders; (2) Credit-Worthiness Of The Creditor Lender; & (3) Genuineness Of The Transaction. By Submitting Following Set Of Documentation:

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: SMC: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA MOHAN GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/s. Garv Associates, ITO Ward -1(3), Faridabad B/105, Green Field Colony, Sarai Khawaja, Faridabad, Haryana 121010 vs. PAN AAJFG 5926 E (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Shri Dinesh Kumar Aggarwal, CA Revenue For : Shri Om Prakash, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 08.06.2023 Date of Pronouncement : 28.07.2023 ORDER PER CHANDRA MOHAN GARG, J.M. This appeal has been filed against the order of Ld. NFAC, New Delhi dated 08.03.2023 for…

Sh. Amit Tyagi, Ghaziabad vs. DCIT, Ghaziabad

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

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH : A : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI C.M. GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2010-11 Amit Tyagi, Vs. DCIT, K.No.59, Village Yusuf Pur, Circle-1, Delhi Meerut Road, Ghaziabad. Modi Nagar, Ghaziabad. PAN: AFUPT2060A (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri P.C. Yadav, Advocate & Shri Morh Mukut Yadav, Advocate Revenue by : Shri Kanav Bali, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 09.02.2023 Date of Pronouncement : 05.04.2023 ORDER PER C.M. GARG, JM: This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 18.11.2016 of the CIT(A)…

Navyug Iron Traders, Ghaziabad vs. DCIT, Ghaziabad

In the result, appeal of Assessee allowed

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

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES “E”: DELHI BEFORE SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI O.P. KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA.No.553/Del./2017 Assessment Year 2010-2011 M/s. Navyug Iron Traders, Ghaziabad. The DCIT, PANAAAFN9536A C/o. Shri Akhilesh Kumar, vs., Circle-1, Advocate, Chamber No.206-207, Ansal Ghaziabad. Satyam, RDC Raj Nagar, Ghaziabad. (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Shri Akhilesh Kumar, Advocate For Revenue : Shri Atiq Ahmad, Sr. D.R. Date of Hearing : 17.09.2019 Date of Pronouncement : 24.09.2019 ORDER PER BHAVNESH SAINI, J.M. This appeal by Assessee has been direct…

Lakshya Educational Trust, Ghaziabad vs. Addl. CIT, Range-1, Ghaziabad

In the result appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishilakshya Educational Trust, Vs. Addl. Cit, Range-1, Akhilesh Kumar, Adv., Chamber Ghaziabad No. 206-207, Ansal Satyam, Rdc Raj Nagar, Ghaziabad, Pan: Aatl6943M (Appellant) (Respondent)

…it u/s 68 of the Act. The assessee was asked to produce the director which was found to be not traceable at the given address and further the assessee has also not produced the complete balance sheet. In view of this the reliance on the above decision and on 38 Taxmann.com 239, 370 ITR 159 is placed. 13. The other set of the decisions were also with respect to the fact that whether the loan is supported with the evidence and no cash is deposited in the account of the depositor, onus is discharged. In the same set of decisions it has also held that the ld AO has to conduct enquiry to prove the material on record.…