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 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 366,339 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 68 Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 147 Section 131 Section 148 Section 143(2)Section 153A

Issues it is cited on

creditworthiness of the creditor source of source share capital and share premium share application money paper company retracted statement addition u/s 68 addition under section 68 genuineness of the transaction entry operator accommodation entry section 133(6)

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

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Superb Developers (P) Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 55/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Jul 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N. K. Saini & Ms. Suchitra Kambleacit Vs Superb Developers (P) Ltd. Central Circle-3 Wz-183, F. F. Lance No. 4 New Delhi Lajwanti Garden New Delhi Aaics4437L (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit Vs Superb Developers (P) Ltd. Central Circle-3 Wz-183, F. F. Lance No. 4 New Delhi Lajwanti Garden New Delhi Aaics4437L (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit Vs Superb Developers (P) Ltd. Central Circle-3 Wz-183, F. F. Lance No. 4 New Delhi Lajwanti Garden New Delhi Aaics4437L (Appellant) (Respondent) Superb Developers (P) Ltd. Vs Dcit Wz-183, F. F. Lance No. 4 Central Circle-3 Lajwanti Garden New Delhi New Delhi Aaics4437L (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 132Section 133Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 68

…o incriminating material was found. The Ld. AR further submitted that there was no investigation made on behalf of the Assessing Officer . Therefore, this case is squarely covered by the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Lovely Exports (P) Ltd. 216 CTR 195. The Ld. DR relied upon the Assessment Order. 12. We have heard both the parties and perused all the records. From the perusal of the records, it is found that there was no incriminating material found during the search proceedings and there was no investigation made by the Assessing Officer. Thus, the ratio laid down by the decision of the Hon'…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Superb Developers (P) Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 54/DEL/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Jul 2018AY 2008-09

Section 132Section 133Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 68

Shri Mujaffar Hussen, Jaipur vs. Income Tax Officer, Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 290/JPR/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur05 Jul 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: The Hon'Ble Tribunal For Condonation Of The Short Delay In Submission Of The Appeal.’’

For Appellant: Shri Yogesh Kumar Sharma, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Poonam Rai, DCIT - DR

Section 44ASection 68

…ivities as well as the sale/purchase deeds was disclosed and given tha fact that the amount were reflect in the bank account there was no question of dubious credit entries the verdict of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs Lovely Exports (P) Ltd. 216 CTR 195 which held as under: - “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 appellant company from alleged bogus shareholders, whose names are given to the Assessing…

ITO 12(2)(2), Mumbai vs. Elegant Creations P . Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 5632/MUM/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jun 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2012-13 Income Tax Officer M/S Elegant Creations Pvt. Ltd. 12(2)(2), Room No. 146A, 701, Meenaxi Apt. Gokuldham, Vs. 1St Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Goregaon (E), Mumbai-400063, M.K. Road, Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aaace5295L Appellant Respondent Revenue By : Ms. S. Padmaja, Dr Assessee By : Mr. Vipul J. Shah, Ar Date Of Hearing : 17/04/2018 Date Of Pronouncement: 28/06/2018

For Appellant: Mr. Vipul J. Shah, ARFor Respondent: Ms. S. Padmaja, DR

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 68

…share application money have been issued through banking channel. There is no cash transaction which could compel oneself to assume that the transactions were not genuine.” Drawing the above conclusion by relying on decision in CIT v. Lovely Exports (P) Ltd. 216 CTR 295 (SC), Oasis Hospitalities P. Ltd. (2011) 333 ITR 119 (Del), Sophia Finance Ltd. 205 ITR 98 (Del) (FB), CIT v. Creative World Telefilms Ltd. (2011) 333 ITR 100, CIT v. Mohanakala (2007) 291 ITR 278 (SC), CIT v. Stellar Investment Ltd. (1991) 192 ITR 287 (Del), CIT v. Gangeshwari Metal Pvt. Ltd. 361 ITR 10 (Del), the Ld. M/s Elegant Creations Pvt.…

Grover Vineyards Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO WD 1(1)(4), Mumbai

Appeal are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3509/MUM/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jun 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2009-10 Income Tax Officer Ward M/S Grover Vineyards 1(1)(4),531 A/579 Pvt. Ltd., 107/8, 1St Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, Floor, Arcadia, N.C.P.A. M.K.Road Lane, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400020 Mumbai-400021. Pan No. Aaacg3592Q Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/S Grover Vineyards Income Tax Officer Ltd. Anand Bhavan, 348, Ward 1(1)(4) Vs. Dr. D.N. Road, Fort, Mumbai. Mumbai-400001 Pan No. Aaacg3592Q Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. L. Raghavendra Rao, ARFor Respondent: Ms. S. Padmaja, CIT(DR)

