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.

Bestline Properties Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO-12(1)(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is

ITA 3500/MUM/2023[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 May 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Ms Padmavathy S

Section 148Section 68

…applicable binding decision are ignored by Ld. A.O. while framing Assessment Order: a. That the addition made to income is incorrect and is against law in view of the decision of The Hon'ble Apex Court in Commissioner of Income Tax vs Lovely Exports (P) Ltd., 216 CTR 195, subsequently followed and applied by The Hon'ble Delhi High Court in commissioner Of Income- Tax vs Stellar Investment Ltd (Delhi), wherein the Hon'ble Courts have held that where the share application money is alleged to have been received from alleged bogus shareholders, whose names are given to the AO, the Revenue should proceed to reopen the…

DCIT-14(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Jaymala Infrastructure Private Limited, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dism

ITA 2719/MUM/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 May 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Rahul Chaudhary () Assessment Year: 2012-13

For Appellant: Mr. Ankush Kapoor, CIT-DRFor Respondent: Mr. Ajay Singh
Section 143(3)Section 68

…cant is he applicant is squarely covered by the ratio laid by Hon. Apex Court in the matter of squarely covered by the ratio laid by Hon. Apex Court in the matter of squarely covered by the ratio laid by Hon. Apex Court in the matter of Lovely Exports vs CIT, 216 CTR 195. It is held that as per the ratio, the Lovely Exports vs CIT, 216 CTR 195. It is held that as per the ratio, the Lovely Exports vs CIT, 216 CTR 195. It is held that as per the ratio, the onus was successfully discharged by the appellant and the AO failed to onus was successfully discharged by the appellant and the AO failed to onus was successful…

Deepak Switch Gears Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. PCIT, Asansol

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 809/KOL/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata07 May 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A. No.809/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Deepak Switch Gears Pvt. Ltd….…......................…...……………....Appellant 48/6, Suman Villa, 2Nd Floor, 155, Jessore Road, Kolkata-700055. [Pan: Aabcd1131H] Vs. Pcit, Asansol….....….........................................................…..…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri A. K. Tibrewal, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Abhijit Kundu, Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : April 08, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : May 07, 2024 आदेश / Order संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य "वारा / Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Revision Order Dated 30.12.2022 Of The Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax, Kolkata [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Pr. Cit’] Passed U/S 263 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). The Assessee In This Appeal Has Agitated Against The Action Of The Pr. Cit In Exercising His Revision Jurisdiction U/S 263 Of The Act & Thereby Directing The Assessing Officer To Frame The Assessment Afresh. 2. The Registry Has Pointed Out That The Appeal Is Time-Barred By 158 Days. A Separate Application Of Condonation Of Delay Has Been Filed, Wherein, It Has Been Pleaded That After Receipt Of The Impugned Order Of The Pr. Cit, The Assessee, Through Its Director, Shri Deep Kishan Saraf, Immediately Approached One Shri Pawan Kumar Agarwal, Chartered

Section 253Section 263Section 5

…ompany, in similar facts and circumstances of this case. The assessee company relies on the following judgments which inter alia include the judgments of Hon’ble Supreme Court and Jurisdictional Calcutta High Court. a) CIT vs. Lovely Products Pvt. Ltd. [2008] 216 ITR 195 (SC) b) CIT vs. Dataware Pvt. Ltd. ITAT No.263 of 2011 GA No.2856 of 2011 c) CIT vs. Roseberry Mercantile (P) Ltd. ITAT No.241 of 2010 G.A No.3296 of 2010” 6.2 However, the ld. Pr. CIT did not get satisfied with the above reply of the assessee and held that the order of the Assessing Officer passed I.T.A. No.809/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2012-1…

Wellman Logistice Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ACIT(OSD), Ward-4(1), Kolkata.

