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 366,314 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.

ACIT, Chennai vs. Srm Systems and Software P Ltd., Chennai

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1635/CHNY/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai13 Jun 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A. Mohan Alankamony]

For Appellant: Shri N. Devanathan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Jasdeep Singh, CIT

…e unreported judgment of the Madras High Court in the case of CIT vs Victory Spinning Mills Ltd. in T.C.(A) Nos. 309 to 311 of 2014, dated 22.8.2014, the ld. Counsel submitted that in view of the judgment of the Apex Court in CIT vs Lovely Exports P. Ltd., 216 CTR 195, it is for the Assessing Officer to reopen the individual assessment if there was any allegation of bogus share application. The ld. Counsel further submitted that it is not the case of the Assessing Officer that the share application money actually emanated from the corpus of the assessee so as to treat the same as undisclosed income of the a…

M.K. Cycle Industries Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

ITA 6161/DEL/2014[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Jun 2016AY 2003-04

Bench: Sh. I.C. Sudhir & Sh. O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2003-04 M/S. M.K. Cycle Industries Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Ito, Ward – 6(1), New Delhi G-76, Sant Nagar Extn., Tilak Nagar, New Delhi (Pan: Aaecs3075L) (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 271Section 31Section 68

…2,00,000/- 5,05,005/- By cash 08-05-02 961559 5,00,000/- - 5,005/- To CLG 13-05-02 S 003027 2,00,000 2,05,005/- By cash 13-05-02 961559 2,00,000/- 5,005/- To CLG 4. The Assessing Officer also distinguished the judgment of M/s. Lovely Export Pvt. Ltd. (2008) 216 CTR 195 (SC). Finally, the Assessing Officer concluded the following facts in respect of the issue in dispute and held that total amount of Rs. 11 lacs received from the above parties was only a camouflaged transaction and it was the money of the assessee, which was routed back and accordingly the addition under Section 68 of the Act was made: i) The ass…

ITO 5(1)(2), Mumbai vs. Genesis Trading P. Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, all the three appeals of the revenue as well as cross objection of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 5334/MUM/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Jun 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Ramlal Negi, Jm आमकय अऩीर सं./Ita No.5332 To 5334/Mum/2014 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2005-06 To 2007-08) Ito-5(1)(2), Mumbai Vs. M/S Genesis Trading Pvt. Ltd., Oceanic, 3Rd Floor, Flat No.34, Rajab Ali Road, Mumbai- 400026 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aaccg 1820 B (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. & Cross Objection No.40/Mum/2016 (Arising Out Of Ita No.5334/Mum/2014) (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2007-08) M/S Genesis Trading Pvt. Vs. Ito-5(1)(2), Mumbai Ltd., Oceanic, 3Rd Floor, Flat No.34, Rajab Ali Road, Mumbai-400026 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aaccg 1820 B (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. याजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri S.K.Bepari ननधाारयती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri N.R.Agrawal सुनवाई की तायीख / Date Of Hearing : 28/04/2016 घोषणा की तायीख/Date Of Pronouncement 08/06/2016 आदेश / O R D E R Per R.C.Sharma (A.M): These Are The Appeals Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Of Cit(A)-Mumbai, For The Assessment Year 2005-06 To 2007-08, In The Matter Of Order Passed U/S.143(3) R.W.S.147 Of The I.T.Act. The Assessee Has Also Filed Cross Objection.

For Appellant: Shri N.R.AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri S.K.Bepari
Section 132(1)Section 143(3)Section 68

…nts, however, the assessee failed to satisfy the most important 'condition i.e. genuineness of the transaction. .lt is mentioned in the assessment order that the assessee relied upon the decision of Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs Lovely Exports (P) Ltd. [216 CTR 195]. The A.O. did not accept the decision in the case of Lovely Exports (P) Ltd. on the ground that the decision in the case of Lovely 'Exports (P) Ltd. and also in some other cases relate to public limited company and have received the subscription through the public issue as per SEBl's guidelines whereas the assessee company is a private limited c…

