CIT v. Lovely Exports (P) Ltd.

216 CTR 195Supreme Court of India2008#57 most cited

What is CIT v. Lovely Exports (P) Ltd. authority for?

If an assessee company receives share application money from alleged bogus shareholders and provides their details to the Assessing Officer, no addition can be made under Section 68 in the company's hands; the Department must proceed against the shareholders by reopening their individual assessments.

854

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,421 Indian tax judgments — from 2008 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Lovely Exports (P) Ltd. · Section 68 · share application money · bogus shareholders · creditworthiness of creditor · genuineness of transaction · addition u/s 68 · reopening assessments of shareholders · 216 CTR 195 · Supreme Court 2008

Sections most often in play

Section 68Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 131Section 148Section 143(2)Section 153A

Issues it is cited on

creditworthiness of the creditorsource of sourceshare capital and share premiumshare application moneypaper companyretracted statementaddition u/s 68addition under section 68genuineness of the transactionentry operatoraccommodation entrysection 133(6)

Judgments citing CIT v. Lovely Exports (P) Ltd.

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax-4(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Qmax Synthetics Private Limited, Mumbai

ITA 4378/MUM/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Apr 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhailacit-4(3)(1) Vs. M/S Qmax Synthetics R. No. 649, 6Th Floor, Pvt. Ltd., 5-B/174, Aayakar Bhavan, Sanjay Building, Mittal Mumbai – 400 020 Industrial Estate, Andheri (E), Mumbai 400 059 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aaacq0206D Respondent .. Appellant

For Appellant: Ashok BansalFor Respondent: T. Shankar
Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 68

…tity of these persons are not or doubt and assessment particulars of all the persons are on record and there is no material to hold that creditworthiness of these persons are not established. The judgement of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Lovely Export 216 CTR 195 and also the judgement of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Value Capital Services Pvt. Ltd 307 ITR 334 are relevant on this issue. It was held by Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case of CIT vs. Electro Polychem Ltd. 294 ITR 661 and Hon'ble Allahabad High Court in the case of Jaya Securities Ltd 166 Taxman 7 that no addition can be…

ACIT Non Corporate Circle-12(1), Chennai vs. M.Sumathy, Chennai

The appeal stand dismissed in terms of our above order

ITA 414/CHNY/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai19 Apr 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri P. Sajit Kumar (JCIT) – Ld. DRFor Respondent: Shri D. Anand (Advocate)-Ld. AR
Section 131Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 68

…g that the provisions of Sec.68 contemplates that the assessee has to give satisfactory explanation about the "nature and source" of any sum found credited in the books of account. In terms of the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in Lovely Exports Pvt. Ltd. (216 CTR 195), when the assessee had categorically established the nature and source of the said sum and discharged the onus that lies on it in terms of Section 68 of the Act, the additions are not justified. When the nature and source of the amount so invested is known, it cannot be said to be undisclosed income. Therefore, the addition of such subscriptions…

M/S Davalagiri Property Developers Private Limited, Bangalore vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-2(1)(2), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed

ITA 568/BANG/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore11 Apr 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri V. Srinivasan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Priyadarshi Mishra, Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 133(6)Section 234Section 68

…n the present case there was no enquiry by the AO or addition made in the hands of the creditor. Being so, no addition could be made on this count in the hands of the assessee. He relied on the following decisions :- (1) CIT v. Lovely Exports (P) Ltd. [2008] 216 CTR 195 (SC) wherein it was held that if the share application money is received by the assessee company from alleged bogus shareholders, whose names are given to the Assessing Officer, then the department is free to proceed to reopen their individual assessments in accordance with law but this amount of share money cannot be regarded as undisclosed inco…

Galaxy Infraprojects & Developers Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. Pr. CIT- 14, Mumbai

ITA 3315/MUM/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Apr 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Promod Kumar () & Ms. Suchitra Kamble () Assessment Year: 2009-10 Galaxy Infraprojects& Developers Pvt. Ltd., Pr. Cit-14, Unit 69/2948, Ratnadeep Co-Op Housing Room No. 415, 4Th Floor, Society Ltd., Gandhi Nagar, Bandra (E), Vs. Aayakarbhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai-400051. Mumbai-400021. Pan No. Aaccg 7477 N Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. Prateekjha, Ar Revenue By : Mr. Harendra Narayan Singh, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 11/01/2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 05/04/2022

