How many judgments cite CIT v. Nipun Builders & Developers?

264 judgments on BharatTax cite CIT v. Nipun Builders & Developers (350 ITR 407), spanning 2013 to 2025.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does CIT v. Nipun Builders & Developers come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 68, Section 133(6), Section 142(1), Section 143(3), Section 131, Section 148.

CIT v. Nipun Builders & Developers

350 ITR 407High Court2013#310 most cited

What is CIT v. Nipun Builders & Developers authority for?

For any sum credited in an assessee's books, including share application money, the assessee must prove the identity and creditworthiness of the creditor and the genuineness of the transaction. Failure to discharge this onus under Section 68 renders the amount taxable.

264

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2013 to 2025.

Also referred to as

CIT v Nipun Builders & Developers · Nipun Builders · Section 68 · share application money · unexplained credits · identity of creditor · creditworthiness of creditor · genuineness of transaction · onus on assessee · paper company · unsecured loans

Sections most often in play

Section 68 Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 131 Section 148 Section 1961 Section 69C

Issues it is cited on

paper company share capital and share premium creditworthiness of the creditor section 31 source of source section 251(2)principal officer live link section 251(1)(a)share application money entry operator admission of additional evidence

Judgments citing CIT v. Nipun Builders & Developers

Kangra Valley Garden Hotels Private Limited, Kangra vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward Dharamshala, Himachal Pradesh, Dharamshala

Appeal of the assessee is allowed as and by

ITA 602/CHANDI/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh18 Dec 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: This Tribunal As & By Way Of Second Appeal.

For Appellant: Shri Mayank Aggarwal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Rohit Sharma, CIT DR (Virtual)

Section 127(2)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 250Section 253

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण,च"डीगढ़ "यायपीठ , च"डीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH BENCH ‘A’ CHANDIGARH BEFORE: SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI PARESH M. JOSHI, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ ITA Nos.600, 601 & 602/CHD/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / A.Ys : 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 Kangra Valley Garden Hotels Pvt. Ltd., The ITO, बना Chak Ban Rakh Tea Estate, Dharamshala (HP). म Near Tharoat Village, VPO Charri, VS Tehsil-Shahpur, Distt. Kangra (HP). "थायी लेखा सं./PAN /TAN No: AADCK8100B अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee by : Shri Mayank Aggarwal, Advocate राज"व…

Kangra Valley Garden Hotels Private Limited, Kangra vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward Dharamshala, Himachal Pradesh, Dharamshala

Appeal of the assessee is allowed as and by

ITA 601/CHANDI/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh18 Dec 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: This Tribunal As & By Way Of Second Appeal.

For Appellant: Shri Mayank Aggarwal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Rohit Sharma, CIT DR (Virtual)

Section 127(2)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 250Section 253

Kangra Valley Garden Hotels Private Limited, Kangra vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward Dharamshala, Himachal Pradesh, Dharamshala

Appeal of the assessee is allowed as and by

ITA 600/CHANDI/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh18 Dec 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: This Tribunal As & By Way Of Second Appeal.

For Appellant: Shri Mayank Aggarwal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Rohit Sharma, CIT DR (Virtual)

Section 127(2)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 250Section 253

Ags Developers Pvt Ltd, Jasola Delhi vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 1 (4), New Delhi

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

ITA 2185/DEL/2024[2008-2009]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Oct 2024AY 2008-2009

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat[Assessment Year : 2008-09] Ags Developers Pvt.Ltd., Vs Ito, H.No.47, Pocket Ii, Ward -1(4), Near Appollo Hospital, Jasola, New Delhi. New Delhi-110076. Pan-Aafca1795G Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Sandeep Goel, Adv. Respondent By Shri Siddharth B.S. Meena, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 04.09.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 18.10.2024

Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 68

…O to establish that Delhi money had come from assessee's coffers. Hon’ble CIT Vs Nipun Builders The point at which the initial onus on the assessee to Jurisdictional and Developers P Ltd prove the unexplained credit would stand discharged High Court of [2013] 350 ITR 407 depends upon the facts and circumstances of each Delhi [Delhi] case. Hon’ble Charan Singh Vs Section 101, 102 of Indian Evidence Act, make it Supreme Court Chander Bhan Singh clear that initial onus is on person who substantially 1988 SC 637 asserts a claim. If the onus is discharged by him and a case is made out, the onus shifts on the deponent.…

Balhanuman Commodeal Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-5(4), Kolkata

ITA 116/KOL/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 Oct 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rakesh Mishraassessment Year: 2012-13

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Vineet Kumar, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR

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

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAKESH MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2012-13 Balhanuman Commodeal Pvt. I.T.O., Ward-5(4), Kolkata, Ltd., Aaykar Bhawan, P-7, 7, Red Cross Place, 4th Floor, Vs Chowringhee Square, Kolkata - 700001 Kolkata - 700069 (PAN: AAECB5704H) (Appellant) (Respondent) Present for: Appellant by : None Respondent by : Shri Vineet Kumar, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 08.07.2024 Date of Pronouncement : 03.10.2024 O R D E R PER RAKESH MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: This appeal filed by the assessee is against t…

Saket Agarwal, Jaipur vs. ITO Ward 2(3) Jaipur, Jaipur

In the result appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 646/JPR/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur01 Oct 2024AY 2014-15

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

For Appellant: Ms. Satwika Jhan, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Alka Gautam (CIT) a

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 41(1)

…de through banking channels are adequately answered by the Assessing Officer. Further, reliance is placed on the issue of payments by cheque does not establish genuineness of the transaction, on following judgments. 1. CIT-v-Raipur Builder & Developers (2013) 350 ITR 407 (Del.) 2. Sh. Nemichand Kothare -v- CIT (2003) 264 ITR-254 (Gau). 5.1.16. It is also relevant that the appellant had failed to provide even the basic information like the permanent Account Number which could have helped the Assessing Officer to verify the persons whose correct addresses were not provided by the appellant. The addresses provided b…

M/S Toplink Commerce Limited, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward 10(2), Kolkata

ITA 1413/KOL/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata09 Sept 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Rakesh Mishraassessment Year: 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Ankit Jalan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Subhendu Datta, CIT, DR

Section 131Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 250Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI RAKESH MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/s. Toplink Commerce Income Tax Officer, Ward- Limited 10(2), Kolkata Vs Jatragachi, New Town, P.O. Ghuni, Kolkata-700060. (PAN: AADCT9277C) (Appellant) (Respondent) Present for: Appellant by : Shri Ankit Jalan, Advocate Respondent by : Shri Subhendu Datta, CIT, DR Date of Hearing : 10.06.2024 Date of Pronouncement : 09.09.2024 O R D E R PER RAKESH MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: This appeal filed by the assessee is against the order of the Ld. Commission…

Winsher Vinimay Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward - 9(2), Kolkata

ITA 1393/KOL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata06 Aug 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Rakesh Mishraassessment Year: 2012-13

For Appellant: N o n eFor Respondent: Shri Bibekananda Madhu, JCIT, Sr. DR

Section 131Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 68

…1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI RAKESH MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2012-13 Winsher Vinimay Pvt. Ltd. Income Tax Officer, Ward-9(2), 6, Raghunandan Lane, Vs. Kolkata. Kolkata-700007. (PAN: AAACW8336N) (Appellant)(Respondent) Present for: Appellant by : N o n e Respondent by : Shri Bibekananda Madhu, JCIT, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 08.05.2024 Date of Pronouncement : 06.08.2024 O R D E R PER RAKESH MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: This appeal filed by the assessee is against the order of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, K…

ITO -24(2)(1), Mumbai, Piramal Chambers vs. Kailash Chandra Gupta, HUF, Mumbai

ITA 4013/MUM/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Jul 2024AY 2012-13

