CIT v. Lubtec India Ltd.

311 ITR 175High Court2009#3511 most cited
34

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2026.

Sections most often in play

Section 69CSection 143(3)Section 69ASection 133ASection 142(1)Section 144Section 131Section 132

Issues it is cited on

survey under section 133asection 132(4a)unexplained expendituresection 69bbusiness connectionsection 41(1)dumb documentssundry creditorssection 41section 69cloose paperssection 40a(3)

Judgments citing CIT v. Lubtec India Ltd.

AMAN THUKRAL,LUDHIANA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 2(1), LUDHIANA , LUDHIANA

Accordingly, Additional Ground No. 1 is allowed for statistical

ITA 886/CHANDI/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh11 Mar 2026AY 2021-22

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Pankaj Bhalla, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Manav Mangal, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 250(6)Section 69C

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण,च"ीगढ़ "ायपीठ “A” , च"ीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH BENCH “B”, CHANDIGARH HEARING THROUGH: PHYSICAL MODE "ी लिलत कुमार, "ाियक सद" एवं "ी मनोज कुमार अ"वाल, लेखा सद" BEFORE: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR, JM & SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY , AM आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No. 886/Chd/ 2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2021-22 बनाम Aman Thakral , The ITO, Prop M/s PP Knits at 1284/56, Ward 2(1), Guru Nanak Dev Nagar, Ludhiana Basti Jodhewal, Rahon Road, Ludhiana 141008 "ायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: ADNPT2155R अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""थ"/Respondent िनधा"रती की ओर से/Assessee by : Sh. Pankaj Bhalla, CA राज" की ओर…

SANGHI TEXTILES PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERBAD vs. ITO., WARD-3(1), HYDERABAD

ITA 1311/HYD/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad07 Jan 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Us:

Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 145Section 147Section 148Section 194ASection 250Section 37(1)

…ailed to substantiate the cash flow, provide bank statements, or reconcile deposits with disclosed income. In absence of any verifiable explanation, the AO was justified in invoking section 698. The Hon'ble Delhi High Court in CIT v. Lubtec India Ltd. [(2009) 311 ITR 175 (Del)] has upheld additions under section 69B where assessee fails to explain investments with corroborative evidence. Thus, the addition of Rs. 19,54,348/- as unexplained investment is sustained and relevant grounds of appeal are dismissed and not allowed. 5.5. The appellant is agitated against the Rejection of Books of Account u/s 145(3) of the…

DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,CC-2,, KANPUR vs. SHRI.MOHAMMAD ASFAND AKHTAR, KANPUR

In the result, the appeal of Revenue in ITA

ITA 144/LKW/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow26 Sept 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Anadee Nath Misshraassessment Year: 2018-19 Dcit, Cc-2 V. Shri Mohammad Asfand Laxmi Niwas, 10/503, Akhtar Allenganj, Kanpur-208001. Plot No.02, Block-B, Scheme-39, Ram Rai Ki Sarai, Jajmau, Kanpur Nagar-208010. Tan/Pan: Aempa0823R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2018-19 Shri Mohammad Asfand Akhtar V. Dcit, Central Circle-Ii Plot No.02, Block-B, Scheme-39, 10/503, Allenganj, Kanpur- Ram Rai Ki Sarai, Jajmau, 208001. Kanpur Nagar-208010. Tan/Pan: Aempa0823R (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Ashish Jaiswal, Advocate Respondent By: Shri R. K. Agarwal, Cit(Dr) O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Ashish Jaiswal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri R. K. Agarwal, CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(va)Section 37Section 41Section 41(1)Section 68Section 69C

…d suspicion without any positive evidence or observation what so ever, your honour is humbly requested to kindly provide appropriate relief to the appellant. ITA. No.139/LKW/2022 Page 73 of 158 107. Reliance is placed upon: In CIT v. Lubtec India Ltd. [2009] 311 ITR 175 (Delhi), the hon’ble high court held that where there was nothing to show that expenditure in question was in fact incurred by assessee and assessee had denied having incurred expenditure and had contended that it did not have that kind of money, no addition on account of such expenditure could be made to assessee’s income. And further in Commiss…

MOHD. ASFAND AKHTAR,KANPUR vs. DEPUTI COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CC-2, KANPUR