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)

…ds 7.1 The Ld. CIT(A) observed that as reported by the AO, the amount was received through proper channel and after complying with the necessary requirement of Ministry of Corporate Affair. Then, relying on the decision in CIT v. Lovely Exports P. Ltd. (2008) 216 CTR 195 (SC), the Ld. CIT(A) deleted the addition of Rs.12,99,22,170/- made by the AO. 8. Before us, the Ld. DR relies on the decision in Major Metals Ltd. v. UoI (WP No. 397 of 2011) by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court and the order of the ITAT ‘F’ Bench Mumbai in DCIT v. M/s Varsity Education Management (ITA No. 486/Mum/2015) for the AY 2011-12. In the ca…

Moti Adhesives P.Ltd, Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-17(2), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3133/DEL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Jun 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhuassessment Year: 2009-10

For Appellant: Sh. Kapil Goel, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Ashima Neb, Sr. DR

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 292CSection 68

…Bench of this Court in case of Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Gagandeep Infrastructure (P.) Ltd., reported in [2017] 80 Taxmann 272 (Bombay) and the order of the Apex Court in case of Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Lovely Exports (P.) Ltd., reported in [2008] 216 CTR 195 (SC). 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…

ACIT 30(3), Mumbai vs. Shreedham Builders, Mumbai

ITA 5589/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Jun 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri N.K. Pradhanassessment Year: 2012-13 Acit-30(3), Shreedham Builders, R. No.510, 5Th Floor, 105/106, 1St Floor, बनाम/ Pratayakshkar Bhavan, Vijay Indl. Estate, Vs. Bandra Kurla Complex, Malad (W), Bandra (East), Mumbai-400064 Mumbai-400051 (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) P.A. No. Abdfs0133N

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 68

…009) 26 DTR (Del.) 358, and v) Bhav Shakti Steel Mines (P) Ltd. v. CIT (2009) 179 Taxmnan 25. wherein the Hon 'bie Delhi High Court has observed as under: - "In any event we also note that the Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Lovely Exports (F) Ltd. [2008] 216 CTR 195 considered the question as to whether the share application money can be regarded as undisclosed income under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Supreme Court dismissing the SLP observed that if the share money is received by the assessee company from alleged bogus shareholders whose names are given to the Assessing Officer, then the Dep…

ITO 19(2)(3), Mumbai vs. Meenakshi N Shah, Mumbai

ITA 7082/MUM/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jun 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri G. Manjunathaassessment Year: 2007-08 Dcit 5(2)(2) Meridian Chem Bond Mumbai Purchase Ltd., बनाम/ 903 Raheja Centre, Free Vs. Press Journal Marg, Nariman Point, Mumbai 400 021 (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) Pan. Aaacr1789G

Section 68

…d by attending circumstances. Once the assessee produces evidences about identity, genuineness and credit worthiness of the lender onus of proof shifts to the Revenue. Fifthly, the Honorable Supreme Court in the case of Lovely Exports Private Limited, (2008) 216 CTR 195 (SC), has stated that the AO is at liberty to bring to tax the amounts in their respective hands of the creditors if their identity, genuineness and creditworthiness is not proved. The AO should have made efforts to assess the amounts in the hands of the creditors at least on protective basis. Lastly, even if the creditworthiness of the creditors…

ITO 9(2)(2), Mumbai vs. Kem Liquors & Beverages P. Ltd, Thane

In the result, the Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 686/MUM/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Jun 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri G Manjunathaassessment Year : 2010-11 Ito 9(2)(2), M/S. Kem Liquors & Beverages P Ltd., Mumbai A/47, Road No.11, Wagle Indl. Estate, Vs. Thane (W), Thane 400 604

For Appellant: Shri Ram TiwariFor Respondent: Shri Subodh Ratnaparkhi

Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 4Section 5Section 56(1)Section 61

…ficer has not made out this case on any legal ground, hence, such presumption cannot be sustained. Appellant further gets support from various decisions of the case of – a) Padmaraje R Kadambande vs CIT 195 ITR 877 (1992)(SC) b) CIT vs Lovely Exports (P) Ltd. 216 CTR 195 (2008) (SC) c) CIT vs. Jagatjit Industries Ltd. 337 ITR 21 (Delhi) (2010) (SC) d) Niyati B Yodh vs. ACIT, 4 SOT 941 (Mumbai) (2004)” 5. The learned DR submitted that on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A) has erred in deleting the additions made by the Assessing Officer towards share capital including share premium…