Section 10(38)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 148

…n 68 by relying on various decisions like N.R. Portfolio Pvt. Ltd., A Govindarajulu Mudaliar Vs. CIT 205 ITR 802 (SC), Full Bench decision of Sophia Finance Ltd. 205 ITR 98 (Del), Nova Promoters Finlease (P) Ltd. 342 ITR 169 (Del), CIT Vs. Nipun Builders Ltd. 350 ITR 407 and held that mere issuance of cheque and providing bank detail would not be sufficient to discharge the liability of assessee in view of the link between entry providers and incriminating evidence. In this case of Swati Bajaj, Hon'ble Kolkata High Court has mentioned that several assessees who were involved in this penny stock scam all over the…

Kaushik Chandravadan Parikh, Mumbai vs. NFAC, Delhi

ITA 2064/MUM/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Jul 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal (Jm) & Shri Omkareshwar Chidara (Am)

Section 10(38)Section 132Section 68

…ons like N.R. Portfolio Pvt. Ltd., A Govindarajulu 16 Kaushik Chandravadan Parikh Mudaliar Vs. CIT 205 ITR 802 (SC), Full Bench decision of Sophia Finance Ltd. 205 ITR 98 (Del), Nova Promoters Finlease (P) Ltd. 342 ITR 169 (Del), CIT Vs. Nipun Builders Ltd. 350 ITR 407 and held that mere issuance of cheque and providing bank detail would not be sufficient to discharge the liability of assessee in view of the link between entry providers and incriminating evidence. In this case of Swati Bajaj, Hon'ble Kolkata High Court has mentioned that several assessees who were involved in this penny stock scam all over the…

M/S. Qns Castings Pvt. Ltd., Muzaffarnagar vs. ITO, Muzaffarnagar

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 3554/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Jul 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 250(4)Section 68

…ent. Further reliance is put on the decisions of the Hon'ble High Courts in the cases of Titan Securities Itd. (2013) 357 ITR 184 (Delhi), Empire Builtech Pvt. Ltd. 366 ITR 110 (Delhi), Nova Promoters & Finlease Pvt. Ltd. (Delhi), Nipun Builders & Developers 350 ITR 407 (Delhi), Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sumati Dayal vs. CIT 241 ITR 801, Ridhi Promoters Pvt. Ltd. 58 Taxman.com 367 (Delhi).’ 18. After going through the ratio of above decisions as referred above it is noted that on the facts of the present case, the appellant has failed to prove identity, creditworthiness and genuineness of transaction…

ACIT, Circle - 19(1), New Delhi vs. Redkite Capital P. Ltd., New Delhi

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 6742/DEL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 May 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: SHRI G.S. PANNU, HON'BLE (Vice President), SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri M.P. Rastogi, CAFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardhan, Sr. DR

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES : F : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI G.S. PANNU, HON’BLE VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2012-13 ITO, Vs Red Capital P. Ltd., Ward-21(2), 4852/24, Ist Floor, New Delhi. Ansari Road, Darya Ganj, Delhi – 110 002. PAN: AAECR8359L (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri M.P. Rastogi, CA Revenue by : Shri Vivek Vardhan, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 18.03.2024 Date of Pronouncement : .05.2024 ORDER PER ANUBHAV SHARMA, JM: This appeal is preferred by the Revenue against the order dated 01.08.2018 of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appe…

Amarpadma Credits Private Limited, Jodhpur vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1)(1), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 1/AHD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad22 May 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: MRS. ANNAPURNA GUPTA (Accountant Member), SHRI SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Baid, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ankit Jain, Sr. DR

