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 366,005 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.

ITO, Income Tax Department vs. Ska Techinfra Pvt Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue Department stand dismissed on merits, whereas the CO filed by the Assessee stand dismissed being not pressed

ITA 4369/MUM/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jan 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Br Baskaran & Shri Narender Kumar Choudhryassessment Year: 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri Prakash Jhunjhunwala, Ld. A.RFor Respondent: Shri Swapnil Sawant, Ld. Sr. A.R

Section 147Section 250Section 68Section 69C

…O to prove otherwise that the said transaction was nothing but undisclosed income of the Assessee. 9.4 The Ld. Commissioner, even otherwise also taken into consideration the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of CIT vs. Lovely Exports Ltd. (2008) 216 CTR 198 wherein it was held that where the Revenue urges that the amount of share application money has been received from bogus shareholders, then it is for the Income Tax Officer to proceed by reopening the assessment of such shareholders and assessing them to tax in accordance with law. It does not entitle the Revenue to add the same to the assessee's…

The Dy. C.I.T., Central Cir. 2(1), Nagpur vs. M/S Mahavir Coal Resources Pvt. Ltd

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue for A

ITA 386/NAG/2014[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur08 Jan 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Kishore P. DewaniFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke

Section 132(1)

…erred to hereinabove, the addition made by the Assessing Officer under section 68 of the Act is unjustified and unsustainable. Various judicial precedents relied upon in the submission of the assessee are as under:– i) CIT v/s Lovely Exports Pvt. Ltd. [2008] 216 CTR 195 (SC); “2. 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 free to procee…

The Dy. C.I.T., Central Cir. 2(1), Nagpur vs. M/S Mahavir Coal Resources Pvt. Ltd

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue for A

ITA 385/NAG/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur08 Jan 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Kishore P. DewaniFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke

Section 132(1)Section 153C

…referred to hereinabove, the addition made by the Assessing Officer under section 68 of the Act is unjustified and unsustainable. Various judicial precedents relied upon in the submission of assessee are as under:– i) CIT v/s Lovely Exports Pvt. Ltd. [2008] 216 CTR 195 (SC); “2. 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 free to procee…

Masineni Hotels Private Limited, Anantapur vs. ACIT, Circle-1, Anantapur

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 346/HYD/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 Dec 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri K. Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.346/Hyd/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2016-17) Masineni Hotels Private Vs. Acit, Circle-1 Limited Anantpur Anantapur [Pan : Aahcm6211F] (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Mohd.Afzal, Ar रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By:: Shri Srinath Sadanala, Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 10/12/2024 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of 30/12/2024 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Manjunatha G., A.M: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 16.05.2023 Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) [Ld.Cit(A)], National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, Pertaining To A.Y.2016-17 On The Following Grounds : 1. Under The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case The Learned Cit(A), Nfac, New Delhi Erred In Confirming The Addition Of Rs.2,35,48,000/- Being The Difference In The Share Capital, Share Application & Other Loan Subscribed / Given By Managing Director Shri M.Ramaiah U/S 68 Of The Income Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act”), 1961 (The Act).

For Appellant: Mohd.Afzal, ARFor Respondent: : Shri Srinath Sadanala, DR

Section 68

…n the hands of the individual shareholder, then on the very same amount, no addition can be made in the hands of the appellant company. In this regard, he relied upon the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Lovely Exports Pvt. Ltd. (2008) 216 CTR 195 (SC) and the decision of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Creative World Telefilms Ltd.(2011) 333 ITR 100 (Bom.). 8. The learned DR on the other hand, supporting the order of the Ld.CIT(A), submitted that it is a matter on record, that the appellant could not explain the difference amount claimed to have been received from Shri M…

Dayal Cotspin Limited, Akola vs. ACIT, Akola Circle, Akola

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 87/NAG/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur12 Dec 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Kishore P. DewaniFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe

Section 132(1)Section 142(1)Section 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 154Section 234ASection 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI K.M. ROY, ACCOUNTANT, MEMBER ITA no.87/Nag./2024 (Assessment Year : 2012–13) Dayal Cotspin Ltd. New Radhakishan Plots ……………. Appellant Akola 444 001 PAN – AACCD4041K v/s Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax ……………. Respondent Akola Circle, Akola Assessee by : Shri Kishore P. Dewani Revenue by : Shri Abhay Y. Marathe Date of Hearing – 26/11/2024 Date of Order – 12/12/2024 O R D E R PER K.M. ROY, A.M. This appeal by the assessee is against the impugned order dated 04/01/2024, passed by the learned Commissio…

Dy Commissioner of Inocme Tax, Circle -2, Nagpur vs. M/S N Kumar Construction Co .Pvt.Ltd, Nagpur