ITA 694/KOL/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata02 May 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Sonjoy Sarma

Section 143(2)Section 250Section 6Section 68

…were offered, it was incumbent on the Assessing Authority to examine the same and arrive at a cogent conclusion. Assessing Officer having failed to discharge such obligation the addition is not sustainable in law.., case of CIT vs. Lovely Exports Ltd. (2008) 216 CTR 195 (SC) that where share application money.” 7.4. In the course of assessment proceeding, Ld. AO directed the assessee to produce the director of the assessee and also the directors of the subscriber companies along with relevant documentary evidence and details which was not complied with in full. Ld. Counsel submitted that mere non-appearance of d…

DCIT, Chennai vs. M/S Aditya Trading Solutions Private Limited, Chennai

ITA 843/CHNY/2022[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Mar 2024AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपीलसं./Ita No.: 843/Chny/2022 & Co No.: 17/Chny/2023 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13 Deputy Commissioner Of M/S. Aditya Trading Solutions Income Tax, V. Private Limited, Central Circle-3(1), 25 G9, Gems Court, Chennai – 34. Khader Nawaz Khan Road, Nungambakkam, Chennai – 600 034. [Pan: Aafca-0343-N] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (Respondent/Cross Objector) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri. V. Nandakumar, Cit : Shri. I. Dinesh, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 28.02.2024 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 27.03.2024

For Appellant: Shri. V. Nandakumar, CIT
Section 68

…essee has reiterated its submissions made :-9-: ITA. No:843/Chny/2022 & CO No: 17/Chny/2023 before the Assessing Officer along with certain judicial precedents including the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs Lovely Exports P Ltd (2008) 216 CTR 195 (SC). The sum and substances of arguments of the assessee before the ld. CIT(A) are that, the appellant has filed sufficient evidences to prove identity of the shareholders, genuineness of transactions and creditworthiness of the parties. The Assessing Officer, made additions towards share application money received from the shareholders u/s. 68…

Vedic Foundation Pvt Ltd, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward - 26(2), New Delhi

In the result, this appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 4550/DEL/2019[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Feb 2024AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri N.K.Billaiya & Ms.Astha Chandra[Assessment Year : 2007-08] Vedic Foundation Pvt.Ltd., Vs Ito, 43-B, Ff, Dilshad Garden, Ward-26(2), New Delhi-110093. New Delhi. Pan-Aaaci8590C Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Gaurav Kabra, Ca Respondent By Shri Vivek Vardhan, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 21.02.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 28.02.2024 Order Per N.K.Billaiya, Am : This Appeal By The Assessee Is Preferred Against The Order Of Ld.Cit(A)- 31, New Delhi Dated 08.03.2019 For The Assessment Year 2007-08. The Grievances Of The Assessee Read As Under:-

Section 147Section 68Section 69C

…361 ITR 220 (Delhi), Shiv Dhoot Pearls 237 taxman 104 (Delhi) and Dwarkadhis Investment P. Ltd. 330 ITR 298 (Delhi), it was held that source of source of investment company is not required to be explained. (iv) In the case of CIT vs. Lovely Exports (P.) Ltd. 216 CTR 195 (SC), it was held by Hon’ble Apex Court that if share application money is received by assessee company from alleged bogus shareholders, whose names are given to Assessing Officer, then Department is free to proceed to reopen their individual assessments in accordance with law but this amount of share money cannot be regarded as undisclosed incom…

True-Man Consultants Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-7(2), Kolkata.

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

ITA 1158/KOL/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 Feb 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Sri Rajpal Yadav & Dr. Manish Borad

Section 131Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250Section 68

…Calcutta in the Commissioner of Income Tax, Kolkata v. Dataware Private Limited IT AT No. 263 of 2011, 21st September, 2011. That Hon'ble Supreme Court while dismissing SLP in the ease of Lovely Exports as has been reported as judgment delivered by the CTR at 216 CTR 295. That Ld. CIT (A) has further failed to understand that the decision of the Hon'ble High Court, Calcutta in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax Vs M/s. Leonard Commercial (P) Ltd on 13 June, 2011 in ITAT NO 114 of 2011. That Ld. CIT(A) has failed to appreciate that details which emerges from the paper book filed before the lower authorities, i…

D.C.I.T., CC-1(3), Kolkata vs. M/S. Navin Construction & Credit Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed and cross- objection of the assessee is allowed

ITA 580/KOL/2022[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Jan 2024AY 2015-2016

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg, Hon’Ble & Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri Akkal Dudhewala, A/RFor Respondent: Shri Abhijit Kundu, CIT, D/R
Section 133(6)Section 14ASection 250Section 35Section 35(1)Section 68

…| आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण "यायपीठ, कोलकाता | IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI SANJAY GARG, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER & DR. MANISH BORAD, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No. 580/Kol/2022 Assessment Year: 2015-16 Deputy Commissioner of Income M/s. Navin Constructions & Tax, Central Circle – 1(3), Vs Credit Pvt. Ltd. 12, Government Place East, Kolkata Dalhousie Kolkata - 700069 [PAN: AAACN9084E] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) C.O. No. 17/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2015-16 M/s. Navin Constructions & Deputy Commissioner of Income Credit Pvt. Ltd. Tax, Central Circle – 1(3), Vs 12…

Vedic Foundation Private Limited, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward-26(2), New Delhi

In the result, this appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 9170/DEL/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Jan 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Anubhav Sharmavedic Foundation Private Limited, Vs. Ito, Ward 26 (2), 43-B, 1St Floor, Dilshad Garden, New Delhi. Delhi – 110 093. (Pan : Aaaci8590C) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Rakesh Joshi, Ca Revenue By : Shri Amit Katoch, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 10.01.2024 Date Of Order : 25.01.2024

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh Joshi, CAFor Respondent: Shri Amit Katoch, Sr. DR
Section 131Section 133Section 143Section 147Section 68Section 69C

…. Orchid Industries Pvt. Ltd. 397 ITR 136 (Bombay); (iii) CIT vs. Kamdhenu Steel and Alloys Ltd. 361 ITR 220 (Delhi); (iv) Shiv Dhoot Pearls 237 taxman 104 (Delhi); (v) Dwarkadhis Investment P. Ltd. 330 ITR 298 (Delhi); (vi) CIT vs. Lovely Exports (P.) Ltd. 216 CTR 195 (SC), 7. Per contra, ld. DR for the Revenue relied upon the orders of the authorities below. He submitted that assessee was requested to produce the Directors but they were not produced. He further submitted that these companies are bogus entry providing companies and whose identity, 6 creditworthiness and genuineness was not proved. He furthe…

Deepsikha Vinimay (P) Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, WD- 6(1), Kolkata

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 904/KOL/2023[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata09 Jan 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rajesh Kumar

Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 144BSection 147Section 263Section 68

…ncome of the assessee under section 68 of the Act as unexplained cash credit. 7. The ld. CIT(Appeals) also affirmed the order of ld. Assessing Officer by holding that the ratio laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of CIT –vs.- Lovely Export (2008) 216 CTR 195 (SC) and various other decisions of the Hon’ble High Courts and Tribunal, which were prior to the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court on the issue of applicability of section 68 of the Act qua receipt of share capital/share premium in the case of PCIT –vs.- NRA Iron & Steel Pvt. Limited (2019) 412 ITR 161(SC). The ld. CIT(Appeals) observed and…

D.C.I.T., CC-2(3), Kolkata vs. Rabindra Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

ITA 1508/KOL/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Dec 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon’Ble & Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 1508/Kol/2019 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Rabindra Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. C.C. -2(3), Kolkata Vs 202, Anamika Apartment 12, Lee Road 2Nd Floor Kolkata - 700020 [Pan: Aaccr2601M] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Siddharth Agarwal, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Rakesh Kumar Das, Cit, D/R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 13/12/2023 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 21/12/2023 आदेश/O R D E R Per Dr. Manish Borad: The Above Captioned Appeal Is Directed At The Instance Of The Revenue Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Kolkata – 17, (Hereinafter The “Ld. Cit(A)”) Dt. 29/03/2019, Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act”) For The Assessment Year 2012- 13. 2. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:- “That On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law; The Ld. Cit(A)-17, Has Erred By Deleting The Additions To The Tune Of Rs. 27,22,00,000/- Made By The Ao Under Section 68 In Respect Of Undisclosed Cash Credit Found In The Books Of The Assessee In The Garb Of Share Application Money, Received During The F.Y.201 1-12, From Bhillai Holding Pvt. Ltd., Without Judging The Case On Merits & Appreciating The Fact That The Source Of Funds Received By The Investor Company, Namely, Bhillai Holding Pvt. Ltd. Were From Paper / Shell

For Appellant: Shri Siddharth Agarwal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Rakesh Kumar Das, CIT, D/R
Section 131Section 143(2)Section 250Section 68

