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.

How many judgments cite CIT v. Lovely Exports (P) Ltd.?

854 judgments on BharatTax cite CIT v. Lovely Exports (P) Ltd. (216 CTR 195), spanning 2008 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does CIT v. Lovely Exports (P) Ltd. come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 68, Section 133(6), Section 143(3), Section 147, Section 131, Section 148.

CIT v. Lovely Exports (P) Ltd. (216 CTR 195)

M/S Swargamrut Dairy Prv Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 11 (2)(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 6839/MUM/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Jun 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri M. Balaganesh, Hon'Blem/S. Swargamrut Dairy Pvt. Ltd., V. Dcit – 11(2)(2) 113, 1St Chamber Income Tax Office, Churchgate Maker Chamber-V Mumbai - 400020 Nariman Point – 400021 Pan: Aalcs3714R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Vishnu Agarwal Department By : Shri Vijaykumar Menon Date Of Hearing : 18.03.2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 15.06.2021

For Appellant: Shri Vishnu AgarwalFor Respondent: Shri Vijaykumar Menon

Section 143Section 143(1)Section 147Section 68

…vision Bench of this Court in case 11 M/s. Swargamrut Dairy Pvt. Ltd., of CIT v. Gagandeep Infrastructure (P.) Ltd. [2017] 80 taxmann.com 272/247 Taxman 245/394 ITR 680 (Bom.) and the order of the Apex Court in case of CIT v. Lovely Exports (P.) Ltd. [2008] 216 CTR 195. 4. We have considered the submissions. 5. The Assessing Officer added Rs. 95 lakhs as income under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act only on the ground that the parties to whom the share certificates were issued and who had paid the share money had not appeared before the Assessing Officer and the summons could not be served on the addresses give…

M/S Namdhari Industrial Traders Pvt. Ltd., Ludhiana vs. ACIT, Ludhiana

ITA 917/CHANDI/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh14 Jun 2021AY 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Mukhi, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Ashok Khanna, Addl.CIT

Section 131(1)(d)Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250(6)Section 68

…rein the shareholding of the said three investor companies in the subsequent years stand along with shareholding details as on 31.03.2016, which are available at pages 107 to 118 of the said paper book. 18. In the case of CIT vs. Lovely Exports Pvt Ltd. 2008 216 CTR 195 (SC), the Hon’ble Supreme Court has held that where the share application is received by the assessee company from alleged bogus shareholders whose name are given to the AO along with their PAN No etc., then the department is free to proceed to reopen assessment of the shareholders in accordance with law but this amount of share money cannot be r…

Asst CC 1 (3), Mumbai vs. M/S Neminath Associates, Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 8043/MUM/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Jun 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri M. Balaganesh, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Ms. Hema SharmaFor Respondent: Shri Tharian Oommen

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 271(1)(c)Section 68

…in u/s 68 of the Act. M/s. Neminath Associates 10 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…

Asst CIT CC 1 (3), Mumbai vs. M/S Neminath Associates, Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 8035/MUM/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Jun 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri M. Balaganesh, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Ms. Hema SharmaFor Respondent: Shri Tharian Oommen

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 271(1)(c)Section 68

…in u/s 68 of the Act. M/s. Neminath Associates 10 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…

Asst CIT CC 1 (3), Mumbai vs. M/S Neminath Associates, Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 8034/MUM/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Jun 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri M. Balaganesh, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Ms. Hema SharmaFor Respondent: Shri Tharian Oommen

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 271(1)(c)Section 68

…in u/s 68 of the Act. M/s. Neminath Associates 10 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…

Asst CIT CC 1 (3), Mumbai vs. M/S M/S Neminath Homes P Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 8028/MUM/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Jun 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri M. Balaganesh, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Prakash JunjunwalaFor Respondent: Shri Tharian Oommen

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 271(1)(c)Section 68

…68 of the Act. M/s. Neminath Homes Pvt. Ltd., 10 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…

