CIT v. Kinetic Capital Finance Ltd.

354 ITR 296High Court2013#3099 most cited

What is CIT v. Kinetic Capital Finance Ltd. authority for?

The assessee discharges its initial onus under section 68 by providing identity and creditworthiness of the creditor; the assessee is not thereafter required to prove the genuineness of transactions between its creditors and the creditors' source of income.

39

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2025.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Kinetic Capital Finance Ltd. · section 68 · addition u/s 68 · source of source · genuineness of the transaction · unexplained cash credit · onus of proof · assessee discharged onus · creditors source of income

Also reported as

14 Taxmann.com 150202 Taxmann 548

Sections most often in play

Section 68Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 41(1)Section 43BSection 131Section 133(6)

Issues it is cited on

source of sourceaddition u/s 68rule 46agenuineness of the transactionunexplained cash creditsection 131section 133(6)section 68scrutiny assessmentprevious yearundisclosed incomesection 143(2)

Judgments citing CIT v. Kinetic Capital Finance Ltd.

ASHOK NARIYANI,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-5, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1532/JPR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur15 Sept 2025AY 2017-18
For Appellant: Sh.Deepak Sharma, Adv. &For Respondent: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT, Sr.-DR
Section 115BSection 131Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 68

…{ "clean_text": "आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, जयपुर न्यायपीठ, जयपुर\nIN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”A” JAIPUR\nडॉ. एम. एल. मीना, लेखा सदस्य एवं डॉ. एस. सीतालक्ष्मी, न्यायिक सदस्य के समक्ष\nBEFORE: DR. M.L. MEENA, AM & DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JM\nआयकर अपील सं./ITA. No. 1532/JPR/2024\nनिर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Years : 2017-18\nAshok Nariyani बनाम The ACIT,\nManisha Agencies, 7B Joshi Colony, Vs. Circle-5,\nNear Pondrik Park, Jaipur. Jaipur.\nस्थायी लेखा सं./ जीआईआर सं./PAN/GIR No.: AFWPN0855K\nअपीलार्थी / Appellant\nप्रत्यर्थी / Respondent\nनिर्धारिती की ओर से / Assessee by : Sh.Deepak Sharma, Adv. &…

ACIT CIRCLE-22(1), MUMBAI vs. RAHEJA LEGACY TRUST, MUMBAI

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

ITA 2826/MUM/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jan 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Amarjit Singhassessment Year: 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri Bharat Raichandani & Bhagrati SahuFor Respondent: Smt. Sanyogita Nagpal, CIT/DR
Section 250Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH “D”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2018-19 Raheja Legacy Trust ACIT, Circle-22(1), Mumbai 5th Floor, Raheja Centre Point, vs. 294, C.S.T. Road, Santacruz (East), Mumbai-400098. PAN: AABTR 4447 F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2018-19 ACIT, Circle-22(1), Raheja Legacy Trust Mumbai 5th Floor, Raheja Centre Point, vs. 294, C.S.T. Road, Santacruz (East), Mumbai-400098. PAN: AABTR 4447 F (Appellant) (Respondent) Present for: Assessee by : Shri Bharat Raichandani & Bhagrati S…

RAHEJA LEGENCY TRUST,MUMBAI vs. ACIT, CIR-22(1), MUMBAI

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

ITA 2268/MUM/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jan 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Amarjit Singhassessment Year: 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri Bharat Raichandani & Bhagrati SahuFor Respondent: Smt. Sanyogita Nagpal, CIT/DR
Section 250Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH “D”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2018-19 Raheja Legacy Trust ACIT, Circle-22(1), Mumbai 5th Floor, Raheja Centre Point, vs. 294, C.S.T. Road, Santacruz (East), Mumbai-400098. PAN: AABTR 4447 F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2018-19 ACIT, Circle-22(1), Raheja Legacy Trust Mumbai 5th Floor, Raheja Centre Point, vs. 294, C.S.T. Road, Santacruz (East), Mumbai-400098. PAN: AABTR 4447 F (Appellant) (Respondent) Present for: Assessee by : Shri Bharat Raichandani & Bhagrati S…

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-26, NEW DELHI vs. DHANESHWARI WOOD PRODUCTS LTD, ASSAM

