CIT v. Ms. Mayawati

338 ITR 563High Court2011#1574 most cited

What is CIT v. Ms. Mayawati authority for?

Section 68 of the Income Tax Act cannot be invoked to make additions if the assessee does not maintain books of account. For this purpose, bank statements or passbooks are not considered 'books of account'.

73

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Ms. Mayawati · 338 ITR 563 · Section 68 · books of account not maintained · no addition under Section 68 · bank passbook not books of account · bank statement not books of account · individual assessee no books · cash credit addition · unexplained cash credit

Also reported as

12 Taxmann.com 306

Sections most often in play

Section 68Section 133(6)Section 148Section 147Section 131Section 143(3)Section 132Section 142(1)

Issues it is cited on

section 148bsection 106section 36(1)(ii)section 149(1)(a)bogus share capitalcreditworthiness of the creditorprice riggingsource of sourceaddition under section 68beneficial ownerretracted statementaddition u/s 68

Judgments citing CIT v. Ms. Mayawati

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 4(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. AVIMA EXPORTS PRIVATE LIMITED, KOLKATA

Appeal stands dismissed

ITA 1599/KOL/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Feb 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shripradip Kumar Choubey, Jm

Section 131Section 133ASection 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

…. Financial strengths cannot be determined only based on the aforesaid parameters. One should obtain the 360-degree financials of any entity to infer any adverse statement against its genuineness. Reliance is placed in the case of 'CIT, Dehi vs. Ms. Mayawati, 338 ITR 563 (Del), 03/08/2011′, where the Hon'ble Delhi High court held the following: "The capacity of any person does not mean how they earn monthly or annually but the term capacity is a wide term and that can be pursued by how wealthy he is. All the formalities, as per the law are made by the assessee and donors as well." SI. Name of Loan parties Share C…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-4(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. VIVEK GUPTA, KOLKATA

Appeal of the revenue is dismissed and cross objection is partly allowed

ITA 1592/KOL/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI PRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY (Judicial Member)

Section 133ASection 143(1)Section 250Section 68

…(SC), wherein it has been held that statement recorded u/s 133A of the Act has no eviden- tiary value and no admission made during such statement cannot be ba- sis of addition. Similarly, the Ld. CIT(A) relied on the decision of CIT, Del- hi Vs. Ms. Mayawati, 338 ITR 563, dated 03.08.2011, wherein the Hon’ble Delhi High Court has held that the capacity of any person can not be judged on the basis monthly or annually income but the term capacity is by very wide term. The Hon’ble court has held that the addition cannot be made on the ground that the assessee has no fixed assets, low turnover and or low expenses and…

ABHIRUCHI MARKETING P. LTD., ,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD 7(1), , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 934/KOL/2025[2008-2009]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Dec 2025AY 2008-2009

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shripradip Kumar Choubey, Jm Abhiruchi Marketing P. Ltd. C/O. S.N. Ghosh & Associates, Ito, Ward 7(1) Advocates, Aaykar Bhawan, P-7, 2, Garstin Place, 2 Nd Floor, Suite Chowringhee Square, Fifth Floor, Vs. No.203, Off Hare Street, Kolkata, Kolkata-700069, West Bengal West Bengal-700001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aagca1408B Assessee By : Shri Somnath Ghosh, Ar Revenue By : Shri Manas Mondal, Dr Date Of Hearing: 16.10.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 31.12.2025

For Appellant: Shri Somnath Ghosh, ARFor Respondent: Shri Manas Mondal, DR
Section 131Section 132(6)Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 147Section 263Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM AND SHRIPRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY, JM Abhiruchi Marketing P. Ltd. C/o. S.N. Ghosh & Associates, ITO, Ward 7(1) Advocates, Aaykar Bhawan, P-7, 2, Garstin Place, 2 nd floor, Suite Chowringhee Square, Fifth Floor, Vs. No.203, Off Hare Street, Kolkata, Kolkata-700069, West Bengal West Bengal-700001 (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN No. AAGCA1408B Assessee by : Shri Somnath Ghosh, AR Revenue by : Shri Manas Mondal, DR Date of hearing: 16.10.2025 Date of pronouncement: 31.12.2025 O R D E R Per Rajesh Kumar, AM: This is an appeal preferred by…

