CIT v. Nivedan Vanijya Niyojan Ltd.

263 ITR 623High Court2003#3305 most cited

What is CIT v. Nivedan Vanijya Niyojan Ltd. authority for?

An assessee must establish the identity, creditworthiness, and genuineness of subscribers to share capital. Furnishing income tax file numbers alone is insufficient to discharge this burden.

36

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2013 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Nivedan Vanijya Niyojan Ltd. · 263 ITR 623 · section 68 · share application money · identity of subscribers · creditworthiness · genuineness of transaction · unexplained cash credit · paper company · shell company · addition u/s 68 · accommodation entry

Also reported as

130 Taxmann 153

Sections most often in play

Section 133(6)Section 1961

Issues it is cited on

paper companyshell companysource of sourceshare application moneyaddition u/s 68section 133genuineness of the transactionsection 131accommodation entryunexplained cash creditsection 133(6)undisclosed income

Judgments citing CIT v. Nivedan Vanijya Niyojan Ltd.

ITO, Ward-10(4), Kolkata vs. M/S Positive Properties Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, appeal of revenue is dismissed

ITA 2274/KOL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata09 Jan 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am]

Section 68

…s shown by the company in its books of accounts and if the source cannot be explained properly the ITO may assess the sum as income of the company from undisclosed source." 7. The Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in CIT vs Nivedan Vanijya Niyojan Ltd. (2003) 263 ITR 623 (Cal) has held that where the assessee company did not produce the subscribers of its share capital when required to do so, it failed to establish the identity of the subscribers, prove their creditworthiness and the genuineness of the transaction and therefore addition u/s.68 was justified. In the said decision the Hon'ble Court has placed its r…

Forjet Leasing Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO 4(2)(3), Mumbai

In the result appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 3633/MUM/2015[1995-96]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Sept 2018AY 1995-96

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri. Manoj Kumar Singh, DR
Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 148Section 68Section 80I

…at the amount was received by cheque. In the case of Mangilal Jain vs. ITO (Mad.) 315 ITR 105 it was held that 'Mere proof of identity of .creditor or that transaction was by cheque, is not sufficient. In the case of CIT vs. Nivedan Vanijya Niyojan Ltd. (Cal) 263 ITR 623 it has been held that section 68 is applicable even to share application money - use of the words "any sum found to be credited in the books'" indicates that the section is widely worded and the AO is not precluded .from making enquiry as to the true nature and source thereof even if the sum is credited as share application money. I.T.A. No.3633…

Jasamrit Constructions P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO 6(3)(2), Mumbai

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

ITA 1091/MUM/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Feb 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Joginer Singh & Shri Rajesh Kumarm/S. Jasamrit Constructions Income Tax Officer-6(3)(2) Private Ltd. Room No. 503, 5Th Floor Flat No. 901, Building 'B' Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Ashok Tower, Near Itc Hotel Mumbai 400020 Parel, Mumbai 400017 Pan – Aabcj8295L Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Vijay MehtaFor Respondent: Shri Aarju Goradia
Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 68

…3 ITR 803 (Bom) a. Govindarajulu Mudaliar vs. CIT 34 ITR 807 (SC) xxi. VIP (P) Ltd. vs. CIT 265 ITR 202 (MP) xxii. CIT vs. Sophia Finance Ltd. 205 ITR 98 (Del) xxiii. CIT vs. Active Traders (P) Ltd. 214 ITR 583 (Cal) xxiv. CIT vs. Nivedan Vanijya Niyojan Ltd. 263 ITR 623 (Cal) xxv. CIT vs. Bhagwati Jewels Ltd. 201 ITR 461 (Del) xxvi. CIT vs. Prateek Finance and Investment Co. Ltd. 215 ITR 272 (Del) xxvii. Shankar Industries vs. CIT 114 ITR 689 (Cal) xxviii. Nanak Chandra Laxman Das vs. CIT 140 ITR 151(All) xxix. Hari Chand Virender Paul vs. CIT 140 ITR 148 (P&H) xxx. CIT vs. Biju Patnaik 160 ITR 674 (SC) xxxi. In…

