CIT v. Neo Poly Pack Pvt. Ltd.

217 ITR 4High Court1996#3789 most cited

What is CIT v. Neo Poly Pack Pvt. Ltd. authority for?

The High Court upholds the Assessing Officer's addition of unsecured loans when the assessee provides confirmation of accounts and informs of company name changes, with transactions conducted through banking channels.

31

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,314 Indian tax judgments — from 2011 to 2025.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Neo Poly Pack Pvt. Ltd. · 217 ITR 4 · unsecured loan · Sagarika Sea Craft Ltd. · confirmation of accounts · change of name · banking channel · AO addition

Sections most often in play

Section 10A(a)Section 10B(1)Section 10B(e)Section 11Section 12Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144C(13)

Issues it is cited on

related party transactionddttransactional net margin methodarms length pricesection 92bcup methodsection 144c(5)childmost appropriate methodrule of consistencysection 34arm's length price

Judgments citing CIT v. Neo Poly Pack Pvt. Ltd.

DCIT 5(2), Mumbai vs. Malabar Hill Club Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the revenue and cross objection of the assessee are hereby dismissed

ITA 6197/MUM/2012[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Oct 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri N.K. Pradhanassessment Year: 2009-10 Dcit-5(2), M/S Malabar Hill Club R. No.571, Aaykar Bhavan Limited, बनाम/ M.K. Road, Il Palazzo, B.K. Kher Vs. Mumbai-400020 Marg, Malabar Hill, Mumbai-400006 (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) P.A. No. Aaacw3868M

Section 144

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, मुंबई "यायपीठ, बी, मुंबई । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES “B”, MUMBAI "ी जो"ग"दर "संह, "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी एन. के. "धान, लेखा सद"य, के सम" Before Shri Joginder Singh, Judicial Member, and Shri N.K. Pradhan, Accountant Member Assessment Year: 2009-10 DCIT-5(2), M/s Malabar Hill Club R. No.571, Aaykar Bhavan Limited, बनाम/ M.K. Road, IL PALAZZO, B.K. Kher Vs. Mumbai-400020 Marg, Malabar Hill, Mumbai-400006 (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) P.A. No. AAACW3868M राज"व क" ओर से / Revenue by Shri Mohammed Rizwan-DR "नधा"रती क" ओर से / Assessee by Shri J.D. Mistri, Shri Niraj…

M/S. Kingpin Investment & Finance P. Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT Cir -9(2), Mumbai

ITA 309/MUM/2007[2001-2002]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jul 2016AY 2001-2002

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.309,1717 &1718/Mum/2007 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2001-2002,2002-03 & 2003-04)

For Appellant: Shri F.V. Irani
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI R.C. SHARMA, AM AND SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, JM आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.309,1717 &1718/Mum/2007 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2001-2002,2002-03 & 2003-04) M/s. Kingpin Investment & Finance Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax Pvt. Ltd Circle-9(2), बनाम/ Mandhana Manor-445, Mumbai. “C” Wing, Mogul Lane, Vs. Matunga(W), Mumbai-400 016. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. AABCH 7898H (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) : आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.1288,4447,1853 &1971/Mum/2007 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2001-2002,2002-03 & 2003-04) Dy. Commissio…

DCIT - 9(2), Mumbai vs. M/S. Kingpin Investment & Finance P. Ltd., Mumbai

ITA 1971/MUM/2007[2003-2004]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jul 2016AY 2003-2004

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.309,1717 &1718/Mum/2007 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2001-2002,2002-03 & 2003-04)

For Appellant: Shri F.V. Irani
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI R.C. SHARMA, AM AND SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, JM आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.309,1717 &1718/Mum/2007 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2001-2002,2002-03 & 2003-04) M/s. Kingpin Investment & Finance Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax Pvt. Ltd Circle-9(2), बनाम/ Mandhana Manor-445, Mumbai. “C” Wing, Mogul Lane, Vs. Matunga(W), Mumbai-400 016. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. AABCH 7898H (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) : आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.1288,4447,1853 &1971/Mum/2007 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2001-2002,2002-03 & 2003-04) Dy. Commissio…