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 729/DEL/2021[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 May 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. Kul Bharatdr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. P. J. Bhide, CA &For Respondent: Ms. Sapna Bhatia, CIT-DR
Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘H’, NEW DELHI Before Sh. Kul Bharat, Judicial Member Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Accountant Member ITA No. 729/Del/2021 : Asstt. Year : 2009-10 ITA No. 728/Del/2021 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 DCIT, Vs. Dhaneshwari Wood Products Ltd., Central Circle-26, Moheena Tea Estate, P.O. Moheena, New Delhi-110055 Golaghat, Assam-785625 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AAACD6906F Assessee by : Sh. P. J. Bhide, CA & Sh. Sunil Maheshwari, CA Revenue by : Ms. Sapna Bhatia, CIT-DR Date of Hearing: 11.03.2024 Date of Pronouncement: 21.05.2024 ORDER Per Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Accountant Membe…

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-26, NEW DELHI vs. DHANESHWARI WOOD PRODUCTS LTD, ASSAM

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 728/DEL/2021[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 May 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. Kul Bharatdr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. P. J. Bhide, CA &For Respondent: Ms. Sapna Bhatia, CIT-DR
Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘H’, NEW DELHI Before Sh. Kul Bharat, Judicial Member Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Accountant Member ITA No. 729/Del/2021 : Asstt. Year : 2009-10 ITA No. 728/Del/2021 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 DCIT, Vs. Dhaneshwari Wood Products Ltd., Central Circle-26, Moheena Tea Estate, P.O. Moheena, New Delhi-110055 Golaghat, Assam-785625 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AAACD6906F Assessee by : Sh. P. J. Bhide, CA & Sh. Sunil Maheshwari, CA Revenue by : Ms. Sapna Bhatia, CIT-DR Date of Hearing: 11.03.2024 Date of Pronouncement: 21.05.2024 ORDER Per Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Accountant Membe…

JCIT, CIRCLE-22(2), NEW DELHI vs. S R FOILS & TISSUE P. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 540/DEL/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Jan 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.K.Billaiya & Shri Kul Bharat[Assessment Year : 2011-12] Jcit, Vs S R Foils & Tissue P.Ltd., Circle-22(2), 2Nd Floor, Vardhman Plaza-Ii, New Delhi. J-Block, Community Centre, Rajouri Garden, New Delhi-110027. Pan-Aaacr7410E Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Upvan Gupta, Adv. Respondent By Ms. Maninder Kaur, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 05.01.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 11.01.2023 Order

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 33(2)Section 53Section 53(1)Section 68

…us, if does not attract any adverse action u/s 68 of the Act. The Ld. AR relied on decision of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the cases of D. C. Rastogi Vs. Commissioner of Income tax [259 ITR 513] and Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Kinetic Capital Finance ltd. [354 ITR 296] and submitted that adhoc addition in the light of these cases are unjustified. In appeal the Ld. AR submitted a copy of account of the creditors who had not responded as per AO, for F.Y. 2009-10, 2010- 11 & 2011-12. I have examined the accounts and found that there is a regular transactions with these parties and in the very next year the accoun…

DCIT CC 8(1), MUMBAI vs. M/S JAINAM INVESTMENTS, MUMBAI

In the result, appeals filed by the revenue are hereby dismissed

ITA 4474/MUM/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Feb 2021AY 2016-17
For Appellant: Shri Suchek Anchaliya (AR)For Respondent: Shri Rahul Raman (DR)
Section 143(1)Section 148Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “F” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM AND SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, JM आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. Nos. 4286 & 4474/Mum/2019 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2011-12 & 2016-17) DCIT, CC-8(1) बिधम/ M/s. Jainam Investments 11A, 5th Floor, Rockside Aayakar Bhavan, M. K. Vs. Road, Mumbai-400020. Apartment, A Wing, Walkeshwar Road, Mumbai- 400009. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. : AAHFJ1230A (अपीलाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. Revenue by: Shri Rahul Raman (DR) Assessee by: Shri Suchek Anchaliya (AR) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of Hearing: 16/02/2021 घोषणा की तारीख /D…

SH. BARAT PAL SOOD,,PHAGWARA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER,, PHAGWARA

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

ITA 11/ASR/2015[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar03 Feb 2020AY 2009-2010
For Appellant: Shri Sandeep Vijh, CAFor Respondent: Shri Charan Dass, DR
Section 143(3)

…आयकर अऩीऱीय अधधकरण, अमृतसर न्यायऩीठ, अमृतसर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH AMRITSAR BEFORE SHRI L.P. SAHU, AM & SHRI RAVISH SOOD, JM आयकर अऩीऱ सं./ITA No.11/ASR/2015 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2009-2010) Sh. Barat Pal Sood, Vs. ITO, Ward-1, Phagwara Rattan Niwas, G.T.Road, Phagwara C/o V.P.Vijh & Co., C.A. K.K. Tower, Ist & IInd Floor, Opp. Circuit House, Jalandhar स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ PANNo. : ACJPS 0851 J (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) ननधााररती की ओर से /Assessee by : Shri Sandeep Vijh, CA राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue by : Shri Charan Dass, DR सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of Heari…