ITO 5(1)(2), Mumbai vs. Genesis Trading P. Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, all the three appeals of the revenue as well as cross objection of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 5333/MUM/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Jun 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Ramlal Negi, Jm आमकय अऩीर सं./Ita No.5332 To 5334/Mum/2014 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2005-06 To 2007-08) Ito-5(1)(2), Mumbai Vs. M/S Genesis Trading Pvt. Ltd., Oceanic, 3Rd Floor, Flat No.34, Rajab Ali Road, Mumbai- 400026 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aaccg 1820 B (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. & Cross Objection No.40/Mum/2016 (Arising Out Of Ita No.5334/Mum/2014) (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2007-08) M/S Genesis Trading Pvt. Vs. Ito-5(1)(2), Mumbai Ltd., Oceanic, 3Rd Floor, Flat No.34, Rajab Ali Road, Mumbai-400026 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aaccg 1820 B (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. याजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri S.K.Bepari ननधाारयती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri N.R.Agrawal सुनवाई की तायीख / Date Of Hearing : 28/04/2016 घोषणा की तायीख/Date Of Pronouncement 08/06/2016 आदेश / O R D E R Per R.C.Sharma (A.M): These Are The Appeals Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Of Cit(A)-Mumbai, For The Assessment Year 2005-06 To 2007-08, In The Matter Of Order Passed U/S.143(3) R.W.S.147 Of The I.T.Act. The Assessee Has Also Filed Cross Objection.

For Appellant: Shri N.R.AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri S.K.Bepari
Section 132(1)Section 143(3)Section 68

…nts, however, the assessee failed to satisfy the most important 'condition i.e. genuineness of the transaction. .lt is mentioned in the assessment order that the assessee relied upon the decision of Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs Lovely Exports (P) Ltd. [216 CTR 195]. The A.O. did not accept the decision in the case of Lovely Exports (P) Ltd. on the ground that the decision in the case of Lovely 'Exports (P) Ltd. and also in some other cases relate to public limited company and have received the subscription through the public issue as per SEBl's guidelines whereas the assessee company is a private limited c…

ITO 5(1)(2), Mumbai vs. Genesis Trading P. Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, all the three appeals of the revenue as well as cross objection of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 5332/MUM/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Jun 2016AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Ramlal Negi, Jm आमकय अऩीर सं./Ita No.5332 To 5334/Mum/2014 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2005-06 To 2007-08) Ito-5(1)(2), Mumbai Vs. M/S Genesis Trading Pvt. Ltd., Oceanic, 3Rd Floor, Flat No.34, Rajab Ali Road, Mumbai- 400026 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aaccg 1820 B (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. & Cross Objection No.40/Mum/2016 (Arising Out Of Ita No.5334/Mum/2014) (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2007-08) M/S Genesis Trading Pvt. Vs. Ito-5(1)(2), Mumbai Ltd., Oceanic, 3Rd Floor, Flat No.34, Rajab Ali Road, Mumbai-400026 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aaccg 1820 B (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. याजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri S.K.Bepari ननधाारयती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri N.R.Agrawal सुनवाई की तायीख / Date Of Hearing : 28/04/2016 घोषणा की तायीख/Date Of Pronouncement 08/06/2016 आदेश / O R D E R Per R.C.Sharma (A.M): These Are The Appeals Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Of Cit(A)-Mumbai, For The Assessment Year 2005-06 To 2007-08, In The Matter Of Order Passed U/S.143(3) R.W.S.147 Of The I.T.Act. The Assessee Has Also Filed Cross Objection.

For Appellant: Shri N.R.AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri S.K.Bepari
Section 132(1)Section 143(3)Section 68

…nts, however, the assessee failed to satisfy the most important 'condition i.e. genuineness of the transaction. .lt is mentioned in the assessment order that the assessee relied upon the decision of Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs Lovely Exports (P) Ltd. [216 CTR 195]. The A.O. did not accept the decision in the case of Lovely Exports (P) Ltd. on the ground that the decision in the case of Lovely 'Exports (P) Ltd. and also in some other cases relate to public limited company and have received the subscription through the public issue as per SEBl's guidelines whereas the assessee company is a private limited c…

DCIT Cen Cir 44, Mumbai vs. Shashikiran Shetty, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA N0

ITA 5978/MUM/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 May 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 5813/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2007-08) Shashikiran Shetty, Dcit, Cen. Cir. 44, बनाम/ 5 Th Floor, Diamond Square, Aayakar Bhavan, V. Cst Road Kalina, M.K. Road, Santacruz (East), Mumbai – 400 020. Mumbai – 400 098. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Ameps 5601 B (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent)

For Respondent: Shri Manjunatha Swamy
Section 131Section 132(1)Section 132(4)Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 153ASection 271A

…In reply, the assessee admitted the undisclosed income of Rs. 23 crores. The assessee later on admitted the undisclosed income in his hands instead of the company in view of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Lovely Exports Ltd. , 216 CTR 195 and the decision in the case of CIT v. Divine Leasing & Finance Ltd. dated 21st January 2008 (TIOL 118 SC IT). The ld. CIT(A) after considering the decision of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT v. Mahendra C. Shah, 299 ITR 305 and the decision of Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in the case of CIT v. Radha Kishan Goel [2005] 278 ITR 454 (…