Asst CIT CC 1 (3), Mumbai vs. M/S Neminath Enterprises, Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 7989/MUM/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Jun 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri M. Balaganesh, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Ms. Hema SharmaFor Respondent: Shri Tharian Oommen

Section 147Section 68

…d by Shri Bhanwarlal Jain u/s 68 of the Act. 10. 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:- M/s. Neminath Enterprises 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 whi…

Asst CIT CC 1 (3), Mumbai vs. M/S Neminath Enterprises, Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 7988/MUM/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Jun 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri M. Balaganesh, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Ms. Hema SharmaFor Respondent: Shri Tharian Oommen

Section 147Section 68

…d by Shri Bhanwarlal Jain u/s 68 of the Act. 10. 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:- M/s. Neminath Enterprises 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 whi…

M/S Shiva Shakti Enclaves Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Central Range 7(3), Mumbai

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

ITA 629/MUM/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Jun 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri M Balaganesh & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadalem/S. Shiva Shakti Vs. Dcit Central Enclaves Pvt Ltd., Range 7(3) 203/204 Raigad R.No. 655, 6Th Floor, Darshan, Opp Indian Oil Aayakar Bhavan, Mk Colony, Jp Road, Road, Mumbai – Andheri West, Mumbai 400020. – 400053. Pan/Gir No. : Aagcs5014B Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Shri Vimal Punmiya, Ar Respondent By : Shri Vijay Kumar Menon, Dr Date Of Hearing 15.04.2021 Date Of Pronouncement 04.06.2021 आदेश / O R D E R Per Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm: The Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) -49 Mumbai, Passed U/S. 143(3) R.W.S. 147 & 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

For Appellant: Shri Vimal Punmiya, ARFor Respondent: Shri Vijay Kumar Menon, DR

Section 131Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 234ASection 274Section 68

…ient evidence on record. Moreover no opportunity of being heard was given to the assessee. However, in support of this contention, the Ld. Representative of the assessee has placed reliance upon the following law.:- 1. CIT Vs. Loverly Exports Pvt. Ltd. (2008) 216 CTR 195 (SC) 2. PCIT Vs. Himachal Fibers Ltd. (2018) 98 taxmann.com 173 (SC) 3. PCIT Vs. Bharat Securities P. Ltd. (2020) 13 taxmann.com 32 (SC) 4. PCIT Vs. Rohtak Chain Co. P. Ltd. (2019) 110 taxmann.com 59 (SC) 5. PCIT Vs. Ami Industries Pvt. Ltd. 1231 of 2017 6. CIT Vs. Gagandeep Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. ITA. No.1613 of 2014 (Bom) 7. CIT Vs. Orchid In…

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

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

ITA 906/MUM/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 May 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri Rajesh Kumarassessment Year: 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh Joshi, A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Kavita P. Kaushik, D.R

Section 133(6)Section 133ASection 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148

…nd assessing them to tax in accordance with law and it did not entitle revenue to add same to assessee's income as unexplained cash credit. ' 12.27 The Appellant company has also relied upon the decision of Apex Court in the case of Lovely Exports Pvt. Ltd. , 216 CTR 195, wherein it was held as under:- "The assessee had received certain amounts from various persons as share application money. No addition on account unexplained cash credits could be made to its income in the absence of any evidence to suggest that the subscribers were benamidars or any part of the share capital represented the assessee's own inco…

Dolphin Goods Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward-6(1), Kolkata

ITA 240/KOL/2020[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata05 May 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: "ी जे. सुधाकर रे"डी, लेखा सद"य एवं/And "ी ऐ. ट". वक", "यायीक सद"य) [Before Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