Section 133Section 250Section 40A(3)Section 68

…e of the assessee. If onus is not discharged to the satisfaction of the AO, then the amount of credit would be treated as income without anything further to be done. Further, reliance is placed on the decisions of CIT vs. Nipun Builders and Developers P. Ltd.-350 ITR 407(Del); CIT vs. Nova Promoters and Finlease (P) Ltd. - 342 ITR 169 (Del.); CIT vs. Oasis Hospitalities Pvt. Ltd. 333 ITR 119 (Del.); and - Rajmandir Estates Private Limited vs. PCIT-386 ITR 162 (Cal)]. 5.5.1 In this case, it is clear that the appellant has not been able to discharge its onus to prove the nature and source of impugned credits to the…

Balgopal Merchants Pvt Ltd vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax 2 Kolkata

Accordingly, the appeal fails and is dismissed

ITAT/232/2023HC Calcutta13 May 2024

Bench: THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE T.S SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

Section 131Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 260A

…ng all the details, the assessing officer did not advert to the same. In this regard, the reply sent by the assessee to the notice under Section 142(1) annexed to the 1 (1978) 114 ITR 689 2 (2013) 350 ITR 407 3 (2022) 446 ITR 56 (Cal) ITAT NO. 232 OF 2023 REPORTABLE Page 11 of 26 supplementary affidavit in page 47 was referred to stating that the details called for were fully furnished. The shareholder’s response was also referred to which is annexed to the supplementary affidavit in page 13 and 14 and in pages 27 to 30. Therefore, i…

Spectrum Foods Limited, Jaipur vs. Income Tax Officer, Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 38/JPR/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur08 Apr 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Sh. S. L. Poddar, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Anup Singh (Addl. CIT)

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”B” JAIPUR Mk0 ,l- lhrky{eh] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh jkBksM deys'k t;UrHkkbZ] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 38/JP/2024 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years : 2010-11 cuke M/s Spectrum Foods Limited The Income Tax Officer, Vs. L-5, B-II, Surya House, Krishna Jaipur Marg, C-Scheme, Jaipur LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AADCS 3704 R vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Sh. S. L. Poddar, Adv. jktLo dh…

Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi-7 vs. M/S Paramount Propbuild Pvt. Ltd

ITA/247/2023HC Delhi19 Mar 2024

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHWANT VARMA

Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 263

…2024:DHC:2211-DB ITA 247/2023 Page 1 of 20 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment reserved on: 06 March 2024 Judgment pronounced on:19 March 2024 + ITA 247/2023 PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI-7 ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Puneet Rai, SSC with Mr. Ashvini Kumar, Mr. Rishab Nangia & Mr. Nikhil Jain, Advs. Versus…

Snr Electronics Ltd, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward - 24(1), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 937/DEL/2020[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Feb 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. Kul Bharatdr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Ms. Deepti Chandola, Sr. DR

Section 143Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 292CSection 68Section 69C

…s of any of the aforesaid creditor companies to prove their physical existence. Similar view has been taken by Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in the case CIT vs. Youth Construction Pvt. Ltd., 357 ITR 197 and CIT vs. Nipun Builders and Developers Pvt. Ltd., 350 ITR 407, wherein, it has been held that onus is on assessee to prove the identity of share applicants, failing which it has to be concluded that the 14 SNR Electronics Ltd. assessee company has introduced its own money through non- existing companies using the banking channels in the shape of share application money. In view of above, it is clear that th…

New Leaf Home P.Ltd, Faridabad vs. ITO, Ward-18(2), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal is treated as partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2485/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Nov 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year: 2014-15 New Leaf Home P. Ltd. Vs. Ito, Ward-18(2) House No. 352, New Delhi. Sector-21 D, Nit Faridabad, Near Jiva Public School, Faridabad, Haryana, Pin : 121001 Pan Aadcn7291C (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Salil Aggarwal, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Anita Meena, Sr.DR