Shashikiran Shetty, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen Cir 44, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA N0

ITA 5813/MUM/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 May 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 5813/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2007-08) Shashikiran Shetty, Dcit, Cen. Cir. 44, बनाम/ 5 Th Floor, Diamond Square, Aayakar Bhavan, V. Cst Road Kalina, M.K. Road, Santacruz (East), Mumbai – 400 020. Mumbai – 400 098. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Ameps 5601 B (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent)

For Respondent: Shri Manjunatha Swamy
Section 131Section 132(1)Section 132(4)Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 153ASection 271A

…In reply, the assessee admitted the undisclosed income of Rs. 23 crores. The assessee later on admitted the undisclosed income in his hands instead of the company in view of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Lovely Exports Ltd. , 216 CTR 195 and the decision in the case of CIT v. Divine Leasing & Finance Ltd. dated 21st January 2008 (TIOL 118 SC IT). The ld. CIT(A) after considering the decision of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT v. Mahendra C. Shah, 299 ITR 305 and the decision of Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in the case of CIT v. Radha Kishan Goel [2005] 278 ITR 454 (…

Jalaram Enterprises Co. P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen Cir 2, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose and the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 4289/MUM/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Apr 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri Ashwani Tanejaआयकर अपील सं /I.Ta No. 4289/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11 M/S. Jalaram Enterprises The Dcit, बनाम/ Co. Pvt. Ltd., Central Circle-2, Vs. 7,Pathai Niwas, N.S. Road, Old Cgo Bldg., Mulund (W), Mumbai- 400 020 Mumbai-400 080 आयकर अपील सं /I.Ta No. 5060/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11 The Dcit, M/S. Jalaram Enterprises Co. बनाम/ Central Circle-2, Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Old Cgo Bldg., 7,Pathai Niwas, N.S. Road, Mumbai- 400 020 Mulund (W), Mumbai-400 080

For Respondent: ShriAjay
Section 68

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, मुंबई "यायपीठ , मुंबई । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “J” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI C.N. PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ASHWANI TANEJA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं /I.TA No. 4289/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11 M/s. Jalaram Enterprises The DCIT, बनाम/ Co. Pvt. Ltd., Central Circle-2, Vs. 7,Pathai Niwas, N.S. Road, Old CGO Bldg., Mulund (W), Mumbai- 400 020 Mumbai-400 080 आयकर अपील सं /I.TA No. 5060/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11 The DCIT, M/s. Jalaram Enterprises Co. बनाम/ Central Circle-2, Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Old CGO Bldg., 7,Pathai Niwas, N.S. Road…

ITO, New Delhi vs. M/S Jansampark Advertising & Marketing Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the questions of law stand answered in favour of the Revenue though with a direction that the matter of assessment arising out of notice under Section 148 Income Tax

ITA 4839/DEL/2009[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Apr 2016AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: Shri Shravan Gotru, Sr-DRFor Respondent: Shri Rajeev Saxena, Adv
Section 148Section 3Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: ‘D’: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA MOHAN GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER, AND SHRI L.P. SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER, ITA No. 4839/Del /2009 [A.Y : 2004-05] The I.T.O Vs. M/s Jansampark Advertising & Marketing Ward -4(2) P] Ltd New Delhi I – 49, Lajpat Nagar - 1 New Delhi – 110 024. PAN : AAACJ 01 15 G [Appellant] [Respondent] Date of Hearing : 29.03.2016 Date of Pronouncement: 05.04.2016 Appellant by : Shri Shravan Gotru, Sr-DR Respondent by : Shri Rajeev Saxena, Adv ORDER PER CHANDRA MOHAN GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER This appeal filed by the Revenue is directed against the or…

ITO, New Delhi vs. M/S Nishit Fincap (P) Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 2515/DEL/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Mar 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaay: 2006-07 Income Tax Officer, Vs M/S Nishit Fincap (P) Ltd., Ward 13(3), B-58, Gujranwala Town-1, New Delhi. New Delhi. (Pan: Aaacn3687M) (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Ved Jain, Ca Respondent By: Shri P.Damkanunjna, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 07.01.2016 Date Of Pronouncement: 31.03.2016

For Appellant: Shri Ved Jain, CAFor Respondent: Shri P.Damkanunjna, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 68

…er the genuineness of the transaction and the veracity of the repudiation.” 10. With regard to the issue of share application money, while dismissing the SLP filed by the Department, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Lovely Exports (P) Ltd. (216 CTR 195) observed as under: “Can the amount of share money be regarded as undisclosed income under s. 68 of IT 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 f…