For Appellant: Mr. PrateekJha, ARFor Respondent: Mr. Harendra Narayan Singh, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263

…he revision u/s 263 is not proper and just. The Ld. AR relied upon the decision of CIT vs. Nirav Modi 71 Taxman 272. The Ld. AR relied upon the following decisions:  Malabar Industrial Co, Ltd v. CIT (2000) 243 ITR 83 (SC),  CIT v. Lovely Exports Pot. Ltd. (216 CTR 195) (SC),  ACIT-1(1) v. M/s. Gagandeep Infrastructure Pot. Ltd. (ITA No.5784/MUM/2011).  Commissioner of Income Tax vs P. Mohanakala (SC) 2540 of2007.  CIT v. Devi Prasad Khandelwal& Co. Ltd. 81 ITR 460 (BombayHC).  Poonam Bhotikav/s ITO(ITA no 665/Kol/2017. Galaxy Infraprojects & Developers Pvt. Ltd. 4 6. The Ld. DR relied upon the order u/s 26…

Rukmani Infra Projects Pvt. Ltd., Bhubaneswar vs. ACIT, Circle-1(2), Bhubaneswar

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

ITA 358/CTK/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack30 Mar 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं./Ita No.358/Ctk/2017 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2013-2014) Rukmani Infra Projects Ltd., Vs Acit, Circle-1(2), Bhubaneswar Plot No.251, District Centre, C.S.Pur, Bhubaneswar-16 Pan No. : Aaecr 1585 L (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. यनधागररती की ओर से /Assessee By : None : Shri Manoj Kumar Goutam, Cit-Dr राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 08/03/2022 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 30/03/2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Arun Khodpia, Am : This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Has Been Directed Against The Order Passed By The Ld. Cit(A)-1, Bhubaneswar, Dated 16.06.2017, For The Assessment Year 2013-2014. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Extracted From The Available Records Are That, The Assessee, A Company Incorporated Under The Companies Act, 1956, Engaged In The Business Of Erection, Commissioning, Technical & Maintenance Service To Different Power Plants. The Return Of Income For The Ay 2013-14 Was Filed By The Assessee On 01.10.2013 Declaring A Total Income Of Rs.1,65,91,030/-. The Case Of The Assessee Was Selected Under Cass. Notice U/S 143(2) & 143(1) Were Issued & Served On The Assessee. Assessment Proceedings Were Completed By The Ao & Concluded With An Addition Of Rs.3,58,95,574/- Under Four Different

For Appellant: None
Section 143(2)Section 68

…vt Ltd., the investment company to whom the shares were allotted by the assessee 5 company. Assessee has further submitted following case laws to substantiate its contention: i) CIT Vs Stellar investment Ltd 251 ITR 263 [SC] ii) CIT Vs Lovely Exports (P) Ltd 216 CTR 195[SC] iii) CIT, Meerut Vs M/s VAN Resorts & Hotels (P) Ltd. Allahabad HC iii) CIT, Meerut Vs Nav Bharat Duples Ltd. Allahabad HC iv) CIT Vs Oasis Hospitalities Pvt Ltd & UP Bone Mills India Ltd. Delhi HC v) Vijay power generators Ltd & Director of Income Tax, Delhi HC 6.3 In conclusion to submission on this ground the assessee had stated on para 2…

M/S.Bhaskar Traders vs. Asst.Commknr.of Income Tax, Berhampur

ITA/174/2018HC Orissa30 Mar 2022

Bench: DR. JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR (CJ),MR. JUSTICE R.K.PATTANAIK

Arvind Hanjarimal Jain, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT 31 (2), Mumbai

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

ITA 270/MUM/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Mar 2022AY 2012-13

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

For Appellant: Shri Jain DixitFor Respondent: Shri Mehul Jain
Section 132Section 133(6)Section 139Section 143Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 154