LUMINO INDUSTRIES LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T., CC - 2(3),, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2083/KOL/2025[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata02 Dec 2025AY 2020-2021

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am\Nand\Nshri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm\Nita No. 2083/Kol/2025\N(Assessment Year: 2020-21)\Nlumino Industries Limited\Nunit No.12/4, Merlin Acropolis,\N1858/1, Rajdanga Main Road,\Nkolkata Township,\Nkolkata-700107, West Bengal\N(Appellant)\Nvs.\Ndcit, Cc 2(3)\Naayakar Bhawan Poorva,\N110, Shanti Pally,\Ne.M. Bypass, Kolkata-700107,\Nwest Bengal\N(Respondent)\Npan No. Aabcl0720E\Nassessee By\N:\Nshri Soumitra Choudhury &\Nms. Nandini Sureka, Ars\Nrevenue By\N:\Nshri P.N. Barnwal, Dr\Ndate Of Hearing:\N12.11.2025\Ndate Of Pronouncement:\N02.12.2025\Norder\Nper Rajesh Kumar, Am:\N1. This Is An Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals), Kolkata-26, (Hereinafter Referred To As The “Ld. Cit(A)"] Dated 14.07.2025 For The Ay 2020-21.\Nthe Issue Raised In Ground No.2 Is Against The Order Of Learned Cit (A) Confirming The Addition Of ₹15,00,000/- As Made By The Learned Ao On Account Of Unexplained Cash Credit U/S 68 Of The Act In Respect Of Loan Taken From The Eapl.\N2.

Section 132Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 68

…entries through these companies. In our opinion, mere fact that the loan creditors company had low income in the form of operating profit or no fixed assets or incurred very low expenses is not the criteria as has been held in the case of CIT vs. Ms. Mayawati 338 ITR 563 dated 03.08.2011. Also, the Hon'ble Hurisdictional High Court in case of PCIT VS. Sreeleathers [2022] 143 taxmann.com 435 (Calcutta)/[2022] 448 ITR 332 (Calcutta)[14-07-2022], has held that where the assessee has furnished all the evidences with the AO and then no addition can be made if /ao has not done any enquiry. The Hon'ble Court has held as…

D.C.I.T., CC - 3(1),, KOLKATA vs. GLIX SECURITIES PRIVATE LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, the CO of the assessee and Revenue’s appeal are dismissed

ITA 1291/KOL/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata02 Dec 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pardip Kumar Choubey, Jm Dcit Glix Securities Private Limited 110, Shanti Pally, 1St Floor 1, Grant Lane, Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, Vs. Kolkata-700012, West Bengal Kolkata-700107, West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aabcg1844J Co No. 66/Kol/2025 (Arising In Ita No. 1291/Kol/2025 For A.Y. 2011-12) Dcit Glix Securities Private Limited 110, Shanti Pally, 1St Floor 1, Grant Lane, Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, Vs. Kolkata-700012, West Bengal Kolkata-700107, West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Manish Tiwari, Ar Revenue By : Shri P.N. Barnwal, Dr Date Of Hearing: 14.10.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 02.12.2025

For Appellant: Shri Manish Tiwari, ARFor Respondent: Shri P.N. Barnwal, DR
Section 131Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 68

…oan creditors. The ld. CIT (A) controverted the conclusion drawn by the ld. AO that the share subscribers/ loan creditors were not having any operating income during the year by relying on the decision of CIT Commissioner of Income-tax vs. Ms. Mayawati [2011] 338 ITR 563 (Delhi)/[2011]. The ld. CIT (A) while deleting the addition dealt with each subscriber from page no.47 to 56 by discussing the credential of each subscriber. Similarly, the ld. CIT (A) discussed each and every loan creditors from page no. 56 to 59 of the Paper Book, while deleting the addition. The ld. CIT (A) relied on the decision of Commission…