DCIT 5(2), Mumbai vs. Lahoti Overseas Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee company in ITA

ITA 3812/MUM/2012[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Mar 2016AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 3812/Mum/2012 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2003-04) Dy. Commissioner Of Income M/S Lahoti Overseas Ltd., बनाम/ Tax , 5(2),Room No. 571, 307, Arun Chambers, V. 5 Th Floor, Tardeo Road, Tardeo, Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai - 400034. M.K. Road, Mumbai – 400 020. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Aaacl2578 H .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Yogesh TharFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh Bare (Sr.DR)
Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151(1)

…he assessee company relied upon the following decisions:- i) Shankar Industries v. CIT (114 ITR 689)(Calcutta) ii) CIT v. Precision Finance Pvt. Ltd. (208 ITR 465) iii) CIT vs. Corley Trading Company Limited (232 ITR 820) iv) CIT v. Lovely Exports Pvt. Ltd. (216 CTR 195 (SC) v) CIT v. Kinetic Capital Finance Ltd. (ITA No. 87/2007)(Delhi) vi) M/s Kiara Jewellery Pvt. Ltd. v. ACIT (ITA No. 4911/Mum/09) The CIT(A) admitted the additional evidence which were mainly by way of bank statements, director’s reports, auditor’s report , balance sheet, identity card , permanent card , copy of passport, copy of tax return, a…

M/S Vam-Hi-Fashion Garments Pvt. Ltd, New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

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

ITA 494/DEL/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Mar 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Sh. R.S. Singhvi, CAFor Respondent: Sh. T. Vasanthan, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…sessee by pressuring it to bring the creditor from the foreign country which 10 is contrary to the facts of the case as well as evidence produced by the assessee. 7.3 Besides, above case laws, the Hon’ble Apex Court also in the case of CIT Vs. Lovely Exports 216 CTR 195 has held that 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 it cannot be regarded as undisclosed income of the assessee. 7.4 We also fi…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Vip Growth Fund Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the Revenue’s Appeal stands dismissed

ITA 5153/DEL/2011[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Mar 2016AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri L.P. Sahuassessment Year: 2003-04 Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax Vs. M/S Vip Gorwth Fund Pvt. Ltd. Circle 17(1), New Delhi 208, 4855/24, Ansar Road, Daryaganj, New Delhi – 110 002 (Pan:Aaacv2851M) (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. R.C. Roy, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. V.R. Sonbhadra, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 68

…criber the genuineness of the transaction and the veracity of the repudiation." With regard to the issue of share application money, while dismissing the SLP filed by the Department, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Lovely Exports (P) Ltd. (216 CTR 195) observed as under: 8 "Can the amount of share money be regarded as undisclosed income under s. 68 of IT 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…

ITO, New Delhi vs. M/S Tarun Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., Delhi

ITA 2652/DEL/2009[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Feb 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastavaay: 2006-07 Income Tax Officer, Vs Tarun Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., Ward 16(1), 5036, Excelsior Cinema Street, New Delhi. Sirkiwalan, Delhi. (Pan: Aaact2713N) (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri O.P.Meera, Sr. D.R. Respondent By: Shri Amit Goel, Ca

For Appellant: Shri O.P.Meera, Sr. D.RFor Respondent: Shri Amit Goel, CA
Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 68

…er the genuineness of the transaction and the veracity of the repudiation.” 10. With regard to the issue of share application money, while dismissing the SLP filed by the Department, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Lovely Exports (P) Ltd. (216 CTR 195) observed as under: “Can the amount of share money be regarded as undisclosed income under s. 68 of IT 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 f…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S D.K.B. Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1722/DEL/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Jan 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri A.T. Varkey & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri R.S. Singhvi CAFor Respondent: Shri Hemant Gupta, Senior DR
Section 131Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 68

…ould not 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. 4.3.7. Further, I find that the Apex Court in CIT v Lovely Exports (P) Ltd. (2008) 216 CTR 195 held that the even if the share application money received by the appellant company is from alleged bogus shareholder, 8 whose identity is produced by the appellant company, the revenue can always proceed against such shareholders and if necessary reopen their individual assessment. Similar decision is also taken in the case of CIT v. Steller In…