In the result, the appeal of Revenue in ITA

ITA 139/LKW/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow26 Sept 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Anadee Nath Misshraassessment Year: 2018-19 Dcit, Cc-2 V. Shri Mohammad Asfand Laxmi Niwas, 10/503, Akhtar Allenganj, Kanpur-208001. Plot No.02, Block-B, Scheme-39, Ram Rai Ki Sarai, Jajmau, Kanpur Nagar-208010. Tan/Pan: Aempa0823R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2018-19 Shri Mohammad Asfand Akhtar V. Dcit, Central Circle-Ii Plot No.02, Block-B, Scheme-39, 10/503, Allenganj, Kanpur- Ram Rai Ki Sarai, Jajmau, 208001. Kanpur Nagar-208010. Tan/Pan: Aempa0823R (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Ashish Jaiswal, Advocate Respondent By: Shri R. K. Agarwal, Cit(Dr) O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Ashish Jaiswal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri R. K. Agarwal, CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(va)Section 37Section 41Section 41(1)Section 68Section 69C

…d suspicion without any positive evidence or observation what so ever, your honour is humbly requested to kindly provide appropriate relief to the appellant. ITA. No.139/LKW/2022 Page 73 of 158 107. Reliance is placed upon: In CIT v. Lubtec India Ltd. [2009] 311 ITR 175 (Delhi), the hon’ble high court held that where there was nothing to show that expenditure in question was in fact incurred by assessee and assessee had denied having incurred expenditure and had contended that it did not have that kind of money, no addition on account of such expenditure could be made to assessee’s income. And further in Commiss…

INCOMETAX OFFICER, THRIUVALLUR vs. GT60 ARUNGULAM PRIMARY AGRI COOPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY, TIRUTTANI

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2781/CHNY/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 Jul 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.2781/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19 The Income Tax Officer, Vs. Gt60 Arungulam Primary Agri Ward 1, Cooperative Credit Society, Tiruvallur. No. 1, Periya Theru, Thumbikulam Village, Thalavedu Post & Taluk, Tiruvallur 631 212. [Pan: Aabag2568F] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Ms. R. Anita, Addl. Cit ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Malar Mannan, Advocate सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 02.06.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 17.07.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Dated 26.07.2024 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi For The Assessment Year 2018-19. 2. We Find That This Appeal Is Filed With A Delay Of 24 Days. The Ito, Ward 1, Tiruvallur Filed An Affidavit For Condonation Of Delay Stating The Reasons. Upon Hearing Both The Parties & On Examination Of The Said

For Appellant: Ms. R. Anita, Addl. CITFor Respondent: Shri Malar Mannan, Advocate
Section 142(1)Section 148Section 69ASection 69C

…urse of 10 I.T.A. No.2781/Chny/24 appellant society's business to make further credit to its members. Once there is no expenditure, question of disallowance u/s. 69C does not arise. The Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Lubtec India Ltd. (2009) 311 ITR 175 (Del.) held that what is postulated in section 69C of the Income-tax Act, 1961, is that first of all the assessee must have incurred that expenditure. The Hon'ble Delhi ITAT in the case of ACIT, vs. Kishan Lal Jewels (P) Ltd. [2013] 33 taxmann.com 656 (Delhi - Trib.), held that in the absence of any material whatsoever with Assessing Officer to s…

MOHD. ASFAND AKHTAR,KANPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, RANGE-1, KANPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 138/LKW/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow09 Jul 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: SH. KUL BHARAT, VICE PRESIDENT AND SH. NIKHIL CHOUDHARY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Ashish Jaiswal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. R.K. Agarwal, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 195Section 250

…f his expenses through banking channels and past savings. Furthermore, his mother was a taxpayer and it has been held in various Court decisions namely CIT-2, Cochin vs. Lakshmi Hospital (2011) 13 taxman.com 33 (Kerela) and CIT vs. Lubtec India Limited (2009) 311 ITR 175 (Delhi), that no additions can be made until the incurrence of expenditure is established by the ld. AO and in the absence of any evidence to show that such expenditure had been incurred, no addition could be made. The ld. CIT(A) however, held that the assessee had not provided A.Y. 2013-14 sufficient evidences to confirm that the assessee’s mot…