Section 68

…INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “E”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS. ASTHA CHANDRA, JUDICIAL MEMBER Asstt. Year: 2014-15 New Leaf Home P. Ltd. Vs. ITO, Ward-18(2) House No. 352, New Delhi. Sector-21 D, NIT Faridabad, Near Jiva Public School, Faridabad, Haryana, Pin : 121001 PAN AADCN7291C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by: Shri Salil Aggarwal, Sr. Advocate Shri Shailesh Gupta, Advocate, Shri Madhur Aggarwal, Advocate Department by: Ms. Anita Meena, Sr.DR Date of Hearing: 04.09.2023 Date of 21.11.2023 pronouncement: O R D E R PER ASTHA CHANDRA, JM The appeal filed by…

ITO, WD-5(1), Kolkata vs. M/S Safeline Marketing Pvt. Ltd, Kolkata

ITA 20/KOL/2021[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 Oct 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon’Ble & Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Surana, A/RFor Respondent: Shri S. Datta, CIT, D/R

Section 250Section 68

…| आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण "यायपीठ, कोलकाता | IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, HON’BLE VICE PRESIDENT & DR. MANISH BORAD, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No. 20/Kol/2021 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Income Tax Officer, Ward-5(1), M/s. Safeline Marketing Pvt. Ltd. Kolkata Vs 3rd Floor, R. No. 5 16, India Exchange Place, Dalhousie Kolkata - 700001 [PAN: AAOCS7729P] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Sunil Surana, A/R Revenue by : Shri S. Datta, CIT, D/R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date of Hearing : 26/09/2023 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date of Pronouncement: 16/10/2023 आ…

ACIT, CC- 30, New Delhi vs. J H Jewellers LLP, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is dismissed

ITA 809/DEL/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Oct 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & M.Balaganeshassessment Year: 2016-17 The Dcit, Central Circle-30, New Delhi M/S. J H Jewellers Llp, 13, Sunder Nagar Market, Kasturba Vs. Nagar, South East, Delhi 110003 Pan Aacfj 3285 G (Appellant) (Respondent) For Revenue: Shri Waseem Arshad, Cit(Dr) For Assessee: Shri U.N Marwah, Ca Shri Parveen Goel, Adv. Date Of Hearing : 23.08.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 13.10.2023 Order Per Chandra Mohan Garg, J.M. This Appeal Has Been Filed Against The Order Cit(A)-30, New Delhi Dated 25.03.2021 For A.Y. 2016-17. 2. The Grounds Have Been Raised By The Revenue Are As Follows:- 1. The Cit(A) Has Erred In Law & On The Facts In Deleting The Rs.11,24,76,000/- Additions Of Rs. 32,50,00,000/- Made U/S 68 Of The It Act 1961. 2. The Cit(A) Has Erred In Law & On The Facts Of The Case Considering That As Per The Balance Sheet Of These Companies As On 31.03.2016, The Said Fund Were Available In The Balance Sheet Of All The Four Companies Under The Head "Cash & Cash Equivalents" As On 31.03.2015 Which Are Now Reflected In Current Investment In I.E. Investment As Capital In The Appellant Firm As On31.03.2016. Further, Relying On The Submission Of The Assessee That The Said Four Companies Introduced Funds In The Ay 2008-09, The Case Of Maharaja Tie Up, Dynamic Enclave & Shivshakti Commercial Pt Ltd Were Assessed W/S 147 Of The Act For A.Y. 2008-09 Accepting The Share Capital/Share Premium.

For Appellant: Shri U.N Marwah, CAFor Respondent: Shri Waseem Arshad, CIT(DR)

Section 68

…urt in the case of PCIT vs. NRA Iron & Steel P Ltd. arising out of SLP(Civil) No. 29855 of 2018 dated 05.03.2019. The ld. CIT(DR) has also placed reliance on the judgments of Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in the case of CIT vs Nipun Builders & Developers P Ltd. 350 ITR 407 (Del) and in the case of CIT vs Frostair (P) Ltd. reported as 210 Taxmann 221 (Del) and submitted that the conclusion of ld. CIT(A) deleting the addition may kindly be set aside by restoring that of the Assessing Officer. 6. Replying to the above, the ld. Assessee Representative (AR) submitted that the case laws relied by the ld. CIT(DR) pertain…