Section 127Section 131Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 263

…icer invoked the provisions under Section 68/69 of the Income Tax Act and made addition of Rs.24,00,000/-. On appeal the Learned CIT (A) by following the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Cl. T. vs. M/s. Lovely Exports Pvt. Ltd., reported in (2008) 216 CTR 195 allowed the appeal by holding -that share capital/premium of Rs. 24,00,000/- received from the investors was not liable to be treated under Section 68 as unexplained credits and it should not be taxed in the hands of the appellant company. As indicated earlier, the Tribunal below dismissed the appeal filed by the Revenue. After hearing the learne…

M/S Moongipa Development & Infrastructure Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT Central Range 7(3), Mumbai

The appeal stands partly allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 627/MUM/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 May 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am (Hearing Through Video Conferencing Mode) आयकरअपील िं./ I.T.A. No.627/Mum/2019 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2011-12) M/S Moongipa Dev. & Inf. Ltd. Dcit-Cr 7(3) 655, 6Th Floor 203/204, Raigad Darshan बिाम Opp. Indian Oil Colony Aaykar Bhawan / Vs. J.P.Road, Andheri (W) M.K.Road Mumbai – 400 053 Mumbai – 400 020 स्थायीलेखा िं./ जीआइआर िं./ Pan/Gir No. Aafcm-1616-E (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : Assessee By : Shri Vimal Punmiya – Ld. Ar Revenue By : Shri Tharian Oommen – Ld. Sr. Dr ुनवाई की तारीख/ : 19/04/2021 Date Of Hearing घोषणा की तारीख / : 03/05/2021 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1. Aforesaid Appeal By Assessee For Assessment Year (Ay) 2011-12 Contest The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)-49, Mumbai [In Short Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’], Appeal No.Cit(A)-49/It- 165/2017-18 Dated 05/12/2018 On Following Grounds Of Appeal: -

For Appellant: Shri Vimal Punmiya – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Tharian Oommen – Ld. Sr. DR

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 234ASection 274Section 68

…ient evidence on record. Moreover no opportunity of being heard was given to the assessee. However, in support of this contention, the Ld. Representative of the assessee has placed reliance upon the following law.:- 1. CIT Vs. Loverly Exports Pvt. Ltd. (2008) 216 CTR 195 (SC) 2. PCIT Vs. Himachal Fibers Ltd. (2018) 98 taxmann.com 173 (SC) 3. PCIT Vs. Bharat Securities P. Ltd. (2020) 13 taxmann.com 32 (SC) 4. PCIT Vs. Rohtak Chain Co. P. Ltd. (2019) 110 taxmann.com 59 (SC) 5. PCIT Vs. Ami Industries Pvt. Ltd. 1231 of 2017 6. CIT Vs. Gagandeep Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. ITA. No.1613 of 2014 (Bom) 7. CIT Vs. Orchid In…

J.C.I.T.(OSD), Circle-12(1), Kolkata vs. M/S Werit Global Ltd., Kolkata

ITA 55/KOL/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata13 Apr 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

Section 133(6)Section 68

…icer invoked the provisions under Section 68/69 of the Income Tax Act and made addition of Rs.24,00,000/-. On appeal the Learned CIT (A) by following the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Cl. T. vs. M/s. Lovely Exports Pvt. Ltd., reported in (2008) 216 CTR 195 allowed the appeal by holding -that share capital/premium of Rs. 24,00,000/- received from the investors was not liable to be treated under Section 68 as unexplained credits and it should not be taxed in the hands of the appellant company. As indicated earlier, the Tribunal below dismissed the appeal filed by the Revenue. After hearing the learne…

Wearit Global Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Circle - 12(1), Kolkata

ITA 2191/KOL/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata13 Apr 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

Section 133(6)Section 68

…icer invoked the provisions under Section 68/69 of the Income Tax Act and made addition of Rs.24,00,000/-. On appeal the Learned CIT (A) by following the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Cl. T. vs. M/s. Lovely Exports Pvt. Ltd., reported in (2008) 216 CTR 195 allowed the appeal by holding -that share capital/premium of Rs. 24,00,000/- received from the investors was not liable to be treated under Section 68 as unexplained credits and it should not be taxed in the hands of the appellant company. As indicated earlier, the Tribunal below dismissed the appeal filed by the Revenue. After hearing the learne…