KOLSA KHADAN KAMGAR SAHAKARI PAT SANSTHA MARYADIT SILLEWADA PROJECT,NAGPUR vs. ITO WARD 3(4), NAGPUR, NAGPUR

In the result, Revenue’s appeals for A

ITA 12/NAG/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur25 Feb 2025AY 2018-19

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

For Appellant: Smt. Veena AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke
Section 132(4)Section 153CSection 69ASection 69C

…nder Sec 69C in the hands of the appellant. Since the nature of transaction and the source of expenditure is not proved by the learned AO the addition under section 69C cannot be held good. Strength is drawn from the Judgment of CIT v. Lubtec India Ltd.(2009) 311 ITR 175 (Del). sTherefore, the Sixth ground of appeal is hereby adjudicated in the favor of the appellant and the addition made of Rs. 92,31,514/- is deleted and this ground is 'allowed' hereby.” 7. The learned CIT(A) had called for a remand report which indicated that the Assessing Officer was correct in his action, but the learned CIT(A) chose to disr…

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1), NAGPUR, NAGPUR vs. UNIQUE REALITIES BUILDERS & DEVELOPERS, NAGPUR

In the result, Revenue’s appeals for A

ITA 12/NAG/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur25 Feb 2025AY 2019-20

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

For Appellant: Smt. Veena AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke
Section 132(4)Section 153CSection 69ASection 69C

…nder Sec 69C in the hands of the appellant. Since the nature of transaction and the source of expenditure is not proved by the learned AO the addition under section 69C cannot be held good. Strength is drawn from the Judgment of CIT v. Lubtec India Ltd.(2009) 311 ITR 175 (Del). sTherefore, the Sixth ground of appeal is hereby adjudicated in the favor of the appellant and the addition made of Rs. 92,31,514/- is deleted and this ground is 'allowed' hereby.” 7. The learned CIT(A) had called for a remand report which indicated that the Assessing Officer was correct in his action, but the learned CIT(A) chose to disr…

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1), NAGPUR vs. UNIQUE REALITIES BUILDERS & DEVELOPERS , NAGPUR

In the result, Revenue’s appeals for A

ITA 11/NAG/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur25 Feb 2025AY 2018-19

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

For Appellant: Smt. Veena AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke
Section 132(4)Section 153CSection 69ASection 69C

…nder Sec 69C in the hands of the appellant. Since the nature of transaction and the source of expenditure is not proved by the learned AO the addition under section 69C cannot be held good. Strength is drawn from the Judgment of CIT v. Lubtec India Ltd.(2009) 311 ITR 175 (Del). sTherefore, the Sixth ground of appeal is hereby adjudicated in the favor of the appellant and the addition made of Rs. 92,31,514/- is deleted and this ground is 'allowed' hereby.” 7. The learned CIT(A) had called for a remand report which indicated that the Assessing Officer was correct in his action, but the learned CIT(A) chose to disr…

SH. NARESH CHAUHAN,SHIMLA vs. ACIT, CC-II, CHANDIGARH

In the result, the addition so made is hereby directed to be deleted and the ground of appeal is allowed

ITA 728/CHANDI/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh06 Dec 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member), SHRI. PARESH M. JOSHI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Vishal Mohan, Sr. Advocate with Shri Manoj Gupta, C.AFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal, CIT, DR
Section 142(1)Section 153ASection 153A(1)(b)Section 68Section 69C

…d have been made by the Id.A O without putting on record anything to substantiate that the said payments were actually made by the assessee Reliance in this regard is placed on the judgment of Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in case CIT versus looktech India Ltd. 311 ITR 175 page (Delhi) It is pertinent to mention that in this case the Lordship of the Hon'ble High Court was pleased to opine that until and unless the A O brings on record that such expenditure which the Id A O proposed to add as deemed income, same must have actually been incurred by the assessee. In the instant case no such finding has been recorded b…

SH. NARESH CHAUHAN,SHIMLA vs. DCIT, CC-II, CHANDIGARH

In the result, the addition so made is hereby directed to be deleted and the ground of appeal is allowed

ITA 726/CHANDI/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh06 Dec 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member), SHRI. PARESH M. JOSHI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Vishal Mohan, Sr. Advocate with Shri Manoj Gupta, C.AFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal, CIT, DR
Section 142(1)Section 153ASection 153A(1)(b)Section 68Section 69C