ACIT - 9(2), Mumbai vs. M/S. Kingpin Investment & Finance P. Ltd., Mumbai

ITA 1853/MUM/2007[2002-2003]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jul 2016AY 2002-2003

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.309,1717 &1718/Mum/2007 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2001-2002,2002-03 & 2003-04)

For Appellant: Shri F.V. Irani
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI R.C. SHARMA, AM AND SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, JM आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.309,1717 &1718/Mum/2007 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2001-2002,2002-03 & 2003-04) M/s. Kingpin Investment & Finance Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax Pvt. Ltd Circle-9(2), बनाम/ Mandhana Manor-445, Mumbai. “C” Wing, Mogul Lane, Vs. Matunga(W), Mumbai-400 016. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. AABCH 7898H (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) : आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.1288,4447,1853 &1971/Mum/2007 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2001-2002,2002-03 & 2003-04) Dy. Commissio…

M/S. Kingpin Investment & Finance P. Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT Cir -9(2), Mumbai

ITA 1717/MUM/2007[2002-2003]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jul 2016AY 2002-2003

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.309,1717 &1718/Mum/2007 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2001-2002,2002-03 & 2003-04)

For Appellant: Shri F.V. Irani
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI R.C. SHARMA, AM AND SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, JM आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.309,1717 &1718/Mum/2007 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2001-2002,2002-03 & 2003-04) M/s. Kingpin Investment & Finance Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax Pvt. Ltd Circle-9(2), बनाम/ Mandhana Manor-445, Mumbai. “C” Wing, Mogul Lane, Vs. Matunga(W), Mumbai-400 016. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. AABCH 7898H (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) : आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.1288,4447,1853 &1971/Mum/2007 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2001-2002,2002-03 & 2003-04) Dy. Commissio…

DCIT - 9(2), Mumbai vs. M/S. Kingpin Investment & Finance P. Ltd., Mumbai

ITA 1288/MUM/2007[2001-2002]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jul 2016AY 2001-2002

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.309,1717 &1718/Mum/2007 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2001-2002,2002-03 & 2003-04)

For Appellant: Shri F.V. Irani
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI R.C. SHARMA, AM AND SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, JM आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.309,1717 &1718/Mum/2007 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2001-2002,2002-03 & 2003-04) M/s. Kingpin Investment & Finance Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax Pvt. Ltd Circle-9(2), बनाम/ Mandhana Manor-445, Mumbai. “C” Wing, Mogul Lane, Vs. Matunga(W), Mumbai-400 016. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. AABCH 7898H (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) : आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.1288,4447,1853 &1971/Mum/2007 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2001-2002,2002-03 & 2003-04) Dy. Commissio…

M/S. Sivanandha Mills Ltd., Coimbatore vs. DCIT, Coimbatore

In the result, ITA No.2106/Mds/13 is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2106/CHNY/2013[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 Jun 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri G. Pavan Kumar

For Appellant: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Milind Madhukar Bhusari, CIT
Section 143Section 143(1)

…of commission in his income tax returns and same was accepted by the department, disallowance of such commission while computing capital gain in assessee’s hands was not justified. 29 - - ITA 1216 & 2106/13 (iv) It was held in Dhansiram Agarwala vs. CIT 217 ITR 4 (Gau) that where the genuineness and regularity of the accounts have not been challenged, the accounts are prima facie proof of the entries and the correctness thereof under section 34 of the Evidence Act, 1872. 8. Regarding business lull, it was submitted that the assessee could not carry on its business, owing to factors beyond its control, as…

Sivanandha Mills Limited, Coimbatore vs. ACIT, Coimbatore

In the result, ITA No.2106/Mds/13 is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1216/CHNY/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 Jun 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri G. Pavan Kumar