…the necessary details and the ld. Assessing Officer has not indicated any discrepancies in these details. Various judgments were relied on by the assessee including the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Lovely Exports P. Ltd. [2008] 216 CTR 195 (SC), and other case-laws. 4.2. The ld. CIT(A) observed that the assessee has filed documentary evidence in support of the claim of the nature and source being explained for the alleged transactions and also referred to various judicial decisions The ld. CIT(A) observe that the ld. Assessing Officer obtained all these details from the investment…

Income Tax Officer-5(1)(1), Mumbai vs. M/S. Flagship Housing Development P. Ltd.( Formerly Known As M/S. Absolute Building Company Private Limited, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 4642/MUM/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Dec 2023AY 2007-08
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

…the addition needs to be made in the hands of the subscriber but not in the hands of the appellant company. Reliance was placed on the decisions of the Honorable Supreme Court in the case of Divine Leasing and Finance Ltd 299 ITR 268 and Lovely Exports P Ltd. 216 CTR 195. 8. The ld. CIT(A) held that in so far as share premium is concerned, same is not taxable in view of the judgment of the Hon’ble High Court in the case of Vodafone India Services Pvt. 10 M/s. Flagship Housing Development Pvt. Ltd. Ltd reported in [2014] 368 ITR 1 (Bombay) and held that the premium received is a capital receipt which is not taxab…

D.C.I.T., Central Circle - 1(4), Kolkata vs. M/S. Wise Investment Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 163/KOL/2023[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata09 Nov 2023AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg, Hon’Ble & Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 163/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2012-13 D.C.I.T. Central Circle – 1(4), Kolkata M/S. Wise Investment Pvt. Ltd. Vs 3Rd Floor 5, Govind Chand Dhar Lane Kolkata - 700001 [Pan: Aaacw3141R] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Manish Tiwari, Fca Revenue By : Shri Abhijit Kundu, Cit D/R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 26/09/2023 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 09/11/2023 आदेश/O R D E R Per Dr. Manish Borad: The Above Captioned Appeal Is Directed At The Instance Of The Revenue Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax, Appeals -21, Kolkata, (Hereinafter The “Ld. Cit(A)”) Dt. 26/12/2022, Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act”) For The Assessment Year 2012-13. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:- “1. Whether On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case Ld. Cit (A) Is Justified In Deleting Addition Made U/S. 68 Of Rs.32,50,00,000/- Ignoring The Remand Report Dated 20.07.2022 Wherein The Report Categorically Stated That The Share Applicant Company Has No Creditworthiness To Invest In The Assesses Company. 2. Whether On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case Ld. Cit (A) Was Erroneous As It Had Not Taken Cognizance Of The Fact That The 2

For Appellant: Shri Manish Tiwari, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Abhijit Kundu, CIT D/R
Section 131Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 250Section 68

…e, the ld. CIT(A) has rightly deleted the addition u/s 68 of the Act. Reliance is placed on the following decisions:-  CIT vs. Gobi Textile Ltd. 294 ITR 663  Oasis Hospitalities (P) Ltd. vs. CIT (2011) 333 ITR 119 (Del.)  CIT vs. Lovely Exports Ltd. (2008) 216 CTR 195 (SC)  CIT vs. Dolfin Canpack Ltd. 283 ITR 190 (Delhi)  DCIT vs. Rohini Builders (127 Taxman 523)  Sri Barkha Synthetics Ltd. vs. CIT 283 ITR 377 (Raj.)  CIT vs. Down Town Hospitals Ltd. 267 ITR 439 (Gau)  Sophia Finance Ltd. 205 ITR 98 (Delhi) Full Bench  ITO vs. Neelkanth Finbuild Ltd. (2015) 61 taxmann.com 132  CIT vs. Orissa Corporation…

DCIT, Central Circle Ajmer, Ajmer vs. Puja Synthetics Private Limited, Bhilwara

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 87/JPR/2023[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur09 Nov 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Mukesh Soni (Adv.)For Respondent: Shri A.S. Nehra (Addl.CIT)
Section 115JSection 153ASection 263