…d by Shri Bhanwarlal Jain u/s 68 of the Act. 14. Coming to the cases relied upon by the assessee, the assessee has relied upon various judicial precedence including the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs Lovely Export Pvt. Ltd. (2008) 216 CTR 195. The case laws relied upon by the assessee has been dealt as under:- CIT vs. Goa Sponge and Power Ltd (13/02/2012) Tax Appeal No. 16 of 2012 (High Court-Bombay) "Once the authorities have got all the details, including the name and addresses of the shareholders, their PAN/GIR number, so also the name of the Bank from which the alleged investors r…

Arvind Hanjarimal Jain, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT 31 (2), Mumbai

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

ITA 269/MUM/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Mar 2022AY 2011-12

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

For Appellant: Shri Jain DixitFor Respondent: Shri Mehul Jain
Section 132Section 133(6)Section 139Section 143Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 154

…d by Shri Bhanwarlal Jain u/s 68 of the Act. 14. Coming to the cases relied upon by the assessee, the assessee has relied upon various judicial precedence including the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs Lovely Export Pvt. Ltd. (2008) 216 CTR 195. The case laws relied upon by the assessee has been dealt as under:- CIT vs. Goa Sponge and Power Ltd (13/02/2012) Tax Appeal No. 16 of 2012 (High Court-Bombay) "Once the authorities have got all the details, including the name and addresses of the shareholders, their PAN/GIR number, so also the name of the Bank from which the alleged investors r…

Arvind Hanjarimal Jain, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT 31 (2), Mumbai

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

ITA 268/MUM/2020[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Mar 2022AY 2010-11

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

For Appellant: Shri Jain DixitFor Respondent: Shri Mehul Jain
Section 132Section 133(6)Section 139Section 143Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 154

…d by Shri Bhanwarlal Jain u/s 68 of the Act. 14. Coming to the cases relied upon by the assessee, the assessee has relied upon various judicial precedence including the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs Lovely Export Pvt. Ltd. (2008) 216 CTR 195. The case laws relied upon by the assessee has been dealt as under:- CIT vs. Goa Sponge and Power Ltd (13/02/2012) Tax Appeal No. 16 of 2012 (High Court-Bombay) "Once the authorities have got all the details, including the name and addresses of the shareholders, their PAN/GIR number, so also the name of the Bank from which the alleged investors r…

Arvind Hanjarimal Jain, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT 31 (2), Mumbai

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

ITA 267/MUM/2020[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Mar 2022AY 2009-10

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

For Appellant: Shri Jain DixitFor Respondent: Shri Mehul Jain
Section 132Section 133(6)Section 139Section 143Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 154

…d by Shri Bhanwarlal Jain u/s 68 of the Act. 14. Coming to the cases relied upon by the assessee, the assessee has relied upon various judicial precedence including the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs Lovely Export Pvt. Ltd. (2008) 216 CTR 195. The case laws relied upon by the assessee has been dealt as under:- CIT vs. Goa Sponge and Power Ltd (13/02/2012) Tax Appeal No. 16 of 2012 (High Court-Bombay) "Once the authorities have got all the details, including the name and addresses of the shareholders, their PAN/GIR number, so also the name of the Bank from which the alleged investors r…

Kamla Landmarc Enterprises, Mumbai vs. DCIT-(3)(4), Mumbai

The appeal stands dismissed

ITA 1371/MUM/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Mar 2022AY 2014-15

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

For Appellant: Shri Rashmikant Modi &For Respondent: Shri Neelam Shukla
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 153A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (VIRTUAL COURT) “H” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA.NOs. 1365, 1366, 1367, 1368, 1369, 1370 & 1371/MUM/2019 (A.Ys: 2008-09, 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15) M/s. Kamla Landmarc Enterprises v. DCIT – Central Circle – 3(4) Ground Floor, Shanti Vimal 19th Floor, Air India Building P.M. Road, Vile Parle (E) Nariman Point Mumbai - 400057 Mumbai – 400 021 PAN: AAIFK9427D (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA.NOs. 712, 713, 714, 715, 716, 717 & 718/MUM/2019 (A.Ys: 2008-09, 2009-10,…