Aditya Birla Telcom Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT RG 10(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5128/MUM/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Jan 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Pavan Singh, Jm आमकय अऩीर सं./Ita No. 5128/Mum/2013 (निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year :2009-10) Aditya Birla Telecom Ltd., 5Th Vs. Addl. Commissioner Of Floor, Windsor, Off. Cst Road, Income Tax, Near Vidyanagari, Kalina, Range-10(1), Santacruz (E), Mumbai. Aayakar Bhavan, Church Gate, Mumbai स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aafca5315A (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. ननधाारयती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri J.D. Mistri & Shri Deepak Jain याजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By Shri Deepkant Prasad,Cit-Dr : सुनवाई की तायीख / Date Of Hearing : 15Th October, 2015 घोषणा की तायीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 01.01.2016 आदेश / O R D E R Per R.C.Sharma (A.M.) : This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Cit(A), Dated 27-06-2013, For The Assessment Year 2009-10, In The Matter Of Order Passed Under Section 143(3) Of The I.T. Act. 2. The Following Grounds Have Been Taken By The Assessee: Ground No. I: Want Of Natural Justice 1. On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Learned Cit(A) Erred In Confirming The Addition Made By The Ao U/S. 68 Despite The Fact That The Remand Report Of The Ao Confirmed That The Appellant Had Satisfied All The Three Tests, Viz: Identity Of P5 Asia Holding Investment (Mauritius) Ltd., (P5 Asia), Financial Capacity Of P5 Asia & Genuineness

For Appellant: Shri J.D. Mistri &
Section 143(3)Section 68

…was fully complied with. Therefore, in view of various judicial pronouncements which was placed on record, no addition was warranted u/s.68 of the I.T. Act. 10. Ld. AR relied on the Apex Court's decision in the case of CIT vs. Lovely Exports Pvt. Ltd. (2008) (216 CTR 195) in which it was held that once the assessee has given the names and identity of the shareholders, the onus upon it gets discharged and no addition can 8 be made in the hands of that assessee as the onus shift to the Department. Further reliance was placed on the following decisions rendered u/s. 68 of the Act. CIT vs. Creative World Telefilms L…

Commissioner of Income Tax Delhi vs. M/S Shiv Dooti Pearls of Inves

ITA/429/2003HC Delhi21 Dec 2015

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT,HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE DEEPA SHARMA

Section 131Section 143Section 260A(1)Section 44ASection 68

…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. (2008) 299 ITR 268 (Delhi) and CIT v. Lovely Exports (P) Ltd. (2008) 216 CTR 195 (SC)]." ITA No. 429/2003 Page 9 of 9 15. In view of the legal position explained in the above decisions, the Court holds that as far as the present case is concerned, the Assessee has indeed discharged its onus of proving the creditworthiness and genuineness of the lender (TIL). There was no requirement in law for the…

Commissioner of Income Tax-VIII vs. Svp Builders (India)Ltd

ITA/883/2015HC Delhi15 Dec 2015

Bench: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU

…act that it had received Rs.44.15 crore in cash as share application money was ignored;, that the decision in CIT v. Nova Promoters and Finlease (P) Ltd. (supra) was wrongly distinguished and the decision c. the Supreme Court in CIT v. Lovely Exports (P) Ltd. 216 CTR 195 (SC) was distinguishable on facts. 16. It has been pointed out by the Assessees in their written note of submissions before this Court that apart from the fact that all of the corporate shareholders invested in the share capital of the Assessees were Income Tax Assessees who had filed independent confirmations that they had contributed towards th…

Commissioner of Income Tax-VIII vs. S.V. Liquior India Ltd

ITA/875/2015HC Delhi15 Dec 2015

Bench: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU

…act that it had received Rs.44.15 crore in cash as share application money was ignored;, that the decision in CIT v. Nova Promoters and Finlease (P) Ltd. (supra) was wrongly distinguished and the decision c. the Supreme Court in CIT v. Lovely Exports (P) Ltd. 216 CTR 195 (SC) was distinguishable on facts. 16. It has been pointed out by the Assessees in their written note of submissions before this Court that apart from the fact that all of the corporate shareholders invested in the share capital of the Assessees were Income Tax Assessees who had filed independent confirmations that they had contributed towards th…

Commissioner of Income Tax-VIII vs. Svp Builders (India) Ltd

ITA/872/2015HC Delhi15 Dec 2015

Bench: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU

…act that it had received Rs.44.15 crore in cash as share application money was ignored;, that the decision in CIT v. Nova Promoters and Finlease (P) Ltd. (supra) was wrongly distinguished and the decision c. the Supreme Court in CIT v. Lovely Exports (P) Ltd. 216 CTR 195 (SC) was distinguishable on facts. 16. It has been pointed out by the Assessees in their written note of submissions before this Court that apart from the fact that all of the corporate shareholders invested in the share capital of the Assessees were Income Tax Assessees who had filed independent confirmations that they had contributed towards th…