SRI JAGDISH PRASAD SHARMA,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, GHAZIABAD

The appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 104/DEL/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Jan 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri K.N.Charysri Jagdish Prasad Sharma, Vs. Ito, C/O. Mr. Sandeep Bhatnagar, Ward-1(3), Flat No. 12, 2Nd Floor, Sheel Tara Ghaziabad House, 4866/24, Ansari Road, Darya Ganj, New Delhi Pan: Azpps2130R (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Ms. Timsi Sharma, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Rakhi Vimal, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)

…INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “SMC +C”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI K.N.CHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER Sri Jagdish Prasad Sharma, Vs. ITO, C/o. Mr. Sandeep Bhatnagar, Ward-1(3), Flat No. 12, 2nd Floor, Sheel Tara Ghaziabad House, 4866/24, Ansari Road, Darya Ganj, New Delhi PAN: AZPPS2130R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Ms. Timsi Sharma, CA Revenue by: Ms. Rakhi Vimal, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 14/10/2019 Date of pronouncement 13/01/2020 O R D E R PER PRASHANT MAHARISHI, A. M. 1. This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld CIT(A), Ghaziaba…

M/S. CAROL SECURITIES PVT. LTD.,NOIDA vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal filed by Assessee is dismissed

ITA 6352/DEL/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Jan 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri K.N. Chary & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Dheeraj Garg, Sr. DR
Section 133(6)Section 41(1)Section 68

…ers have been served upon them and the address provided by the appellant is correct. Without Prejudice 4. CIT(A) erred on facts and in law in not following the binding precedent of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT v. Kinetic Capital Finance Ltd.: 354 ITR 296 wherein it was held that Revenue has to advert to each and every entry and not to pick up a couple of entries and label entire set of deposits made as undisclosed income. Accordingly, security deposits received from 93 parties from whom confirmation were also provided by assessee, should not be considered for making addition under Section 68 of t…

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. SIDHVANDAN ENTERPRISES PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the Revenue’s Appeal stands dismissed

ITA 1177/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Dec 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri R.K. Panda

For Appellant: Sh. Raj Kumar, CA & Sh. SumitFor Respondent: Ms. Pramita M. Biswas, CIT(DR)
Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “E”, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI R.K. PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No. 1177/DEL/2016 A.Y. : 2012-13 DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 20, VS. M/S SIDHVANDAN 1ST FLOOR, ROOM NO. 104, E-2 ENTERPRISES PVT. LTD., ARA CENTRE, C-1/35, SAFDARJUNG JHANDEWALAN DEVELOPMENT AREA, NEW DELHI – 110 055 NEW DELHI – 110 016 (PAN: AAGCS7782L) (ASSESSEE) (RESPONDENT) Revenue by : Ms. Pramita M. Biswas, CIT(DR) Assessee by : Sh. Raj Kumar, CA & Sh. Sumit Goel, CA ORDER PER H.S. SIDHU : JM The Revenue has filed this Appeal against the impugned Order dated 30.1…

SHRI PRAMOD KUMAR SETHI,INDORE vs. THE ACIT 3(1), INDORE

In the result appeal filed by the revenue being I

ITA 392/IND/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Indore06 Nov 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Borad

Section 133ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 24Section 68

…red loan transaction was a part of pre meditated plan - a smokescreen - conceived and executed with the connivance of the assessee. In these circumstances the appellant has discharged the initial onus as held in cases of M/s Kinetic Capital finance Ltd.(2013) 354 ITR 296 (Del) and Mod Creations (P) ltd (2013)354 ITR 282 (Del). 8. In the event the revenue still had a doubt with regard to genuineness of transaction or as regards to creditworthiness of creditors, it would have to discharge the onus which has shifted on it. If revenue has any doubts with regard to creditworthiness of depositors, the revenue could al…

THE ACIT, 3(1), INDORE vs. SHRI PRAMOD KUMAR SETHI, INDORE

In the result appeal filed by the revenue being I

ITA 383/IND/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Indore06 Nov 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Borad

Section 133ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 24Section 68

…red loan transaction was a part of pre meditated plan - a smokescreen - conceived and executed with the connivance of the assessee. In these circumstances the appellant has discharged the initial onus as held in cases of M/s Kinetic Capital finance Ltd.(2013) 354 ITR 296 (Del) and Mod Creations (P) ltd (2013)354 ITR 282 (Del). 8. In the event the revenue still had a doubt with regard to genuineness of transaction or as regards to creditworthiness of creditors, it would have to discharge the onus which has shifted on it. If revenue has any doubts with regard to creditworthiness of depositors, the revenue could al…