Asst.CIT, Circle-9(1), Hyderabad vs. M/S S.K.R.Constructions, Suryapet

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

ITA 1878/HYD/2013[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad24 Jan 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Smt P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanassessment Year: 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri S. Rama RaoFor Respondent: Shri J. Siri Kumar
Section 143(3)Section 253(2)Section 40A(3)Section 68

…alia, held as under: M/s SKR Constructions. “ However, the entire amounts of such contract receipts cannot be treated as profit of the assessee as per the judicial decisions. Decision of Calcutta High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Nivedan Vanijya Niyojan Ltd. (263 ITR 623) and decision of Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Gurubachan Singh J. Juneja (302 ITR 63), support the said view. Under the circumstances, i am of the considered opinion that there is no justification for bringing the entire amounts being the difference between the Profit & Loss account and the 26AS statement, to the extent of Rs. 1,83,1…

Skr Constructions, Hyderabad vs. Addl.Commissioner of Income Tax, RG-9, Hyderabad

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

ITA 1819/HYD/2013[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad24 Jan 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Smt P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanassessment Year: 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri S. Rama RaoFor Respondent: Shri J. Siri Kumar
Section 143(3)Section 253(2)Section 40A(3)Section 68

…alia, held as under: M/s SKR Constructions. “ However, the entire amounts of such contract receipts cannot be treated as profit of the assessee as per the judicial decisions. Decision of Calcutta High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Nivedan Vanijya Niyojan Ltd. (263 ITR 623) and decision of Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Gurubachan Singh J. Juneja (302 ITR 63), support the said view. Under the circumstances, i am of the considered opinion that there is no justification for bringing the entire amounts being the difference between the Profit & Loss account and the 26AS statement, to the extent of Rs. 1,83,1…

ACIT, Bulandshahr vs. M/S Rama Dairy Products Ltd, Bulandshahr

In the result ground no.2 is dismissed

ITA 4509/DEL/2010[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Jan 2017AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri J.Sudhakar Reddy, A.M. & Shri Kuldip Singh, J.M. Ita No: 4492/Del/2010 Assessment Year 2005-06 Rama Dairy Products Ltd. Vs. Dy.Cit, Circle Bulandshahr Siyana Road Bulandshahr Bulandshahr Pan: Aaacr 9937 N

For Appellant: Sh. R.K.Gupta, C.AFor Respondent: Sh.F.R.Meena, Sr.D.R
Section 144Section 43B

…added to the income of the assessee u/s 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 in the light of the following judgements. CIT vs. Sophia Finance Limited(Del) 205 ITR 98 CIT vs. Active Traders P. Limited(Cal), 214 ITR 583 CIT vs. Nivedan Vanijya Niyojan Ltd., (Cal) 263 ITR 623 CIT vs. Bhagwati Jewels Ltd.(Del.) 201 ITR 461 2. Whether the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals) has erred in law and facts in reducing the addition of Rs.3,06,45,632/- made by the Assessing Officer on account of low GP to Rs.5,21,513/- without appreciating the facts that the books of accounts were not produced by the assessee and relevant…

M/S Rama Dairy Products Ltd., Bulandshahr vs. DCIT, Bulandshahr

In the result ground no.2 is dismissed

ITA 4492/DEL/2010[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Jan 2017AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri J.Sudhakar Reddy, A.M. & Shri Kuldip Singh, J.M. Ita No: 4492/Del/2010 Assessment Year 2005-06 Rama Dairy Products Ltd. Vs. Dy.Cit, Circle Bulandshahr Siyana Road Bulandshahr Bulandshahr Pan: Aaacr 9937 N

For Appellant: Sh. R.K.Gupta, C.AFor Respondent: Sh.F.R.Meena, Sr.D.R
Section 144Section 43B

…added to the income of the assessee u/s 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 in the light of the following judgements. CIT vs. Sophia Finance Limited(Del) 205 ITR 98 CIT vs. Active Traders P. Limited(Cal), 214 ITR 583 CIT vs. Nivedan Vanijya Niyojan Ltd., (Cal) 263 ITR 623 CIT vs. Bhagwati Jewels Ltd.(Del.) 201 ITR 461 2. Whether the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals) has erred in law and facts in reducing the addition of Rs.3,06,45,632/- made by the Assessing Officer on account of low GP to Rs.5,21,513/- without appreciating the facts that the books of accounts were not produced by the assessee and relevant…