QUIVER COMMERCIAL (P) LTD.,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD - 1(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1700/KOL/2024[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata19 Nov 2025AY 2009-2010

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm Ito, Ward 1(2), Kolkata Quiver Commercial (P) Ltd. Aaykar Bhawan, P-7, 3, Amartalla Street, Burrabazar, Chowringhee Square, Vs. Kolkata-700001, West Bengal Kolkata-700069, West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacq1349R Assessee By : Shri Giridhari Dhelia, Ar Revenue By : Shri Guru Bhashyam, Dr Date Of Hearing: 28.10.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 19.11.2025

For Appellant: Shri Giridhari Dhelia, ARFor Respondent: Shri Guru Bhashyam, DR
Section 131Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263Section 68

…, the addition u/s 68 of the Act cannot be made merely on the ground of low income, meagre revenue or low fixed assets and reserves and surplus. The case of the assessee find support from the decision of Hon'ble Delhi High Courtin case of CIT vs. Ms. Mayawati 338 ITR 563 dated 03.08.2011. Also, in case of PCIT vs. Sreeleathers [2022] 143 taxmann.com 435 (Calcutta)/[2022] 448 ITR 332 (Calcutta)[14-07-2022], wherein it has been held as under:- “‘In the absence of any such finding, it is held that the order passed by the Assessing Officer was utterly perverse and rightly interfered by the Commissioner (Appeals). Th…

JAGDISH CHAND VERMA,NEW DELHI vs. ITO,WARD- 67(2), DELHI

The appeal is allowed

ITA 2417/DEL/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Nov 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Anubhav Sharmaassessment Year : 2014-15 Jagdish Chand Verma, Vs. Income Tax Officer, C/O Ca Pramod Shukla, Ward-67(2), 3748, First Floor, Kucha Delhi. Parmanand, Daryaganj. Pan: Aanpv4931G

For Appellant: Shri Anshul Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Kumar Arora, Sr.DR
Section 115BSection 144Section 54Section 68

…Ram Vs. CIT [1969] 7 ITR 427, to contend that the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that a passbook of bank cannot be considered the books of accounts of the assessee. The Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court of Delhi in the case of CIT vs. Ms. Mayawati reported in 338 ITR 563 [DEL] has also held that section 68 cannot be invoked on cheques deposited in bank accounts as the same cannot be treated as books of accounts and it is not disputed that the Assessee was not maintaining any other books of accounts. Reliance is also placed for same proposition in case of Deepak Srivastava vs. ITO [I.T.A No.l328/Del/2024 dt. 18 De…

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 4(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. LADHURAM TOSHNIWAL AND SONS ELECTRICALS PRIVATE LIMITED , KOLKATA

In the result, allthe appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1661/KOL/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata11 Nov 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Manish Tiwari, ARFor Respondent: Shri Kapil Mandal, DR
Section 132Section 133(6)Section 148Section 68

…s’, ‘Turnover’, ‘Rent Payment’, ‘PBT’, ‘PAT’, ‘total other income’, etc. The ld. CIT (A) held that the financial strength cannot determined based on the aforesaid parameters by relying on the decision of Hon'ble Delhi High Courtin case of CIT vs. Ms. Mayawati 338 ITR 563 dated 03.08.2011. The ld. CIT (A) also noted that the assessee had repaid these loans along with ITA Nos.1656 to 1661/KOL/2025 Ladhuram Toshniwal and Sons Electricals Private Limited; AYs: 2015-16 to 2020-21 interest in the subsequent assessment years and therefore, the addition cannot be made u/s 68 of the Act by relying on the decision of Hon'…

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 4(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. LADHURAM TOSHNIWAL AND SONS ELECTRICALS PRIVATE LIMITED , KOLKATA

In the result, allthe appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1660/KOL/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata11 Nov 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Manish Tiwari, ARFor Respondent: Shri Kapil Mandal, DR
Section 132Section 133(6)Section 148Section 68