…d have been made by the Id.A O without putting on record anything to substantiate that the said payments were actually made by the assessee Reliance in this regard is placed on the judgment of Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in case CIT versus looktech India Ltd. 311 ITR 175 page (Delhi) It is pertinent to mention that in this case the Lordship of the Hon'ble High Court was pleased to opine that until and unless the A O brings on record that such expenditure which the Id A O proposed to add as deemed income, same must have actually been incurred by the assessee. In the instant case no such finding has been recorded b…

ACIT, CIRCLE CC 15, NEW DELHI vs. ALKA MENDIRATTA , DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and the Cross Objections of the assessees are also dismissed

ITA 1864/DEL/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Mar 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Sh. Amit Goel, CA &For Respondent: Ms. Sapna Bhatia, CIT-DR
Section 153ASection 69

…in the assessment order. Once this primary and basic condition of section 69 has not been fulfilled, as held by the Hon'ble High court in the above case, provisions of Section 69 of the Act cannot be applied. (x) In the case of CIT v. Lubtec India Ltd (2009) 311 ITR 175 (Del.) it had been held that it is quite clear that what is postulated in section 69C of the Income-tax Act, 1961, is that first of all the assessee must have incurred that expenditure---" The above decision, though, rendered in the context of provisions of section 69C will squarely apply to the case of the appellant as provisions of section 69…

ACIT, CC-15, NEW DELHI vs. YASH PAL MENDIRATTA, DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and the Cross Objections of the assessees are also dismissed

ITA 1863/DEL/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Mar 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Sh. Amit Goel, CA &For Respondent: Ms. Sapna Bhatia, CIT-DR
Section 153ASection 69

…in the assessment order. Once this primary and basic condition of section 69 has not been fulfilled, as held by the Hon'ble High court in the above case, provisions of Section 69 of the Act cannot be applied. (x) In the case of CIT v. Lubtec India Ltd (2009) 311 ITR 175 (Del.) it had been held that it is quite clear that what is postulated in section 69C of the Income-tax Act, 1961, is that first of all the assessee must have incurred that expenditure---" The above decision, though, rendered in the context of provisions of section 69C will squarely apply to the case of the appellant as provisions of section 69…

SANJEEV KUMAR,BULANDSHAHR vs. ITO, WARD 2(3)(2), BULANDSHAHR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 658/DEL/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Oct 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: The Tribunal.

Section 69

…I.T.A.No.658/Del/2023 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “SMC” NEW DELHI SHRI CHANDRA MOHAN GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER आ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.658/Del/2023 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18 बनाम Sanjeev Kumar ITO C/o M/s Raj Kumar & Associates, Vs. Ward 2(3)(2) L-7A (LGF), South Extension, Bulandshahr. Part-II, New Delhi. PAN No. AATPK4646E अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Shri Raj Kumar Gupta, CA िनधा"रतीक"ओरसे /Assessee by Shri Om Prakash, Sr. DR राज"वक"ओरसे /Revenue by सुनवाईक"तारीख/ Date of hearing: 29.08.2023 18.10.2023 उ"ोषणाक"तारीख/Pronouncement on आदेश /O R D E R This appeal has been filed by the…

TOFFEE AGRICULTURAL FARMS PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ITO WARD - 25(3), NEW DELHI

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 4903/DEL/2019[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Apr 2022AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat

Section 142ASection 143(2)Section 2Section 69Section 69BSection 69C

…by the assessing authority the assessment is vitiated, learned 4 Toffee Agricultural Farms P. Ltd. Vs. ITO counsel for the assessee has placed reliance on the judgment of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court rendered in the case of CIT Vs. Lubtech India Ltd. (2009) 311 ITR 175 (Del). Further reliance was placed on the judgment of the Hon’ble Allahabad High Court rendered in the case of Dinesh Kumar Mittal Vs. ITO (1992) 193 ITR 770 (All). He further submitted that the learned CIT(Appeals) to fill the legal lacuna, regarding assessment made u/s 69C, arbitrarily replaced Section 69B in place of Section 69C, as mentio…

RAINBOW PROMOTERS PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 766/DEL/2015[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Feb 2022AY 2006-07