Kamla Landmarc Enterprises, Mumbai vs. DCIT(3)(4), Mumbai

The appeal stands dismissed

ITA 1370/MUM/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Mar 2022AY 2013-14

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

For Appellant: Shri Rashmikant Modi &For Respondent: Shri Neelam Shukla
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 153A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (VIRTUAL COURT) “H” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA.NOs. 1365, 1366, 1367, 1368, 1369, 1370 & 1371/MUM/2019 (A.Ys: 2008-09, 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15) M/s. Kamla Landmarc Enterprises v. DCIT – Central Circle – 3(4) Ground Floor, Shanti Vimal 19th Floor, Air India Building P.M. Road, Vile Parle (E) Nariman Point Mumbai - 400057 Mumbai – 400 021 PAN: AAIFK9427D (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA.NOs. 712, 713, 714, 715, 716, 717 & 718/MUM/2019 (A.Ys: 2008-09, 2009-10,…

Kamla Landmarc Enterprises, Mumbai vs. DCIT(3)(4), Mumbai

The appeal stands dismissed

ITA 1369/MUM/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Mar 2022AY 2012-13

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

For Appellant: Shri Rashmikant Modi &For Respondent: Shri Neelam Shukla
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 153A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (VIRTUAL COURT) “H” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA.NOs. 1365, 1366, 1367, 1368, 1369, 1370 & 1371/MUM/2019 (A.Ys: 2008-09, 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15) M/s. Kamla Landmarc Enterprises v. DCIT – Central Circle – 3(4) Ground Floor, Shanti Vimal 19th Floor, Air India Building P.M. Road, Vile Parle (E) Nariman Point Mumbai - 400057 Mumbai – 400 021 PAN: AAIFK9427D (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA.NOs. 712, 713, 714, 715, 716, 717 & 718/MUM/2019 (A.Ys: 2008-09, 2009-10,…

Kamla Landmarc Enterprises, Mumbai vs. DCIT-(3)(4), Mumbai

The appeal stands dismissed

ITA 1368/MUM/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Mar 2022AY 2011-12

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

For Appellant: Shri Rashmikant Modi &For Respondent: Shri Neelam Shukla
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 153A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (VIRTUAL COURT) “H” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA.NOs. 1365, 1366, 1367, 1368, 1369, 1370 & 1371/MUM/2019 (A.Ys: 2008-09, 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15) M/s. Kamla Landmarc Enterprises v. DCIT – Central Circle – 3(4) Ground Floor, Shanti Vimal 19th Floor, Air India Building P.M. Road, Vile Parle (E) Nariman Point Mumbai - 400057 Mumbai – 400 021 PAN: AAIFK9427D (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA.NOs. 712, 713, 714, 715, 716, 717 & 718/MUM/2019 (A.Ys: 2008-09, 2009-10,…

Kamla Landmarc Enterprises, Mumbai vs. DCIT-(3)(4), Mumbai

The appeal stands dismissed

ITA 1367/MUM/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Mar 2022AY 2010-11

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

For Appellant: Shri Rashmikant Modi &For Respondent: Shri Neelam Shukla
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 153A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (VIRTUAL COURT) “H” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA.NOs. 1365, 1366, 1367, 1368, 1369, 1370 & 1371/MUM/2019 (A.Ys: 2008-09, 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15) M/s. Kamla Landmarc Enterprises v. DCIT – Central Circle – 3(4) Ground Floor, Shanti Vimal 19th Floor, Air India Building P.M. Road, Vile Parle (E) Nariman Point Mumbai - 400057 Mumbai – 400 021 PAN: AAIFK9427D (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA.NOs. 712, 713, 714, 715, 716, 717 & 718/MUM/2019 (A.Ys: 2008-09, 2009-10,…

Kamla Landmarc Enterprises, Mumbai vs. DCIT(3)(4), Central Circle, Mumbai

The appeal stands dismissed

ITA 1366/MUM/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Mar 2022AY 2009-10