…s’, ‘Turnover’, ‘Rent Payment’, ‘PBT’, ‘PAT’, ‘total other income’, etc. The ld. CIT (A) held that the financial strength cannot determined based on the aforesaid parameters by relying on the decision of Hon'ble Delhi High Courtin case of CIT vs. Ms. Mayawati 338 ITR 563 dated 03.08.2011. The ld. CIT (A) also noted that the assessee had repaid these loans along with ITA Nos.1656 to 1661/KOL/2025 Ladhuram Toshniwal and Sons Electricals Private Limited; AYs: 2015-16 to 2020-21 interest in the subsequent assessment years and therefore, the addition cannot be made u/s 68 of the Act by relying on the decision of Hon'…

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 4(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. LADHURAM TOSHNIWAL AND SONS ELECTRICALS PRIVATE LIMITED , KOLKATA

In the result, allthe appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1659/KOL/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata11 Nov 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Manish Tiwari, ARFor Respondent: Shri Kapil Mandal, DR
Section 132Section 133(6)Section 148Section 68

…s’, ‘Turnover’, ‘Rent Payment’, ‘PBT’, ‘PAT’, ‘total other income’, etc. The ld. CIT (A) held that the financial strength cannot determined based on the aforesaid parameters by relying on the decision of Hon'ble Delhi High Courtin case of CIT vs. Ms. Mayawati 338 ITR 563 dated 03.08.2011. The ld. CIT (A) also noted that the assessee had repaid these loans along with ITA Nos.1656 to 1661/KOL/2025 Ladhuram Toshniwal and Sons Electricals Private Limited; AYs: 2015-16 to 2020-21 interest in the subsequent assessment years and therefore, the addition cannot be made u/s 68 of the Act by relying on the decision of Hon'…

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 4(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. LADHURAM TOSHNIWAL AND SONS ELECTRICALS PRIVATE LIMITED , KOLKATA

In the result, allthe appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1658/KOL/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata11 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Manish Tiwari, ARFor Respondent: Shri Kapil Mandal, DR
Section 132Section 133(6)Section 148Section 68

…s’, ‘Turnover’, ‘Rent Payment’, ‘PBT’, ‘PAT’, ‘total other income’, etc. The ld. CIT (A) held that the financial strength cannot determined based on the aforesaid parameters by relying on the decision of Hon'ble Delhi High Courtin case of CIT vs. Ms. Mayawati 338 ITR 563 dated 03.08.2011. The ld. CIT (A) also noted that the assessee had repaid these loans along with ITA Nos.1656 to 1661/KOL/2025 Ladhuram Toshniwal and Sons Electricals Private Limited; AYs: 2015-16 to 2020-21 interest in the subsequent assessment years and therefore, the addition cannot be made u/s 68 of the Act by relying on the decision of Hon'…

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 4(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. LADHURAM TOSHNIWAL AND SONS ELECTRICALS PRIVATE LIMITED , KOLKATA

In the result, allthe appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1657/KOL/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata11 Nov 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Manish Tiwari, ARFor Respondent: Shri Kapil Mandal, DR
Section 132Section 133(6)Section 148Section 68

…s’, ‘Turnover’, ‘Rent Payment’, ‘PBT’, ‘PAT’, ‘total other income’, etc. The ld. CIT (A) held that the financial strength cannot determined based on the aforesaid parameters by relying on the decision of Hon'ble Delhi High Courtin case of CIT vs. Ms. Mayawati 338 ITR 563 dated 03.08.2011. The ld. CIT (A) also noted that the assessee had repaid these loans along with ITA Nos.1656 to 1661/KOL/2025 Ladhuram Toshniwal and Sons Electricals Private Limited; AYs: 2015-16 to 2020-21 interest in the subsequent assessment years and therefore, the addition cannot be made u/s 68 of the Act by relying on the decision of Hon'…

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 4(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. LADHURAM TOSHNIWAL AND SONS ELECTRICALS PRIVATE LIMITED , KOLKATA

In the result, allthe appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1656/KOL/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata11 Nov 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Manish Tiwari, ARFor Respondent: Shri Kapil Mandal, DR
Section 132Section 133(6)Section 148Section 68