Bench: Sh. Amit Shukladr. B. R. R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: Sh. Piyush Kaushik, FCA &For Respondent: Sh. T. Kipgen, CIT DR
Section 132Section 153ASection 40ASection 40A(3)

…take the place for the purpose of passing an order of assessment. 9.0.1 The issue of the alleged payment of interest by the assessee is covered by the judgment of the Hon’ble Jurisdictional (Delhi) High Court in case of CIT vs. Lubtec India Ltd. reported in 311 ITR 175 (Delhi) (2009) wherein it was held by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court that where there was nothing to show that expenditure in question was in fact incurred by assessee and assesesee had denied having ITA Nos. 1678 & 1745/Del/2013 11 Rainbow Promoters (P) Ltd. incurred expenditure and had contended that it did not have that kind of money, no addit…

M/S RAINBOW PROMOTERS PVT. LTD.,,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1745/DEL/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Feb 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Sh. Amit Shukladr. B. R. R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: Sh. Piyush Kaushik, FCA &For Respondent: Sh. T. Kipgen, CIT DR
Section 132Section 153ASection 40ASection 40A(3)

…take the place for the purpose of passing an order of assessment. 9.0.1 The issue of the alleged payment of interest by the assessee is covered by the judgment of the Hon’ble Jurisdictional (Delhi) High Court in case of CIT vs. Lubtec India Ltd. reported in 311 ITR 175 (Delhi) (2009) wherein it was held by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court that where there was nothing to show that expenditure in question was in fact incurred by assessee and assesesee had denied having ITA Nos. 1678 & 1745/Del/2013 11 Rainbow Promoters (P) Ltd. incurred expenditure and had contended that it did not have that kind of money, no addit…

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S RAINBOW PROMOTER (P) LTD.,, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1678/DEL/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Feb 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Sh. Amit Shukladr. B. R. R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: Sh. Piyush Kaushik, FCA &For Respondent: Sh. T. Kipgen, CIT DR
Section 132Section 153ASection 40ASection 40A(3)

…take the place for the purpose of passing an order of assessment. 9.0.1 The issue of the alleged payment of interest by the assessee is covered by the judgment of the Hon’ble Jurisdictional (Delhi) High Court in case of CIT vs. Lubtec India Ltd. reported in 311 ITR 175 (Delhi) (2009) wherein it was held by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court that where there was nothing to show that expenditure in question was in fact incurred by assessee and assesesee had denied having ITA Nos. 1678 & 1745/Del/2013 11 Rainbow Promoters (P) Ltd. incurred expenditure and had contended that it did not have that kind of money, no addit…

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. COUNTRYWIDE PROMOTERS PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

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

ITA 6343/DEL/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 May 2021AY 2007-08

Bench: Sh. K. N. Charydr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Bhagwani, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Nidhi Srivastava, CIT DR
Section 132Section 153ASection 37(1)Section 40A(3)

…take the place for the purpose of passing an order of assessment. 9.0.1 The issue of the alleged payment of interest by the assessee is covered by the judgment of the Hon’ble Jurisdictional (Delhi) High Court in case of CIT vs. Lubtec India Ltd. reported in 311 ITR 175 ( Delhi) (2009) wherein it was held by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court that where there was nothing to show that expenditure in question was in fact incurred by assessee and assesese had denied having incurred expenditure and had contended that it did not have that kind of money, no addition on account of such expenditure could be made to assessee’s…

COUNTRYWIDE PROMOTERS PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

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

ITA 6304/DEL/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 May 2021AY 2007-08

Bench: Sh. K. N. Charydr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Bhagwani, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Nidhi Srivastava, CIT DR
Section 132Section 153ASection 37(1)Section 40A(3)

…take the place for the purpose of passing an order of assessment. 9.0.1 The issue of the alleged payment of interest by the assessee is covered by the judgment of the Hon’ble Jurisdictional (Delhi) High Court in case of CIT vs. Lubtec India Ltd. reported in 311 ITR 175 ( Delhi) (2009) wherein it was held by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court that where there was nothing to show that expenditure in question was in fact incurred by assessee and assesese had denied having incurred expenditure and had contended that it did not have that kind of money, no addition on account of such expenditure could be made to assessee’s…

Showing 1–20 of 34 · Page 1 of 2