ITO, New Delhi vs. M/S. Prakash Colour (P) Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the department is dismissed

ITA 1176/DEL/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Dec 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Smt. Beena Pillai, Jm Ita No. 1176/Del/2011 : Asstt. Year : 2007-08 Income Tax Officer, Vs M/S Prakash Colour (P) Ltd., 15A, 2Nd Floor, Sri Nagar Colony, Ward-14(3), New Delhi Near Bharat Nagar, New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacp5463B Assessee By : Sh. Ved Jain, Adv., Sh. Ashish Chadha & P. Srivastava, Cas Revenue By : Sh. F. R. Meena, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 29.09.2016 Date Of Pronouncement : 16.12.2016 Order Per N. K. Saini, Am: This Is An Appeal By The Department Against The Order Dated 01.12.2010 Of Ld. Cit(A)-Xvii, New Delhi.

For Appellant: Sh. Ved Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. F. R. Meena, Sr. DR
Section 132Section 143(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘F’, NEW DELHI Before Sh. N. K. Saini, AM and Smt. Beena Pillai, JM ITA No. 1176/Del/2011 : Asstt. Year : 2007-08 Income Tax Officer, Vs M/s Prakash Colour (P) Ltd., 15A, 2nd Floor, Sri Nagar Colony, Ward-14(3), New Delhi Near Bharat Nagar, New Delhi (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AAACP5463B Assessee by : Sh. Ved Jain, Adv., Sh. Ashish Chadha & P. Srivastava, CAs Revenue by : Sh. F. R. Meena, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 29.09.2016 Date of Pronouncement : 16.12.2016 ORDER Per N. K. Saini, AM: This is an appeal by the department against the order dated 01.12.2010…

DCIT CC-45, Mumbai vs. Paramshkti Distributors P. Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed, whereas appeal of the revenue is allowed in part in terms indicated hereinabove

ITA 9224/MUM/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Oct 2015AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Pawan Singh, Jm आमकय अऩीर सिं./Ita No.8748/Mum/2010 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2005-2006) M/S Paramshakti Distributors Pvt. Vs. Acit, Cent. Cir-45, Ltd., 501-B, Elegant Business Mumbai Park, Andheri-Kurla Road, J.B.Nagar, Andheri(E), Mumbai- 400059 स्थममी रेखम सिं./ जीआइआय सिं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aabcp 5835 C (अऩीरमथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. & आमकय अऩीर सिं./Ita Nos.9223&9224/Mum/2010 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Years :2005-06 & 2006-07) Acit, Cent. Cir-45, Mumbai Vs. M/S Paramshakti Distributors Pvt. Ltd., 501-B, Elegant Business Park, Andheri-Kurla Road, J.B.Nagar, Andheri(E), Mumbai-400059 स्थममी रेखम सिं./ जीआइआय सिं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aabcp 5835 C (अऩीरमथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. यनधमवरयती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Vijay Mehta यमजस्र् की ओर से /Revenue By :Shri Deepkant Prasad & Shri Nimesh Yadav सुनर्मई की तमयीख / Date Of Hearing : 26/08/2015 घोषणम की तमयीख/Date Of Pronouncement 09/10/2015 आदेश / O R D E R Per R.C.Sharma (A.M):

For Appellant: Shri Vijay MehtaFor Respondent: Shri Deepkant Prasad & Shri Nimesh Yadav
Section 143(3)Section 68

…stment Ltd’s judgment by Hon'ble Supreme Court; Hon'ble Calcutta High Court in a series of judgments reported in Hindustan Tea Trading Co. vs. CIT 263 ITR 289 (Cal); CIT vs. Ruby Traders & Exporters ltd. 263 ITR 300 (Cal); CIT vs. Nivedan Vanijya Niyojan Ltd. 263 ITR 623 (Cal) held that Hon’ble Supreme Court has not laid down any law and the provisions of section would squarely apply to share application money/share capital subscription and on the company's failure to satisfactorily explain the sum received, the same could be assessed as the company's income by virtue of the provisions of section 68 of the Act. T…