…hat investor company. The ld. AR of the assessee also argued that the notices were issued to all investors company and the same were compiled, this fact is also not disputed by the Revenue. Thus, relying on the decision of the CIT vs. Lovely Exports (P.) Ltd. 216 CTR 195 (SC) decided by the Hon’ble Apex Court and the decision of the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case CIT vs. Morani Automatives (P.) Ltd 264 CTR 86 (Raj.). Based on these the ld. AR of the assessee submitted that the primary onus has been discharged the obligation casted upon it and the appeal of the revenue is not sustainable considering…

DCIT, CC-1(2), Kolkata vs. M/S. Chaman Metalics Ltd., Maharashtra

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue stands dismissed

ITA 610/KOL/2023[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Oct 2023AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garganddr. Manish Borad

Section 133(6)Section 250Section 68

…tructure Pvt. Ltd. \/s. DCIT vide order ITA No. 1908/Kol/2012 dt. 20.01.2016; iv) ACIT Us Global Mercantile Pvt. Ltd. in (2016) 46 CCH 41 dt.13.01.2016 (ITAT Kolkata Bench) v) Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of CIT vs Lovely Exports (P) Ltd. reported in (2008) 216 CTR 195 (SC) vi) Hon'ble Calcutta High Court in the case of CIT vs Roseberry Mercantile (P) Ltd in GA No. 3296 of 2010 ITAT No. 241 of 2010 dated 10.01.2011, vii) CIT Vs Nishan Indo Commerce Ltd. in ITA No.52/2001 dt.02.12.2013 (Calcutta High Court) viii) ACIT v. Enrich Agro Food Products (P) Ltd. [2022] 141 taxmann.com 309 (Delhi - Trib.) ix) DCIT v. Ka…

DCIT, Circle-1(1)(2), Surat vs. J B Syntex Pvt. Ltd, Surat

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 140/SRT/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Surat18 Oct 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.140/Srt/2020 Assessment Year: (2011-12) (Physical Hearing) The Dcit, Vs. J. B. Syntex Pvt. Ltd., Circle – 1(1)(2), B-25, Guj. Eco. Textile Park, Surat N. H. No.8, Palsana, Surat – 394315. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aabcj9389D (Appellant) (Respondent) Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr. Dr Appellant By Shri Rasesh Shah, Ca Respondent By Date Of Hearing 17/08/2023 Date Of Pronouncement 18/10/2023

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

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, SURAT BENCH, SURAT BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JM & DR. A. L. SAINI, AM आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.140/SRT/2020 Assessment Year: (2011-12) (Physical Hearing) The DCIT, Vs. J. B. Syntex Pvt. Ltd., Circle – 1(1)(2), B-25, Guj. Eco. Textile Park, Surat N. H. No.8, Palsana, Surat – 394315. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: AABCJ9389D (Appellant) (Respondent) Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr. DR Appellant by Shri Rasesh Shah, CA Respondent by Date of Hearing 17/08/2023 Date of Pronouncement 18/10/2023 आदेश / O R D E R PER DR. A. L. SAINI, AM: Captioned appeal filed by the Revenue, pertaining to…

D.C.I.T. - 15(3)(2), Mumbai vs. Sadguru Management Consultancy P. Ltd., Mumbai

In the result ground of appeal filed by the assessee under rule 27 of ITAT Rule is allowed and appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 6323/MUM/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Sept 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Aby T Vakery & Shri Amarjit Singhdy. Commissioner Of Vs. Sadguru Management Income Tax- 15(3)(2) Consultancy Pvt. Ltd Room No. 451, 4 Th Floor, 7, Gagangiri, Plot No. 47, Aayakar Bhavan, Sector 17, Vashi, Navi Maharshi Karve Road, Mumbai- 400703 Mumbai- 400020 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./ Pan/Gir No: Aamcs1626F Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Dharan Gandhi, ARFor Respondent: Shri Suresh D. Gaikwad, DR
Section 132Section 143(1)Section 148Section 250Section 68

…rcumstances. Once the assessee 7 Sadguru Management Consultancy P. Ltd produces evidences about identity, genuineness and creditworthiness of the lender onus of proof shifts to the revenue." 2.4.8 The Honble Apex Court in the case of Lovely Exports Pvt Ltd. 216 CTR 195(SC) 2008 held that the AO is at liberty to bring to tax the amounts in their respective hands of the investors if their identity, genuineness and creditworthiness is not proved. The AO should have made efforts to assess the amounts in the hands of the investors at least on protective basis. Even in case, the creditworthiness of the investors is n…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (Central), Bilaspur vs. M/S Jagannathdas Harichandmal Jewellers Pvt. Ltd, Raigarh