ITO, WD-6(4), Kolkata vs. M/S Wiz Tech Solutions Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

ITA 1162/KOL/2015[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata14 Jun 2018AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am]

Section 131Section 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…

ITO, Jaipur vs. Land Mark Dilsay P Ltd, Jaipur

Appeals are dismissed in limine but without any order as to costs

ITA 178/JPR/2015[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur08 Jun 2018AY 2006-07

For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal (CA)For Respondent: Smt. Seema Meena (JCIT) fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@

Section 143(1)Section 148

…ot be placed upon the rack and called upon to explain not merely the origin and source of a capital contribution, but also the origin of origin and source of the source. (vi) Further, I find that the Hon’ble Apex Court in CIT v Lovely Exports (P) Ltd. (2008) 216 CTR 195 has held that the even if the share application money received by the appellant company is from alleged bogus shareholder, whose identity is produced by the appellant company, the revenue can always proceed against such shareholders and if necessary reopen their ITA 178/JP/2015 & C.O. 18/JP/2015_ 7 ITO Vs M/s Land Mark Dealers (P) Ltd. individua…

ITO, Jaipur vs. Land Mark Dilsay P Ltd, Jaipur

Appeals are dismissed in limine but without any order as to costs

ITA 177/JPR/2015[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur08 Jun 2018AY 2005-06

For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal (CA)For Respondent: Smt. Seema Meena (JCIT) fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@

Section 143(1)Section 148

…he AO could not bring out any material to disapprove the genuineness of confirmations along with other prima facie details filed by the assessee. Therefore, the decision given by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, in the case of CIT v. Lovely Exports (P.) Ltd. [2008] 216 CTR 195, will apply here and addition made by the AO is uncalled for. 3.3.3. Burden of proof is not static. Once the assessee has provided relevant evidences then the burden shifts on the AO to disapprove their genuineness with new facts. However on the basis of documentary evidences such as (i) PANs of all Seven (7) concerns who have subscribed to the…

Pratik Syntex P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO 13(1)(4), Mumbai

In the result , appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 6690/MUM/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 May 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri C.N Prasad & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No.6690/Mum/2016 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2012-13) बिाम/ M/S. Pratik Syntex Private Ito 13(1)(4), Mumbai Ltd.,A-51, Rustomji Adarsh Heritage, Adarsh Vihar V. Complex, Opp. Marve Road, Malad (W), Mumbai 400064 स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ Pan : Aaecp3487H (अपीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) ..

For Appellant: Shri Haresh P. ShahFor Respondent: Shri Rajat Mittal (DR)

Section 143(3)

…of Hon‟ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT v. Gagandeep Infrastructure Private Ltd. (2017) 394 ITR 680 (Bom). The learned counsel for the assessee also relied upon the decision of Hon‟ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Lovely Exports P. Ltd. (2008) 216 CTR 195(SC), decision of Hon‟ble Bombay High Court in the case of Principal CIT v. Apeak Infotech reported in (2017) 397 ITR 0148(Bom.) , decision of Hon‟ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT v. Orchid Industries Private Limited (2017)397 ITR 0136(Bom.), decision of ITAT Mumbai in the case of Shakti Hardware Collections Private Limited v. DCIT in ITA…

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

…not be asked to explain the source of source of loan accepted through banking channel as well once identity of the lender is proved beyond doubt addition u/s 68 of the Act cannot made as held in following judgments :- a) CIT Vs Lovely Exports (P) Ltd. (2008) 216 CTR 195 (SC). b) CIT vs. Metachem Industries (2000) 245 ITR 160 (MP) c) Shree Barkha Synthetics Ltd Vs. CIT (2006) 283 ITR 377 (Rajsthan) d) Rajat Capital Market Pvt. Ltd Vs. ACIT (2014) 24 ITJ 219 (Indore) The appellant discharged the burden casted upon him and he was not required to prove source of source of loan received from M/s. K & Co. as held in…

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

Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 68

M/S Inland Merchandise Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-9(3), Kolkata

In the result, for statistical purpose, appeal of assessee is treated as allowed

ITA 139/KOL/2017[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata27 Apr 2018AY 2009-2010