DCIT CC-45, Mumbai vs. Paramshkti Distributors P. Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed, whereas appeal of the revenue is allowed in part in terms indicated hereinabove

ITA 9223/MUM/2010[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Oct 2015AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Pawan Singh, Jm आमकय अऩीर सिं./Ita No.8748/Mum/2010 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2005-2006) M/S Paramshakti Distributors Pvt. Vs. Acit, Cent. Cir-45, Ltd., 501-B, Elegant Business Mumbai Park, Andheri-Kurla Road, J.B.Nagar, Andheri(E), Mumbai- 400059 स्थममी रेखम सिं./ जीआइआय सिं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aabcp 5835 C (अऩीरमथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. & आमकय अऩीर सिं./Ita Nos.9223&9224/Mum/2010 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Years :2005-06 & 2006-07) Acit, Cent. Cir-45, Mumbai Vs. M/S Paramshakti Distributors Pvt. Ltd., 501-B, Elegant Business Park, Andheri-Kurla Road, J.B.Nagar, Andheri(E), Mumbai-400059 स्थममी रेखम सिं./ जीआइआय सिं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aabcp 5835 C (अऩीरमथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. यनधमवरयती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Vijay Mehta यमजस्र् की ओर से /Revenue By :Shri Deepkant Prasad & Shri Nimesh Yadav सुनर्मई की तमयीख / Date Of Hearing : 26/08/2015 घोषणम की तमयीख/Date Of Pronouncement 09/10/2015 आदेश / O R D E R Per R.C.Sharma (A.M):

For Appellant: Shri Vijay MehtaFor Respondent: Shri Deepkant Prasad & Shri Nimesh Yadav
Section 143(3)Section 68

…stment Ltd’s judgment by Hon'ble Supreme Court; Hon'ble Calcutta High Court in a series of judgments reported in Hindustan Tea Trading Co. vs. CIT 263 ITR 289 (Cal); CIT vs. Ruby Traders & Exporters ltd. 263 ITR 300 (Cal); CIT vs. Nivedan Vanijya Niyojan Ltd. 263 ITR 623 (Cal) held that Hon’ble Supreme Court has not laid down any law and the provisions of section would squarely apply to share application money/share capital subscription and on the company's failure to satisfactorily explain the sum received, the same could be assessed as the company's income by virtue of the provisions of section 68 of the Act. T…

Parashakti Distributors P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT Cen Cir 45, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed, whereas appeal of the revenue is allowed in part in terms indicated hereinabove

ITA 8748/MUM/2010[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Oct 2015AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Pawan Singh, Jm आमकय अऩीर सिं./Ita No.8748/Mum/2010 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2005-2006) M/S Paramshakti Distributors Pvt. Vs. Acit, Cent. Cir-45, Ltd., 501-B, Elegant Business Mumbai Park, Andheri-Kurla Road, J.B.Nagar, Andheri(E), Mumbai- 400059 स्थममी रेखम सिं./ जीआइआय सिं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aabcp 5835 C (अऩीरमथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. & आमकय अऩीर सिं./Ita Nos.9223&9224/Mum/2010 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Years :2005-06 & 2006-07) Acit, Cent. Cir-45, Mumbai Vs. M/S Paramshakti Distributors Pvt. Ltd., 501-B, Elegant Business Park, Andheri-Kurla Road, J.B.Nagar, Andheri(E), Mumbai-400059 स्थममी रेखम सिं./ जीआइआय सिं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aabcp 5835 C (अऩीरमथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. यनधमवरयती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Vijay Mehta यमजस्र् की ओर से /Revenue By :Shri Deepkant Prasad & Shri Nimesh Yadav सुनर्मई की तमयीख / Date Of Hearing : 26/08/2015 घोषणम की तमयीख/Date Of Pronouncement 09/10/2015 आदेश / O R D E R Per R.C.Sharma (A.M):

For Appellant: Shri Vijay MehtaFor Respondent: Shri Deepkant Prasad & Shri Nimesh Yadav
Section 143(3)Section 68