…s’, ‘Turnover’, ‘Rent Payment’, ‘PBT’, ‘PAT’, ‘total other income’, etc. The ld. CIT (A) held that the financial strength cannot determined based on the aforesaid parameters by relying on the decision of Hon'ble Delhi High Courtin case of CIT vs. Ms. Mayawati 338 ITR 563 dated 03.08.2011. The ld. CIT (A) also noted that the assessee had repaid these loans along with ITA Nos.1656 to 1661/KOL/2025 Ladhuram Toshniwal and Sons Electricals Private Limited; AYs: 2015-16 to 2020-21 interest in the subsequent assessment years and therefore, the addition cannot be made u/s 68 of the Act by relying on the decision of Hon'…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 4(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. AVIMA EXPORTS PRIVATE LIMITED, KOLKATA

Accordingly the ground No. 2 is dismissed by upholding the order of Ld

ITA 1439/KOL/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata11 Nov 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shripradip Kumar Choubey, Jm Dcit, Central Circle 4(3) Avima Exports Private Limited 4Th Ns Road, Dalhousie, Kolkata, 110, Shantipally, Vs. Kolkata-700107, West Bengal Kolkata-700001, West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aagca5857N Assessee By : Shri Manish Tiwari, Ar Revenue By : Shri Raja Sengupta, Dr Date Of Hearing: 03.09.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 11.11.2025

For Appellant: Shri Manish Tiwari, ARFor Respondent: Shri Raja Sengupta, DR
Section 131Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 68

…t be relied to make the addition . The Ld. CIT(A) relied on the decision of Kalasben Mangarlal Chokshi Vs. CIT reported in 220 CTR 138 (Guj) and CIT Vs. Kedar Khan & Sons(2013) 352 ITR 480(SC).The Ld. CIT(A) also relied on the decision of CIT Vs. Ms. Mayawati 338 ITR 563 (Del) to support her finding that the financial strength cannot be determined on the basis of parameters such as low income, lack of fixed assets in the balance sheet , turnover and rent payments etc. the Ld. CIT(A) thereafter in para 6.2.5 extracted the table mentioning therein the resources available with the lender companies in the form of Sha…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-4(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. VIVEK GUPTA, KOLKATA

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1557/KOL/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Oct 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI SONJOY SARMA (Judicial Member)

Section 131Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 195Section 250Section 40Section 68

…be relied to make the addition. The Ld. CIT(A) relied on the decision of Kalasben Mangarlal Chokshi Vs. CIT reported in 220 CTR 138 (Guj) and CIT Vs. Kedar Khan & Sons (2013) 352 ITR 480(SC). The Ld. CIT(A) also relied on the decision of CIT Vs. Ms. Mayawati 338 ITR 563 (Del) to support her finding that the financial strength cannot be determined on the basis of parameters such as low income, lack of fixed assets in the balance sheet, turnover and rent payments. the Ld. CIT(A) thereafter in para 6.2.7 extracted the table mentioning therein the resources available with the lender companies in the form of Share ca…

DEPUTY COMMSSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, 4(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. PRIVI EXPORTS PRIVATE LIMITED, KOLKATA

Accordingly the ground No. 2 is dismissed by upholding the order of Ld

ITA 1456/KOL/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI PRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY (Judicial Member)

Section 131Section 133ASection 250Section 68

…be relied to make the addition . The Ld. CIT(A) relied on the decision of Kalasben Mangarlal Chokshi Vs. CIT reported in 220 CTR 138 (Guj) and CIT Vs. Kedar Khan & Sons(2013) 352 ITR 480(SC). The Ld. CIT(A) also relied on the decision of CIT Vs. Ms. Mayawati 338 ITR 563 (Del) to support her finding that the financial strength cannot be determined on the basis of parameters such as low income, lack of fixed assets in the balance sheet , turnover and rent payments. the Ld. CIT(A) thereafter in para 6.2.5 extracted the table mentioning therein the resources available with the lender companies in the form of Share c…