In the result appeal of revenue is partly allowed in terms of our observations herein above

ITA 106/RPR/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur22 Sept 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.106/Rpr/2022 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2012-13 The Assistant Commissioner Of Vs M/S. Jagannathdas Harichandmal Income Tax (Central), Bilaspur Jewellers Pvt. Ltd. Sadar Bazar, Raigarh (C.G.) Pan: Aaccj2840G (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. िनधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Sunil Kumar Agrawal, Ca राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Choudhary N.C. Roy, Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 14/07/2023 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 22/09/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Arun Khodpia, Am : The Captioned Appeal Is Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Bhopal, Dated 16.03.2022 Which In Turn Arises From The Order By Ld. Assessing Officer U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 147 Dated 30.12.2018 For A.Y.2012-13. The Grounds Of The Appeal Raised By The Revenue Are As Under: “ 1. Whether On The Fact & In The Circumstances Of The Case In Law, While Holding Assessment Passed U/S 147 R.W.S. 143(3) Of Act As Invalid & Void-Ab-Initio, The Ld. Cit(A) Completely Ignored The Fact That During The Course Of Survey, The Assessee Failed To Discharge Its Burden In Establishing 'The Identity, Creditworthiness & Genuineness Of The Transactions As Required U/S 68 Of The Income Tac Act. Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Ignoring That Reassessment Proceeding Are Based On Fresh Facts/Information Rather Than Change Of Opinion. 2. Whether On The Fact & In The Circumstances Of The Case In Law, The Ld.Cit(A) Erred In Ignoring That Confirmation Of Concealment Of Income/Disclosure Made In Statement Recorded During Survey U/S 133A Of Act Is An Information, Though Not Conclusive, Which May Be Used In Regular Assessment Or Reassessment Proceedings.

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Kumar Agrawal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Choudhary N.C. Roy, Sr. DR
Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

…l subscribed by the company shall not be added to company. This view has been taken in a number of case by various courts including CG High Court in the case of Vankateshwar Ispat Ltd 319 ITR page 393 and Supreme Court in case of Lovely Exports (P) Ltd (2008) 216 CTR 195. Hence, in view of the above we hereby request you to please take a judicious view in the matter. 12 It has been found that during original assessment proceedings the then AO vide order sheet entry dated 31.10.2014 after perusal of books of account of the appellant furnished by ld AR of the appellant require the appellant to furnish complete det…

Jagat Singh Rathore, Tonk vs. ITO WD 7(2), Jaipur

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

ITA 139/JPR/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur18 Sept 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Mahendra Gargieya, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Monisha Choudhary, Addl. CITa
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 68

…need arise then addition can have made in its hand only but not in the hands of the company, firm, the present assessee AOP. For this purpose, reliance is placed on the decision of supreme court is Commissioner of Income-tax v. Lovely Exports (P.) Ltd. [2008] 216 CTR 195 (SC) ( DPB ) In the instant case since 7 persons other than assessee, who came together with the appellant assessee to run the Liquor business, made investment, have categorically confirmed the fact of giving their contribution in their duly sworn affidavit as also in the statement recorded, which fact is mentioned by ld. AO also at the top pg.3…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 1(1), Raipur vs. M/S Tripco Services Pvt. Ltd., Raipur

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is partly allowed in terms of our observations above

ITA 110/RPR/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur14 Sept 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.110/Rpr/2020 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16

For Appellant: S/shri Praveen Khandelwal &For Respondent: Shri Choudhary N.C. Roy, Sr. DR
Section 1Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 68

…eived from bogus companies those do not have net worth to make investment and no dividend has been received from these investments?" 4. Whether on the facts of the cases and in law, the CIT(A) is justified on relying on ration of CIT Vs Lovely Exports P. ltd [216 CTR 195] holding that the department is free to proceed to reopen the case of the bogus shareholder which is not relevant after 01.04.2013 as the section 68 has been amended by Finance Act, 2012 inserting the sub-section 1 that source of source has to be proved in the cases of share application money ? 5. "Whether on the facts of the cases and in law, th…