JCIT(OSD), Cir.-12(1), Kolkata vs. M/S Wearit Global Ltd., Kolkata

ITA 115/KOL/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata13 Apr 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

Section 133(6)Section 68

…icer invoked the provisions under Section 68/69 of the Income Tax Act and made addition of Rs.24,00,000/-. On appeal the Learned CIT (A) by following the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Cl. T. vs. M/s. Lovely Exports Pvt. Ltd., reported in (2008) 216 CTR 195 allowed the appeal by holding -that share capital/premium of Rs. 24,00,000/- received from the investors was not liable to be treated under Section 68 as unexplained credits and it should not be taxed in the hands of the appellant company. As indicated earlier, the Tribunal below dismissed the appeal filed by the Revenue. After hearing the learne…

DCIT, Circle - 12(1), Kolkata vs. M/S. Wearit Global Ltd., Kolkata

ITA 20/KOL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata13 Apr 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

Section 133(6)Section 68

…icer invoked the provisions under Section 68/69 of the Income Tax Act and made addition of Rs.24,00,000/-. On appeal the Learned CIT (A) by following the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Cl. T. vs. M/s. Lovely Exports Pvt. Ltd., reported in (2008) 216 CTR 195 allowed the appeal by holding -that share capital/premium of Rs. 24,00,000/- received from the investors was not liable to be treated under Section 68 as unexplained credits and it should not be taxed in the hands of the appellant company. As indicated earlier, the Tribunal below dismissed the appeal filed by the Revenue. After hearing the learne…

Acs Traders (P) Ltd., Howrah vs. PCIT-5, Kolkata

ITA 466/KOL/2020[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Mar 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 263

…icer invoked the provisions under Section 68/69 of the Income Tax Act and made addition of Rs.24,00,000/-. On appeal the Learned CIT (A) by following the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Cl. T. vs. M/s. Lovely Exports Pvt. Ltd., reported in (2008) 216 CTR 195 allowed the appeal by holding -that share capital/premium of Rs. 24,00,000/- received from the investors was not liable to be treated under Section 68 as unexplained credits and it should not be taxed in the hands of the appellant company. As indicated earlier, the Tribunal below dismissed the appeal filed by the Revenue. After hearing the learne…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-4(1), Central Range-4, Mumbai vs. Sahakar Global Limited, Mumbai

Appeal stand partly allowed

ITA 5341/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Mar 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am (Hearing Through Video Conferencing Mode) 1. आयकरअपील िं./ I.T.A. No 5125/Mum/2017 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2009-10) & 2. आयकरअपील िं./ I.T.A. No 5126/Mum/2017 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & 3. आयकरअपील िं./ I.T.A. No 5127/Mum/2017 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2011-12) & 4. आयकरअपील िं./ I.T.A. No 5128/Mum/2017 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Sahakar Global Ltd. Dcit-Cc-4(1) B-10, 1St Floor, Kanakia Space, Room No.1916,19Th Floor बिाम/ Western Edge Ii Air India Building Vs. W.E.Highway, Boriwali(East) Nariman Point Mumbai-400 066 Mumbai-400 021 स्थायीलेखा िं./ जीआइआर िं./ Pan/Gir No. Aaecs-3575-R (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : & 5. आयकरअपील िं./ I.T.A. No 5340/Mum/2017 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & 6. आयकरअपील िं./ I.T.A. No 5968/Mum/2017 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2011-12) & 7. आयकरअपील िं./ I.T.A. No 5341/Mum/2017 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Dcit-Cc-4(1) Sahakar Global Ltd. Room No.1916,19Th Floor B-10, 1St Floor, Kanakia बिाम/ Air India Building Space, Western Edge Ii Vs. Nariman Point W.E.Highway, Boriwali(East) Mumbai-400 021 Mumbai-400 066 स्थायीलेखा िं./ जीआइआर िं./ Pan/Gir No. Aaecs-3575-R