…stment Ltd’s judgment by Hon'ble Supreme Court; Hon'ble Calcutta High Court in a series of judgments reported in Hindustan Tea Trading Co. vs. CIT 263 ITR 289 (Cal); CIT vs. Ruby Traders & Exporters ltd. 263 ITR 300 (Cal); CIT vs. Nivedan Vanijya Niyojan Ltd. 263 ITR 623 (Cal) held that Hon’ble Supreme Court has not laid down any law and the provisions of section would squarely apply to share application money/share capital subscription and on the company's failure to satisfactorily explain the sum received, the same could be assessed as the company's income by virtue of the provisions of section 68 of the Act. T…

CIT vs. Globus Securities & Finance Pvt Ltd

ITA/409/2012HC Delhi10 Dec 2013

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA

Section 68

…ITA 409/2012 Page 1 of 20 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + ITA 409/2012 Reserved on: 2nd December,2013 % Date of Decision: 10th December,2013 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX DELHI ..... Appellant Through Mr. Sanjeev Sabharwal, Sr. Standing Counsel versus GLOBUS SECURITIES & FINANCE PVT. LTD ..... Respondent Through Mr. Salil Kapoor with Mr. Sanat Kapoor, Mr. Vikas Jain and Ms. Sugandha Anand,…

Commissioner of Income Tax-II vs. Maf Academy P. Ltd

ITA-341/2012HC Delhi28 Nov 2013
Section 143(1)Section 148Section 260A(1)Section 68

…======================================================================= ITA 341/2012 Page 1 of 67 *IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment reserved on : 13th August, 2013 Judgment pronounced on: 28th November, 2013 + ITA 341/2012 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-II ..... Appellant Through Mr. N.P. Sahni with Mr. Ruchesh Sinha, Advocates. Versus MAF ACADEMY P. LTD. ..... Respondent Through Dr. Rakesh Gupta with Ms. Rani Kiyala and Mr. Rishabh Kapoor, Advocates.…

Commissioner of Income Tax-II vs. Maf Academy P. Ltd

ITA/341/2012HC Delhi28 Nov 2013
Section 143(1)Section 148Section 260A(1)Section 68

…======================================================================= ITA 341/2012 Page 1 of 67 *IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment reserved on : 13th August, 2013 Judgment pronounced on: 28th November, 2013 + ITA 341/2012 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-II ..... Appellant Through Mr. N.P. Sahni with Mr. Ruchesh Sinha, Advocates. Versus MAF ACADEMY P. LTD. ..... Respondent Through Dr. Rakesh Gupta with Ms. Rani Kiyala and Mr. Rishabh Kapoor, Advocates.…

CIT vs. Nr Portfolio Pvt Ltd

ITA/1019/2011HC Delhi22 Nov 2013

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA

Section 143(1)Section 144Section 147Section 68

…f r Reserved on: 14^'' August, 2013 % Date of Decision : 22"^* November, 2013 b $~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 1019/2011 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX Appellant Through Mr. Sanjeev Sabharwal, Sr. Standing Counsel. versus NR PORTFOLIO PVT LTD. Respondent Through Dr. Rakesh Gupta and Mr. RishabhKapoor, Advocates. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA SANJIV KHANNA, J. For detailed order see ITA 1018/2011, Commissioner ofIncome Tax VsNR Portfolio Pvt. Ltd. pronounced today. NOVEMBER 22"^ 2013 NA —. (SANJIV KHANNA) JUDGE 'Ojud , — (SANJEEV SAC…

Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Nr Portfolio Pvt Ltd

ITA/1018/2011HC Delhi22 Nov 2013
Section 143(1)Section 144Section 147Section 68

…ITA Nos. 1018/2011 & 1019/2011 Page 1 of 24 $~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 1018/2011 Reserved on: 14th August, 2013 % Date of Decision : 22nd November, 2013 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ..... Appellant Through Mr. Sanjeev Sabharwal, Sr. Standing Counsel. versus NR PORTFOLIO PVT LTD. ..... Respondent Through Dr. Rakesh Gupta and Mr. Rishabh Kapoor, Advocates. + INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 1019/2011…