ITA 252/NAG/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur06 Dec 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Manoj G. MoryaniFor Respondent: Shri Vikash Agrawal

Section 131Section 143(2)Section 148Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI K.M. ROY, ACCOUNTANT, MEMBER ITA no.252/Nag./2018 (Assessment Year : 2012–13) Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax ……………. Appellant Circle–2, Nagpur v/s M/s. N. Kumar Construction Co. Pvt. Ltd. 7th Floor, Poonam Plaza, Palm Road ……………. Respondent Civil Lines, Nagpur 440 001 AABCN9937H Appellant by : Shri Manoj G. Moryani Revenue by : Shri Vikash Agrawal Date of Hearing – 06/11/2024 Date of Order – 06/12/2024 O R D E R PER K.M. ROY, A.M. The appeal filed by the Revenue is against the impugned order dated 01/…

Dy Commissioner of Inocme Tax, Circle -2, Nagpur vs. M/S N Kumar Construction Co .Pvt.Ltd, Nagpur

ITA 247/NAG/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur06 Dec 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Manoj G. MoryaniFor Respondent: Shri Vikas Agrawal

Section 131Section 148Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI K.M. ROY, ACCOUNTANT, MEMBER ITA no.247/Nag./2018 (Assessment Year : 2010–11) Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax ……………. Appellant Circle–2, Nagpur v/s M/s. N. Kumar Construction Co. Pvt. Ltd. 7th Floor, Poonam Plaza, Palm Road ……………. Respondent Civil Lines, Nagpur 440 001 AABCN9937H Appellant by : Shri Manoj G. Moryani Revenue by : Shri Vikas Agrawal Date of Hearing – 06/11/2024 Date of Order – 06/12/2024 O R D E R PER K.M. ROY, A.M. This appeal by the Revenue is directed against the impugned order dated…

ACIT, Circle-2(2)(1), Bangalore vs. Vastimal Bhim Raj Sancheti, Bangalore

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 441/BANG/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore04 Dec 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri Soundararajan K

For Appellant: Shri. Prashanth GS, ARFor Respondent: Shri. Subramanian, JCIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru

Section 68

…axmann.com 663) (Delhi)  Pr.CIT Vs. Yogendrakumar Gupta [2023] (152 taxmann.com 661) (Gujarat)  ITO Vs. Kayathwal Estate (P.) Ltd., [2022] (139 taxmann.com 317) (SC)  Ambe Tradecorp (P.) Ltd., [2022] (145 taxmann.com 27) (Gujarat)  CIT Vs. Lovely Exports (216 CTR 195) [2008] (SC)  CIT vs creative World Telefilms Ltd.(2011) ( 333 ITR 100) (Bombay) ITA Nos.440, 441/Bang/2024 Page 13 of 22  CIT vs Gagandeep Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd (394 ITR 680 ) ( 2018) ( Bombay)  ITO vs Anant Shelters Pvt. Ltd. ( 20 taxmann. Com 153) (2012) (Mum) 6. Aggrieved from the above Order, the Revenue filed appeal before the Tribun…

Megapix Vanijya Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward - 9(1), Kolkata

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1151/KOL/2024[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Nov 2024AY 2012-2013

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarmai.T.A. No.1151/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Megapix Vanijya Pvt. Ltd……………………………………………..…..……Appellant C/O Subash Agarwal & Associates, Advocates, Siddha Gibson, 1, Gibson Lane, Suite 213, 2Nd Floor, Kolkata – 700069. [Pan: Aahcm6624J] Vs. Ito, Ward-9(1), Kolkata............…....….…..….........……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Siddharth Agarwal, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Pradip Biswas, Addl. Cit- Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : August 27, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : November 18, 2024 Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: The Present Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 13.05.2024 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’) For Assessment Year 2012-13. 2. The Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Filed Its Return Of Income On 26.09.2012 By Declaring A Total Loss Of Rs.4,540/-. The Case Of The Assessee Was Selected For Scrutiny Due To Large Share Premium Received By The Assessee During The Relevant Financial Year. Consequently, The Assessing Officer Issued Notices U/S 142(1) & 142(2) Of The Act Requesting For Furnishing Requisite Information. In Response To The Notices, The Ld. Ar Of The Assessee Appeared Before The Assessing Officer & Provided Primary Details Including An Explanation That The Assessee Company Was Engaged In The Business Of Share Trading. Upon

Section 131Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 68

…e scrutinised u/s 143(3)/147 of the Act, further detailed evidences were submitted to establish genuineness of the transactions. In this regard, we rely on the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of CIT vs Lovely Exports (P) Ltd. reported in (2008) 216 CTR 195 (SC), wherein, it was held that once company proves the existence and authenticity of shareholders, it had discharged its burden u/s 68 of the Act. We find merit in the contention of the ld. AR. That the premium is matter of business prerogative as held in the Coordinate Mumbai Bench of the Tribunal in the case of M/s Greek Infra Ltd. vs. ITO in…