For Appellant: Shri Prakash Jhujhunwala-Ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri Hemant Kumar Leuva-Ld. CIT-DR

Section 68

…do so would justify the deletion of addition. Similar was the view of Hon‟ble Delhi High court in CIT V/s Vrindavan Farms (P) Ltd. (ITA No. 71/2015 dated 12/8/2015). Further, in terms of decision of Hon‟ble Apex Court in CIT V/s Lovely Exports (P) Ltd. (2008 216 CTR 195), the department could not proceed against the assessee but it could proceed against the alleged doubted subscribers. 4.9 In the above background, it was submitted that since the assessee produced sufficient documentation to discharge initial onus of showing the genuineness and creditworthiness of the share applicants, it was obligatory for Ld. A…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-4(1), Central Range-4, Mumbai vs. Sahakar Global Limited, Mumbai

Appeal stand partly allowed

ITA 5340/MUM/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Mar 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am (Hearing Through Video Conferencing Mode) 1. आयकरअपील िं./ I.T.A. No 5125/Mum/2017 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2009-10) & 2. आयकरअपील िं./ I.T.A. No 5126/Mum/2017 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & 3. आयकरअपील िं./ I.T.A. No 5127/Mum/2017 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2011-12) & 4. आयकरअपील िं./ I.T.A. No 5128/Mum/2017 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Sahakar Global Ltd. Dcit-Cc-4(1) B-10, 1St Floor, Kanakia Space, Room No.1916,19Th Floor बिाम/ Western Edge Ii Air India Building Vs. W.E.Highway, Boriwali(East) Nariman Point Mumbai-400 066 Mumbai-400 021 स्थायीलेखा िं./ जीआइआर िं./ Pan/Gir No. Aaecs-3575-R (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : & 5. आयकरअपील िं./ I.T.A. No 5340/Mum/2017 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & 6. आयकरअपील िं./ I.T.A. No 5968/Mum/2017 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2011-12) & 7. आयकरअपील िं./ I.T.A. No 5341/Mum/2017 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Dcit-Cc-4(1) Sahakar Global Ltd. Room No.1916,19Th Floor B-10, 1St Floor, Kanakia बिाम/ Air India Building Space, Western Edge Ii Vs. Nariman Point W.E.Highway, Boriwali(East) Mumbai-400 021 Mumbai-400 066 स्थायीलेखा िं./ जीआइआर िं./ Pan/Gir No. Aaecs-3575-R

For Appellant: Shri Prakash Jhujhunwala-Ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri Hemant Kumar Leuva-Ld. CIT-DR

Section 68

…do so would justify the deletion of addition. Similar was the view of Hon‟ble Delhi High court in CIT V/s Vrindavan Farms (P) Ltd. (ITA No. 71/2015 dated 12/8/2015). Further, in terms of decision of Hon‟ble Apex Court in CIT V/s Lovely Exports (P) Ltd. (2008 216 CTR 195), the department could not proceed against the assessee but it could proceed against the alleged doubted subscribers. 4.9 In the above background, it was submitted that since the assessee produced sufficient documentation to discharge initial onus of showing the genuineness and creditworthiness of the share applicants, it was obligatory for Ld. A…

Sahakar Global Limited, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-4(1), Mumbai