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

For Appellant: Shri Rashmikant Modi &For Respondent: Shri Neelam Shukla
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 153A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (VIRTUAL COURT) “H” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA.NOs. 1365, 1366, 1367, 1368, 1369, 1370 & 1371/MUM/2019 (A.Ys: 2008-09, 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15) M/s. Kamla Landmarc Enterprises v. DCIT – Central Circle – 3(4) Ground Floor, Shanti Vimal 19th Floor, Air India Building P.M. Road, Vile Parle (E) Nariman Point Mumbai - 400057 Mumbai – 400 021 PAN: AAIFK9427D (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA.NOs. 712, 713, 714, 715, 716, 717 & 718/MUM/2019 (A.Ys: 2008-09, 2009-10,…

Kamla Lamdmarc Enterprises, Mumbai vs. DCIT(3)(4), Mumbai

The appeal stands dismissed

ITA 1365/MUM/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Mar 2022AY 2008-09

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

For Appellant: Shri Rashmikant Modi &For Respondent: Shri Neelam Shukla
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 153A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (VIRTUAL COURT) “H” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA.NOs. 1365, 1366, 1367, 1368, 1369, 1370 & 1371/MUM/2019 (A.Ys: 2008-09, 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15) M/s. Kamla Landmarc Enterprises v. DCIT – Central Circle – 3(4) Ground Floor, Shanti Vimal 19th Floor, Air India Building P.M. Road, Vile Parle (E) Nariman Point Mumbai - 400057 Mumbai – 400 021 PAN: AAIFK9427D (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA.NOs. 712, 713, 714, 715, 716, 717 & 718/MUM/2019 (A.Ys: 2008-09, 2009-10,…

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

…e with the concurrent findings of fact recorded by both the authorities.” 20. Our attention was also drawn to the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court while dismissing SLP in the case of Lovely Exports as has been reported as judgment delivered by the CTR at 216 CTR 295: "Can the amount of share money be regarded as undisclosed income under section 68 of the Income tax Act, 1961? We find no merit in this special leave petition for the simple reason that if the share application money is received by the assessee- company from alleged bogus shareholders, whose names are given to the AO, then the Department is fre…

Saakshee Sales (P) Ltd., Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward-5(2), Kolkata

The appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 72/KOL/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata09 Feb 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Sri Sanjay Garg & Sri Rajesh Kumar)

Section 250

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA ‘C’ BENCH, KOLKATA (BEFORE SRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SRI RAJESH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) I.T.A. No. 72/Kol/2020 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Saakshee Sales (P) Ltd.......................................................................................................Appellant [PAN: AAQCS 8259 L] Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-5(2), Kolkata……….......................................................Respondent Appearances by: Sh. Siddharth Agarwal, Adv., appeared on behalf of the Assessee. Sh. Biswanath Das, Addl. CIT, appeared on behalf of the Revenue. Date of concludi…

ACIT, Central Circle-2(1), Mumbai vs. M/S Luxora Realtors P. Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1096/MUM/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Feb 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Amarjit Singh, Hon'Bleacit – Central Circle – 2(1) V. M/S. Luxora Realtors Pvt. Ltd., Room No. 804, 8Th Floor Soham House, Hari Om Nagar Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Opp. Eastern Express Highway Mumbai - 400020 Mulund(E), Mumbai – 400081 Pan: Aabco3197J (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Kishore Dewani Department By : Ms. Shailja Rai

For Appellant: Shri Kishore DewaniFor Respondent: Ms. Shailja Rai
Section 132(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 68

…had any doubts with regard to their credit worthiness, the revenue could always bring it to tax in the hands of the creditors and/or sub-creditors. [See CIT v. Divine Leasing & Finance Ltd. (20082 2991TR 268 (Delhi) and CIT v. Lovely Exports (P., Ltd. [20082 216 CTR 195 (SCH. " (Emphasis supplied) 19 M/s. Luxora Realtors Pvt. Ltd., 2.4.7 If above referred principles are applied to the facts and circumstances of the case under consideration, it becomes absolutely clear that the appellant had discharged its onus and burden of proof. Not only had it furnished the trail of banking transactions, it had also produced…