P.V.Subramani, Chennai vs. ACIT Corporate Circle-1(3), Chennai

The appeal stand allowed in terms of our order

ITA 561/CHNY/2020[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai06 Nov 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.561/Chny/2020 (िनधा9रणवष9 / Assessment Year: 2009-10) Shri P.V. Subramani Acit बनाम/ C-54, Cmda Truck Complex, Corporate Circle-1(3) Gnt Road, Madhavaram, Chennai. Vs. Chennai-600 110. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Abbps-8164-R (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri N. Arjun Raj (Advocate) - Ld. Ar " थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri Ashwin D Gowda (Addl.Cit) - Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 24-10-2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 06-11-2024

For Appellant: Shri N. Arjun Raj (Advocate) - Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Ashwin D Gowda (Addl.CIT) - Ld. Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 68

…tion and creditworthiness of the lender. In the present case, all the three ingredients have duly been fulfilled by the assessee and therefore, the impugned addition could not be sustained. The Hon’ble Apex Court in the cited case law of Lovely Exports Ltd. {(216 CTR 195 (SC)} held 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 free to proceed to reopen their individual assessments in accordance with law. As per this decision, the onus of the assessee is discharged by furnishing PAN of the lender. It…

Sahil Singla, Chandigarh vs. Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, CC-2, Chandigarh

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 1018/CHANDI/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh04 Nov 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI. AAKASH DEEP JAIN (Vice President), SHRI. SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri T.N. Singla, C.AFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal, CIT, DR

Section 271ASection 68Section 69Section 69A

…itself. 20.6 The Jurisdictional High Court in the case of ‘CIT vs. GP International Ltd.’, 325 ITR 25 (P&H) is directly on the point. No contra decision has been cited before us by the Department. Moreover, in the case of ‘CIT vs. Lovely Exports Pvt. Ltd.’, 216 CTR 195 (SC) it has been held that: "In case lender/creditor is found to be bogus, doubtful then the department may proceed against such lender/creditor as per law." 21. The Department initiated re-assessment proceedings in the case of M/s Jhalaria Metals (Chetan Jhalaria) and Sh. Sanbir Singh on the basis of information passed by the Assessing Officer…

Heritage Hospitals Ltd, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle-11(1), New Delhi

ITA 4090/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Oct 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Anand Kumar Pandey, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sandeep Kumar Mishra, Sr. DR

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI ‘C’ BENCH, NEW DELHI BEFORE MS. MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI NAVEEN CHANDRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 4090/DEL/2018 [A.Y. 2014-15] Heritage Hospitals Ltd Vs. The Dy CIT B-27/5, Raja Garden Circle - 11( 1) Ramesh Nagar, New Delhi New Delhi PAN – AAACH 8678 L (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Anand Kumar Pandey, Adv Department By : Shri Sandeep Kumar Mishra, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 02.08.2024 Date of Pronouncement : .10.2024 ORDER PER NAVEEN CHANDRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:- This appeal by the assessee is preferred against the order of the CIT(…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Devine Infracon Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 3068/DEL/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Oct 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: M Balaganesh, Accontant Member & Ms Madhumita Royassessment Year: 2010-11 The Assistant Vs. M/S Divine Infracon Commissioner Of Income Private Limited, Plot Tax, Central Circle-09, No. 4, Sector-13, Jhandewalan, New Delhi, Dwarka City Centre, Room No.357, Ara Centre, Dwarka, New Delhi- E-2, Jhandewalan 110075 Extension, New Delhi Pan :Aaccd4476A (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Salil Aggarwal, Sr, Advocate Department By Shri T James Singson, Cit, Dr

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 68

…rged its burden under section 68 of the Act. It may be clarified that, the said companies as is evident from the balance sheet has not Page16 only invested in appellant company but many other companies. That the Apex Court in the case of CIT vs. Lovely Export 216 CTR 195 has held that if the share application money is received by the assessee company is from alleged bogus shareholders, whose names are given to the 40, then the Department is free to proceed to reopen the individual assessments of share applicants and addition cannot be made in the hands of the assessee, whereas. the assessments for both the inves…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle -1, Nagpur vs. M/S Raghav Finvest Pvt Ltd, Nagpur

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 121/NAG/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur25 Oct 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Abhay AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe

…he Act has been introduced by the Finance Act 2012 w.e.f. 01/04/2013. Thus, it would be effective only from the Assessment Year 2013-14 onwards and not for the subject Assessment Year. Thus, the case laws relied by the assessee in CIT Lovely Exports (P.) Ltd. 216 CTR 195 (SC) and CIT v/s. Gagandeep Infrastructure P. Ltd. 247 Taxman 245 supports the case of the assessee. 17 M/s. Raghav Finvest Pvt. Ltd. ITA no.121/Nag./2020 18. In the background of aforesaid discussion and judicial precedents as noted above, we do not find any infirmity in the order of learned CIT(A). We also find that the case of the assessee is…

Dy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1, Nagpur vs. M/S Nihal Gits Pvt.Ltd, Nagpur

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 95/NAG/2018[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur25 Oct 2024AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Abhay AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe

Asstt.Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-1, Nagpur vs. Vishnu Gilts Pvt.Lt, Nagpur

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 237/NAG/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur25 Oct 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Abhay AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe

Samarth Lifestyle Retailing Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur vs. DCIT, Circle-6, Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 621/JPR/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur17 Oct 2024AY 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri P. C. Parwal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Nargas, Addl. CIT

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

…T (2023) 202 ITD 757 87-101 9. Copy of decision of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in case of Rajshree Realtors (P) Ltd. Vs. Union of India (2023) 294 Taxman 228 102-109 10. Copy of decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of CIT Vs. Lovely Exports (P) Ltd. (2008) 6 DTR 308 110 11. Copy of decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Andaman Timber Industries Vs. CCE (2015) 127 DTR 241 111-113 12. Copy of decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of PCIT Vs. Adamine Construction (P) Ltd. (2019) 264 Taxman 279 114 13. Copy of decision of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in case of PCIT Vs. Ami Industries (India) Pvt. Ltd. (20…

DCIT Circle -2(1), Hyderabad vs. Gireesh Infrastructure Pvt Ltd, Hyderabad

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 499/HYD/2022[2013-14]Status: HeardITAT Hyderabad15 Oct 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Manjunatha, G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No. 499/Hyd/2022 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2013-14) Dy. Cit Vs. Gireesh Infrastructure Circle 2(1) Private Limited Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan: Aadcg3003H (Appellant) (Respondent) राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: Shri Ashish Kumar Shukla, Dr िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri P Murali Mohan Rao, Ca सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 15/10/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 15/10/2024 आदेश/Order

For Appellant: Shri P Murali Mohan Rao, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ashish Kumar Shukla, DR

Section 68

…ted through proper banking channels. The learned CIT (A) after considering the relevant submissions of the assessee and also taken note of certain judicial precedents including the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Lovely Exports Ltd (2008) 216 CTR 195 held that the appellant is able to establish identity of the creditors, genuineness of the transactions and creditworthiness of the parties which is evident from the evidences filed by the assessee including confirmation from the creditors, their income tax return copies, copies of bank statements and financial statements. Therefore, directed the…

Godavari Multipurpose Articles Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. D.C.I.T., Circle - 7(1), Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the assessee isallowed

ITA 1262/KOL/2024[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Oct 2024AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri Manish Borad, Accountant Member Shri Sonjoy Sarma (Judicial Member)

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 68

…s invalid. (ii) PCIT Vs. Meenakshi Overseas P. Ltd. (2017) 395 ITR 677 Delhi (SC) Hon‟ble Delhi High Court observed that the reasons for reopening assessment must be based on tangible material and proper independent enquiry. (iii) CIT Vs. Lovely Export (2008) 216 CTR 195 (SC), the Hon‟ble Supreme Court held that in case of explanation offered by the assessee, the Ld. AO must verify the same before making the addition u/s 68 of the Act. 9. On the other hand, the Ld. DR supported the orders of the lower authorities and contended that the reopening was valid as per the section 147 of the Act. He further argued that…

M/S. Maa Momai Realty Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 5(2)(4), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is dismissed

ITA 2373/MUM/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Sept 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Ms Kavitha Rajagopal & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayassessment Year: 2010-11 M/S. Maa Momai Realty Income Tax Officer- Pvt. Ltd. 5(2)(4) 17/A, Kanti Bhavan, Lalbaug, Ground Floor, Parel, 1St Parsiwada Lane, Vs. Mumbai- 400011. Mumbai- 400004. Pan: Aagcm2087E (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Kiran Unavekar, SR. D.R

Section 147Section 250Section 269SSection 68

….AO. Accordingly, the Ld.AO presumed these are bogus lender and hence added the amount of Rs.8,22,800/- to the total income of the assessee. 2.21. The identical issue has been decided by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Lovely Exports Pvt. Ltd. (2008) 216 CTR 195 (SC) 9 M/s. Maa Momai Realty Pvt. Ltd.; A. Y.2010-11 wherein it has been held that no addition can be made under section 68 of the Act on account of unexplained investments where the assessee furnished before the AO the evidences to prove identity of the investors.” 5. We have considered the facts of the case and the submissions made by the appe…