For Appellant: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Milind Madhukar Bhusari, CIT
Section 143Section 143(1)

…of commission in his income tax returns and same was accepted by the department, disallowance of such commission while computing capital gain in assessee’s hands was not justified. 29 - - ITA 1216 & 2106/13 (iv) It was held in Dhansiram Agarwala vs. CIT 217 ITR 4 (Gau) that where the genuineness and regularity of the accounts have not been challenged, the accounts are prima facie proof of the entries and the correctness thereof under section 34 of the Evidence Act, 1872. 8. Regarding business lull, it was submitted that the assessee could not carry on its business, owing to factors beyond its control, as…

Nuclear Power Corporation of India Ltd, Mumbai vs. DDIT (It) RG 4(2), Mumbai

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 733/MUM/2011[]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Feb 2016
For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Jasbir Chauhan
Section 195(2)Section 254(1)Section 44Section 44B

…अिधकरण, ‘एल’ खंडपीठ आयकर आयकर अपीलीय अपीलीय अिधकरण खंडपीठ मुंबई मुंबई आयकर आयकर अपीलीय अपीलीय अिधकरण अिधकरण खंडपीठ खंडपीठ मुंबई मुंबई INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,MUMBAI “L” BENCH सव"ी सव"ी सव"ी राजे"" सव"ी राजे"" राजे"", लेखा राजे"" लेखा लेखा सद"य लेखा सद"य सद"य एवं सद"य एवं एवं राम लाल नेगी एवं राम लाल नेगी राम लाल नेगी, , , , "याियक सद"य राम लाल नेगी "याियक सद"य "याियक सद"य "याियक सद"य Before S/Sh. Rajendra,Accountant Member & Ram Lal Negi,Judicial Member आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं/.ITA No.6394/Mum/08 ,िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष"/Assessment Year-Not Applicable आयकर आयकर अपील अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" Dy…

Dy. Director of I-Tax (Int. Tax)-4(2), Mumbai vs. M/S. Nuclear Power Corpn. of India Ltd., Mumbai

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 6394/MUM/2008[]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Feb 2016
For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Jasbir Chauhan
Section 195(2)Section 254(1)Section 44Section 44B

…अिधकरण, ‘एल’ खंडपीठ आयकर आयकर अपीलीय अपीलीय अिधकरण खंडपीठ मुंबई मुंबई आयकर आयकर अपीलीय अपीलीय अिधकरण अिधकरण खंडपीठ खंडपीठ मुंबई मुंबई INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,MUMBAI “L” BENCH सव"ी सव"ी सव"ी राजे"" सव"ी राजे"" राजे"", लेखा राजे"" लेखा लेखा सद"य लेखा सद"य सद"य एवं सद"य एवं एवं राम लाल नेगी एवं राम लाल नेगी राम लाल नेगी, , , , "याियक सद"य राम लाल नेगी "याियक सद"य "याियक सद"य "याियक सद"य Before S/Sh. Rajendra,Accountant Member & Ram Lal Negi,Judicial Member आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं/.ITA No.6394/Mum/08 ,िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष"/Assessment Year-Not Applicable आयकर आयकर अपील अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" Dy…

Dy.Dir. of I.T vs. Shanti Devi Progressive Edu.Socy

ITA - 93 / 1999HC Delhi10 Feb 2011
Section 10(22)

…was so even for the subsequent years, but sought to contend that neither the principle of res judicata nor the rule of estoppel is applicable to the assessment proceedings in view of the observations in Dhansiram Agarwalla v. Commissioner of Income-Tax; 217 ITR 4 (Gauhati). It was, however, held that the rule of consistency does apply to the proceedings. The basic principle advanced was that the tax concessions afforded to the Institutions like the respondent/assessee involved sacrifice of public revenue and thus the concessions should not be abused. If the donations received by the respondent/asses…