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi"व"वध आवेदन (Misc. Application) M.A. No.36/Kol/2018 (Arising Out Ita No.139/Kol/2017) "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year:2009-10 M/S Inland Merchandise Income Tax Officer बनाम Pvt. Ltd.5, Hari Sarkar Ward-9(3) Aayaka V/S. Lane, Kolkata-007 Bhawan, P-7, [Pan No.Aabci 9882 N] Chowringhee Square ,Kolkata-69 (Original Appellant) (Original Respondent) (Applicant) .. (Respondent) Assessment Year:2009-10 M/S Inland Merchandise Income Tax Officer, बनाम Pvt. Ltd., 5, Hari Sarkar Ward-9(3), Aayakar / V/S. Lane, Kolkata-700 007 Bhawan, P-7, [Pan No.Aabci 9882 N] Chowringhee Square, Kolkata-69 .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant !यथ" /Respondent

Section 143(2)Section 263Section 68

…O was not empowered to examine any aspect of raising of share capital with premium and make any addition u/s 68 of the Act in the hands of the appellant in light of the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Lovely Exporters Pvt. Ltd. (2008) 216 CTR 195 (SC) 11) That the Ld. CIT(A) while upholding the aid u/s. 68 of the Act ought to have considered the settled position in law that onus was on the department to link the assessee with the purported unaccounted source and when that link was missing or had not been conclusively proved, it was not open to the department to fasten the assessee with su…

Shivalik Kinema Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur vs. DCIT, Jaipur

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

ITA 400/JPR/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur23 Apr 2018AY 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal (CA)For Respondent: Smt. Seema Meena (JCIT)

Section 139(1)Section 147Section 148Section 68

…ies when there is no such requirement from the AO. In any case, once the assessee has established the identity of these companies, addition cannot be made in the hands of the assessee as held by Supreme Court in case of CIT Vs. Lovely Exports Pvt. Ltd. (2008) 216 CTR 195. 18. It was further submitted that in respect of the above three companies, the assessee has furnished the following documents to establish the identity, genuineness of the transaction and the creditworthiness of these entities: Name, address and Shares Share Capital Evidences PAN no. applied/ produced before the AO allotted M/s Zenith 20,000 R…

Bmm Ispat Limited, Hospet vs. DCIT, Bangalore

In the result, Revenue’s appeal for Assessment Year 2011-12 is dismissed

ITA 779/BANG/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore10 Apr 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri Jason P Boaz

For Appellant: Shri K.R. Pradeep, C.AFor Respondent: Shri K.V.Arvind, Standing Counsel for Dept

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153DSection 234BSection 234DSection 68

…e Ld.CIT-A who confirmed the order of the AO by reiterating the reasons given in the asst. order and ignored the argument of the assessee on the issue of lack of incriminating material and also binding decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Lovely Exports – 216 CTR 195 (CLPB page 509). In this regard it is submitted neither the notice u/s 142(1) nor the asst. order makes a mention of any seized material which is incriminating in nature. The intimation u/s 143(1) of the Act was passed on 24.10.2005 (PB page 1A). The time limit for issue of notice u/s 143(2) of the Act was 30.09.2006 and since no notice u/s 143(2…

Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-7 vs. Royal Finvest Pvt. Ltd

ITA/359/2018HC Delhi23 Mar 2018

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A. K. CHAWLA

Section 133(6)Section 68

…after due consideration of the facts as well ITA 359/2018 Page 2 of 3 as the established judicial precedents. The Ld. CIT(A) has followed the ratio of the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in CIT vs Lovely Exports Pvt. Ltd. reported in 216 CTR 195 which we find has been correctly relied upon. We agree with the adjudication of the Ld. CIT(A) that once the initial onus cast upon by the assessee regarding the genuineness, creditworthiness and identity has been discharged by the assessee, the onus shifts to the department to disprove the claim of the assessee by cogent evidence to…

Jasamrit Creatins P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO 6(3)(2), Mumbai

ITA 1164/MUM/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Mar 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Rajesh Kumarm/S. Jasamrit Creations P. Ltd. Income Tax Officer- 6(3)(2) Flat No. 901, Building ‘B’ Room No. 503, 5Th Floor Vs. Ashok Tower, Near Itc Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Hotel, Parel, Mumbai 400017 Mumbai 400020 Pan – Aabcj8511H Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Anju KisnadwalaFor Respondent: Ms. Pooja Swaroop

Section 133(6)Section 68

…pect of the share application money by observing that "The question sought to be raised in the appeal was also raised before the Tribunal and the Tribunal was pleased to follow the judgment of the apex court in the case of CIT v. Lovely Exports P. Ltd. [2008] 216 CTR 195; [2009] 319ITR (St.) 5, wherein the apex court observed 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 can always proceed against them and if necessary reopen their individual assessments. In the case in hand, it is not di…