THE ACIT, 3(1), INDORE vs. SHRI PRAMOD KUMAR SETHI, INDORE

In the result appeal filed by the revenue being I

ITA 382/IND/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Indore06 Nov 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Borad

Section 133ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 24Section 68

…red loan transaction was a part of pre meditated plan - a smokescreen - conceived and executed with the connivance of the assessee. In these circumstances the appellant has discharged the initial onus as held in cases of M/s Kinetic Capital finance Ltd.(2013) 354 ITR 296 (Del) and Mod Creations (P) ltd (2013)354 ITR 282 (Del). 8. In the event the revenue still had a doubt with regard to genuineness of transaction or as regards to creditworthiness of creditors, it would have to discharge the onus which has shifted on it. If revenue has any doubts with regard to creditworthiness of depositors, the revenue could al…

GUMPRO DRILLING FLUIDS PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - 15, MUMBAI

The appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 2868/MUM/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Oct 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharassessment Year: 2013-14 Gumpro Drilling Fluids Vs Pr. Cit-15, Private Limited, Room No.517, 5Th Floor, Opp. Karma Stambha, Aayakar Bhavan, Hazarat Compound, Lbs M. K. Road, Marg, Vikhroli (West), Mumbai-400020 Mumbai-400083 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) Pan. No.Aadcg2319N "नधा"रती क" ओर से / Assessee By Shri Ashok J. Patil राज"व क" ओर से / Revenue By Shri L.K.S. Dahiya Cit-Dr

Section 120Section 144ASection 263Section 35

…amdhenu Steel & Alloys Ltd. [2014] 361 ITR 220/[2012] 206 Taxman 254/19 taxmann.com 26 (Delhi) (para 8), xviii. CIT v. Dwarkadhish Capital (P.) Ltd. [2011] 330 ITR 298/[2010] 194 Taxman 43 (Delhi) (paras 9, 10), xix. CIT v. Kinetic Capital Finance Ltd. [2013] 354 ITR 296/[2011] 202 Taxman 548/14 taxmann.com 150 (Delhi) (paras 9, 10), xx. Zafa Ahmad & Co. v. CIT [2013] 214 Taxman 440/30 taxmann.com 267 (All.) (paras 9, 10), xxi. Anil Rice Mills v. CIT [2006] 282 ITR 236/[2005] 149 Taxman 313 (All.) (paras 9, 10), xxii. CIT v. Five Vision Promoters (P.) Ltd. [2016] 380 ITR 289/236 Taxman 502/65 taxmann.com 71 (Delh…

DCIT CENT. CIR. - 1(3), MUMBAI vs. JAINAM INVESTMENTS, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 6099/MUM/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Aug 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Ramlal Negi (Jm)

Section 68

…no clinching evidence nor had the Assessing Officer been able to prove that the money actually belonged to non but the assessee. The addition of Rs.17,27,250 under section 68 was not justified. 6.3.27 In the case of CIT v. Kinetic Capital Finance Ltd. [2013] 354 ITR 296 (Del), it was held by the Delhi High Court that the assessee had discharged that initial onus. The assessee was not required thereafter to prove the genuineness of the transactions as between its creditors and the creditors' source of income, i.e. the sub creditors. 6.3.28 In a recent decision given by the Delhi High Court in case of CIT v. Samt…

ASST CIT 19(1), MUMBAI vs. DILIP CHIMANLAL GANDHI, MUMBAI

In the result, this appeal by the Revenue stands dismissed

ITA 7079/MUM/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Aug 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am & Shri Pawan Singh, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Virendar SinghFor Respondent: Shri Suchek Anchaliya
Section 132

…Smt. Sushiladevikhadaria [2009] 319 ITR (Bom); 8) ITO vs. Anant Shelters (P) Ltd. [2012] 51 SOT 234; 9) CIT vs. Varinder Rawlley [2014] 366 ITR 232 (P&H); 10) CIT vs. Jai Kumar Balkiwal [2014] 366 ITR 217 (Raj); 11) CIT vs. Kinetic Capital Finance Ltd. [2013] 354 ITR 296 (Del); 12) CIT vs. Samtelcolor Ltd. 64 DTR 46; and 13) Nemi Chand Kothari vs. CIT [2004] 136 Taxmann 213 18. The ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) concluded as under: 6.3.24 Hence, it is to be inferred that in a case where the assesse has supplied all possible information to the Assessing Officer to explain the credit transaction, he has…