Appeal stand partly allowed

ITA 5128/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Mar 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am (Hearing Through Video Conferencing Mode) 1. आयकरअपील िं./ I.T.A. No 5125/Mum/2017 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2009-10) & 2. आयकरअपील िं./ I.T.A. No 5126/Mum/2017 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & 3. आयकरअपील िं./ I.T.A. No 5127/Mum/2017 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2011-12) & 4. आयकरअपील िं./ I.T.A. No 5128/Mum/2017 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Sahakar Global Ltd. Dcit-Cc-4(1) B-10, 1St Floor, Kanakia Space, Room No.1916,19Th Floor बिाम/ Western Edge Ii Air India Building Vs. W.E.Highway, Boriwali(East) Nariman Point Mumbai-400 066 Mumbai-400 021 स्थायीलेखा िं./ जीआइआर िं./ Pan/Gir No. Aaecs-3575-R (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : & 5. आयकरअपील िं./ I.T.A. No 5340/Mum/2017 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & 6. आयकरअपील िं./ I.T.A. No 5968/Mum/2017 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2011-12) & 7. आयकरअपील िं./ I.T.A. No 5341/Mum/2017 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Dcit-Cc-4(1) Sahakar Global Ltd. Room No.1916,19Th Floor B-10, 1St Floor, Kanakia बिाम/ Air India Building Space, Western Edge Ii Vs. Nariman Point W.E.Highway, Boriwali(East) Mumbai-400 021 Mumbai-400 066 स्थायीलेखा िं./ जीआइआर िं./ Pan/Gir No. Aaecs-3575-R

For Appellant: Shri Prakash Jhujhunwala-Ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri Hemant Kumar Leuva-Ld. CIT-DR

Section 68

…do so would justify the deletion of addition. Similar was the view of Hon‟ble Delhi High court in CIT V/s Vrindavan Farms (P) Ltd. (ITA No. 71/2015 dated 12/8/2015). Further, in terms of decision of Hon‟ble Apex Court in CIT V/s Lovely Exports (P) Ltd. (2008 216 CTR 195), the department could not proceed against the assessee but it could proceed against the alleged doubted subscribers. 4.9 In the above background, it was submitted that since the assessee produced sufficient documentation to discharge initial onus of showing the genuineness and creditworthiness of the share applicants, it was obligatory for Ld. A…

CIT v. Lovely Exports (P) Ltd.

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

Also referred to as

Sections most often in play

Issues it is cited on

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

M/S Swargamrut Dairy Prv Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 11 (2)(2), Mumbai

M/S Namdhari Industrial Traders Pvt. Ltd., Ludhiana vs. ACIT, Ludhiana

Asst CC 1 (3), Mumbai vs. M/S Neminath Associates, Mumbai

Asst CIT CC 1 (3), Mumbai vs. M/S Neminath Associates, Mumbai

Asst CIT CC 1 (3), Mumbai vs. M/S Neminath Associates, Mumbai

Asst CIT CC 1 (3), Mumbai vs. M/S M/S Neminath Homes P Ltd., Mumbai

Asst CIT CC 1 (3), Mumbai vs. M/S Neminath Enterprises, Mumbai

Asst CIT CC 1 (3), Mumbai vs. M/S Neminath Enterprises, Mumbai

M/S Shiva Shakti Enclaves Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Central Range 7(3), Mumbai

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

Dolphin Goods Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward-6(1), Kolkata

M/S Moongipa Development & Infrastructure Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT Central Range 7(3), Mumbai

J.C.I.T.(OSD), Circle-12(1), Kolkata vs. M/S Werit Global Ltd., Kolkata

Wearit Global Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Circle - 12(1), Kolkata

JCIT(OSD), Cir.-12(1), Kolkata vs. M/S Wearit Global Ltd., Kolkata

DCIT, Circle - 12(1), Kolkata vs. M/S. Wearit Global Ltd., Kolkata

Acs Traders (P) Ltd., Howrah vs. PCIT-5, Kolkata

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-4(1), Central Range-4, Mumbai vs. Sahakar Global Limited, Mumbai

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-4(1), Central Range-4, Mumbai vs. Sahakar Global Limited, Mumbai

Sahakar Global Limited, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-4(1), Mumbai