INCOME TAX OFFICER, DELHI vs. MEGHA GARG, DELHI

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

ITA 3488/DEL/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Oct 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Amitabh Shukla, Accountnat Member [Assessment Year: 2013-14] Income Tax Officer, Megha Garg, 1707 E-2 Block Civic Centre, 160 Saraswati Vihar Vaishali, New Delhi-110002 Vs Pitampura, Delhi-110034 Pan-Aecpg7098C Appellant Respondent

Section 10(38)Section 147Section 68Section 69A

…was in any case impermissible as the assessee is an individual having no other business income and consequently not maintaining any books of accounts. Reliance in this regard was placed upon the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Ms. Mayawati 338 ITR 563 and of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Baladin Ram 71 ITR 427 (SC). The ld. Counsel submitted that it had acquired 8000 shares on 30.08.2011 from M/s Economy Suppliers Private Limited and payment of Rs.2,40,000/- was made utilizing banking channel. A copy of Axis Bank, account statement evidencing the transactions has been placed on record thro…

SAMRAT FINVESTORS PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CENT. CIR. 4(2), , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 1038/KOL/2025[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 Oct 2025AY 2016-2017

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shrigeorge Mathan, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Soumitra Choudhury, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanat Kumar Raha, DR
Section 131Section 143(3)Section 263Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM AND SHRIGEORGE MATHAN, JM ITA No.1035 to 1038/KOL/2025 (Assessment Year:2012-13, 2014-15 to 2016-17) Samrat Finvestors Private ITO, Ward 5(2) Limited 110, Shantipally, Aayakar 20/1, Maharshi Debendra Road, Bhawan Poorva, Kolkata-700107, Vs. 2nd Floor, Room No.13A, West Bengal Kolkata-700007, West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN No. AADCS4698G Assessee by : Shri Soumitra Choudhury, AR Revenue by : Shri Sanat Kumar Raha, DR Date of hearing: 27.09.2025 Date of pronouncement: 16.10.2025 O R D E R Per Rajesh Kumar, AM: These a…

SAMRAT FINVESTORS PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CENT. CIR. 4(2), , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 1037/KOL/2025[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 Oct 2025AY 2015-2016

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shrigeorge Mathan, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Soumitra Choudhury, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanat Kumar Raha, DR
Section 131Section 143(3)Section 263Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM AND SHRIGEORGE MATHAN, JM ITA No.1035 to 1038/KOL/2025 (Assessment Year:2012-13, 2014-15 to 2016-17) Samrat Finvestors Private ITO, Ward 5(2) Limited 110, Shantipally, Aayakar 20/1, Maharshi Debendra Road, Bhawan Poorva, Kolkata-700107, Vs. 2nd Floor, Room No.13A, West Bengal Kolkata-700007, West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN No. AADCS4698G Assessee by : Shri Soumitra Choudhury, AR Revenue by : Shri Sanat Kumar Raha, DR Date of hearing: 27.09.2025 Date of pronouncement: 16.10.2025 O R D E R Per Rajesh Kumar, AM: These a…

SAMRAT FINVESTORS PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CENT. CIR. 4(2), , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 1036/KOL/2025[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 Oct 2025AY 2014-2015

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shrigeorge Mathan, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Soumitra Choudhury, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanat Kumar Raha, DR
Section 131Section 143(3)Section 263Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM AND SHRIGEORGE MATHAN, JM ITA No.1035 to 1038/KOL/2025 (Assessment Year:2012-13, 2014-15 to 2016-17) Samrat Finvestors Private ITO, Ward 5(2) Limited 110, Shantipally, Aayakar 20/1, Maharshi Debendra Road, Bhawan Poorva, Kolkata-700107, Vs. 2nd Floor, Room No.13A, West Bengal Kolkata-700007, West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN No. AADCS4698G Assessee by : Shri Soumitra Choudhury, AR Revenue by : Shri Sanat Kumar Raha, DR Date of hearing: 27.09.2025 Date of pronouncement: 16.10.2025 O R D E R Per Rajesh Kumar, AM: These a…

Showing 1–20 of 73 · Page 1 of 4