MANOIR PETRO INDIA LTD,MUMBAI vs. PR CIT 1, MUMBAI

ITA 2626/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Jul 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri G. Manjunathaassessment Year: 2010-11 Manoir Petro India Limited, Pr. Cit-1 602, B-Wing, Universal Room No.387, बनाम/ Business Park, Chandivali 3Rd Floor, Vs. Farm Road, Off Saki Vihar Aayakar Bhavan, Road, Andheri (East), M. K. Road, Mumbai-400072 Mumbai-400020 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) P.A. No. Aafcm5210J

Section 263

…amdhenu Steel & Alloys Ltd. [2014] 361 ITR 220/[2012] 206 Taxman 254/19 taxmann.com 26 (Delhi) (para 8), xviii. CIT v. Dwarkadhish Capital (P.) Ltd. [2011] 330 ITR 298/[2010] 194 Taxman 43 (Delhi) (paras 9, 10), xix. CIT v. Kinetic Capital Finance Ltd. [2013] 354 ITR 296/[2011] 202 Taxman 548/14 taxmann.com 150 (Delhi) (paras 9, 10), xx. Zafa Ahmad & Co. v. CIT [2013] 214 Taxman 440/30 taxmann.com 267 (All.) (paras 9, 10), xxi. Anil Rice Mills v. CIT [2006] 282 ITR 236/[2005] 149 Taxman 313 (All.) (paras 9, 10), xxii. CIT v. Five Vision Promoters (P.) Ltd. [2016] 380 ITR 289/236 Taxman 502/65 taxmann.com 71 (Delh…

SHRI CHANDRA MOHAN SACHDEVA,BHOPAL vs. THE ACIT 1(2), BHOPAL

In the result, the appeals in I

ITA 858/IND/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Indore07 May 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradआ.अ.सं /.I.T.A. Nos.857 & 858/Ind/2016 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2005-06 & 2006-07 Shri Chandra Mohan Assistant Commissioner Sachdeva, Of Income-Tax, E-5/59, Arera Colony, Vs. 1(2), Bhopal Bhopal

Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 68

…settled law that the assessee need not to prove the "source of source". Other judgments relied upon on similar issue are as under :- -: 19 :- Shri Chandra Mohan Sachdeva, Bhopal. - ._ S.No Reference Citation Relevant Para CIT vs. Kinetic Capital Finance 1 354 ITR 296 (Del) Para 7 Ltd 2 Aravali Trading Co. vs. ITO 220 CTR 622 (Raj) Para 20 Labh Chand Bohra v. ITO 219 CTR 571 (Raj) Para 8 3 Para 5 & 6 4 CIT vs. Glocom Impex P Ltd 299 ITR 571 (Del) 5 CIT vs. Dwarkadish Investment 330 ITR 298 (Del) Para 12 6 CIT vs People General Hospital Ltd 356 ITR 65 [MP] 7 CIT v.Oasis Hospitalities (P) Ltd. 333 ITR 119 (Del)…

SHRI CHANDRA MOHAN SACHDEVA,BHOPAL vs. THE ACIT 1(2), BHOPAL

In the result, the appeals in I

ITA 857/IND/2016[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Indore07 May 2018AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradआ.अ.सं /.I.T.A. Nos.857 & 858/Ind/2016 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2005-06 & 2006-07 Shri Chandra Mohan Assistant Commissioner Sachdeva, Of Income-Tax, E-5/59, Arera Colony, Vs. 1(2), Bhopal Bhopal

Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 68

…settled law that the assessee need not to prove the "source of source". Other judgments relied upon on similar issue are as under :- -: 19 :- Shri Chandra Mohan Sachdeva, Bhopal. - ._ S.No Reference Citation Relevant Para CIT vs. Kinetic Capital Finance 1 354 ITR 296 (Del) Para 7 Ltd 2 Aravali Trading Co. vs. ITO 220 CTR 622 (Raj) Para 20 Labh Chand Bohra v. ITO 219 CTR 571 (Raj) Para 8 3 Para 5 & 6 4 CIT vs. Glocom Impex P Ltd 299 ITR 571 (Del) 5 CIT vs. Dwarkadish Investment 330 ITR 298 (Del) Para 12 6 CIT vs People General Hospital Ltd 356 ITR 65 [MP] 7 CIT v.Oasis Hospitalities (P) Ltd. 333 ITR 119 (Del)…

Showing 1–20 of 39 · Page 1 of 2