How many judgments cite CIT v. Oasis Hospitalities P. Ltd.?

292 judgments on BharatTax cite CIT v. Oasis Hospitalities P. Ltd. (333 ITR 119), spanning 2011 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does CIT v. Oasis Hospitalities P. Ltd. come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 68, Section 143(3), Section 1961, Section 133(6), Section 147, Section 142(1).

CIT v. Oasis Hospitalities P. Ltd.

333 ITR 119High Court2011#268 most cited

What is CIT v. Oasis Hospitalities P. Ltd. authority for?

When explaining cash credits under Section 68, the assessee must establish the identity of the creditor, their creditworthiness or financial capacity, and the genuineness of the transaction. Merely proving identity does not discharge this initial onus, which shifts to the Assessing Officer once these three elements are prima facie proven.

292

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,314 Indian tax judgments — from 2011 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Oasis Hospitalities P. Ltd. · Section 68 · Income Tax Act 1961 · cash credits · onus of proof · identity creditworthiness genuineness · share application money · paper company · shifting onus

Also reported as

198 Taxmann 247238 CTR 4029 Taxmann.com 1792011 SCC OnLine DEL 506

Sections most often in play

Section 68 Section 143(3)Section 1961 Section 133(6)Section 147 Section 142(1)Section 132 Section 69C

Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

paper company creditworthiness of the creditor share capital and share premium source of source section 31 section 251(2)share application money entry operator section 251(1)(a)addition u/s 68 live link admission of additional evidence

Judgments citing CIT v. Oasis Hospitalities P. Ltd.

Sh. Dinesh Soin, Ludhiana vs. ACIT, Ludhiana

The appeals are partly allowed

ITA 306/CHANDI/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh29 Apr 2025AY 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Aditya Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Shri Rohit Sharma, CIT DR

Section 249Section 253Section 3Section 5

…er of an evidence. The assessee cannot be taxed and penalized just on the basis of suspicion in the mind of the AO. Reliance in his regard is placed on the following decisions:- i) Lalchand Bhagat Ambica Ram v CIT (37ITR 288) (SC) ii) CIT v. Paras Cotton Co. (288 ITR 211) (Raj.) iii) Faqir Chand Chaman Lai v. ACIT [(2004) 1 SOT 914 (Asr.)] [Appeal dismissed by P&H High Court in 262 ITR 295 and SLP dismissed by SC in 268 ITR 215(St)]; iv) Assam Tea Co. v. ITO [(2005) 92ITD 85 (Asr.) (SB)]; v) Jhantala Investments Limited v ACIT [(2000) 73 ITD 123 (Мит.)] 7. Further in this case assessment was made under section 15…

Kath Brothers, Jaipur vs. ACIT, Central Circle-3, Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 77/JPR/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur28 Apr 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Shrawan Kumar Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Anoop Singh, Addl. CIT

Section 115BSection 133ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 234ASection 69

…ed by the assessee. The A.O has not given any valid reasons for not accepting the cost shown by the assessee though he accepts that the method of accounting was mercantile. Hence, in our opinion, the deletion was justified. 2.3 In CIT v/s Oasis Hospitalities 333 ITR 119(Del) it has been held that In IT Appeal No. 2093 of 2010 and IT Appeal No. 2095 of 2010, the assessees filed copies of PAN, acknowledgement of filing IT returns of the share applicant companies and their bank account statements for the relevant period, i.e., for the period when the cheques were cleared. However, the parties were not produced in s…

Hermon Educational Society, Visakhapatnam vs. Income Tax Officer (Exemption Ward), Visakhapatnam

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 347/VIZ/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam19 Mar 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri G. Manjunatha & Shri K. Narasimha Chary

For Appellant: Shri C. Subrahmanyam, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. AR

Section 10Section 68

…eness of the transaction. In this regard, reliance is further 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.); Rajmandir Estates Private Limited vs. PCIT-386 ITR 162 (Cal)). Further, reliance is placed on the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Principal Commissioner of Income-tax (Central)-1 vs. NRA Iron & Steel (P.) Ltd. reported in [2019] 103 taxmann.com 48/262 Taxman 74/412 ITR 161 (SC). The Court gave out its verdict on 05th Marc…

The Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax -Central -1 vs. Jaguar Buildcon Pvt. Ltd

ITA/530/2023HC Delhi03 Mar 2025

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHWANT VARMA,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH VAIDYANATHAN SHANKAR

Section 133(1)(d)Section 133(6)Section 68

…estments made in share capital are genuine borrowings, since the facts are exclusively within the assessee's knowledge. 9.5. The Delhi High Court in CIT v. Oasis Hospitalities (P) Ltd. [CIT v. Oasis Hospitalities (P) Ltd., 2011 SCC OnLine Del 506 : (2011) 333 ITR 119] , held that: (SCC OnLine Del para 43) This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 10/03/2025 at 12:24:18 ITA 530/2023 & ITA 531/2023…

The Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax -Central -1 vs. Jaguar Buildcon Pvt. Ltd

ITA/531/2023HC Delhi03 Mar 2025

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH VAIDYANATHAN SHANKAR,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHWANT VARMA

Section 133(1)(d)Section 133(6)Section 68

Deepak Communication, Gandhi Nagar vs. ITO Ward 60(6), New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1387/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Feb 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri S Rifaur Rahmanिनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2008-09 बनाम Acit, Adhist Garment Export Pvt. Ltd. Central Circle-15, Vs. 48, Todarmal Road, Room No.353, Ara Centre, Bengali Market, New Delhi. Jhandewalan, New Delhi. Pan No. Aafca1526P अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 133Section 133(6)Section 147Section 68

…ITA No.1387/Del/2018 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “A” NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2008-09 बनाम ACIT, ADHIST GARMENT EXPORT PVT. LTD. CENTRAL CIRCLE-15, Vs. 48, TODARMAL ROAD, ROOM NO.353, ARA CENTRE, BENGALI MARKET, NEW DELHI. JHANDEWALAN, NEW DELHI. PAN No. AAFCA1526P अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Assessee by Shri Gautam Swaroop, Adv. Revenue by Shri Ajay Kumar Arora, Sr. DR सुनवाईक"तारीख/ Date of hearing: 28.05.2025 25.06.2025 उ"ोषणाक"तारीख/Pronouncement on आदेश /O R D E R PER C…

Pr. Commissioner Oflncome Tax Delhi - 5 vs. Mrs. Rowena Sharma

ITA/1220/2018HC Delhi11 Feb 2025

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH VAIDYANATHAN SHANKAR,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHWANT VARMA

Section 68Section 69Section 69ASection 80

…tments made in share capital are genuine borrowings, since the facts are exclusively within the assessee's knowledge. 9.5. The Delhi High Court in CIT v. Oasis Hospitalities (P) Ltd. [CIT v. Oasis Hospitalities (P) Ltd., 2011 SCC OnLine Del 506 : (2011) 333 ITR 119] , held that: (SCC OnLine Del para 43) ―43. … the initial onus is upon the assessee to establish three things necessary to obviate the mischief of Section 68 of the Act. These are: (i) identity of the investors; (ii) their creditworthiness/investments; and (iii) genuineness of the transaction. Only when these three ingredients are establish…

Deputy Commissioner O F Income Tax, Raipur vs. Balajee Loha Pvt. Ltd., Raipur

ITA 356/RPR/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur10 Feb 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No: 356/Rpr/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" Assessment Year: 2014-15)

For Appellant: Shri Amit M. Jain, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri S. L. Anuragi, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 68

…treated as undisclosed income in the hands of the Co. The addition, if at all, should be in the hands of the applicants if their creditworthiness cannot be proved." 36 DCIT vs Balajee Loha Pvt. Ltd., Raipur  In case of CIT vs. Oasis Hospitalities Pvt. Ltd. 333 ITR 119 (Del), it was held that "assessee company has filed copies of PAN, acknowledgment of returns of the share applicants and their bank accounts and statements of the relevant period, thus the primary onus was discharged by the assessee The appellant contends that now it is for the AO to disprove the credits by bringing adverse material. In holding a…

Income Tax Officer, Ward 4(1), Raipur vs. Bhagyaarna Gems and Jewellery Private Limited, Kolkata

ITA 12/RPR/2021[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur31 Jan 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.12/Rpr/2021 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13 The Income Tax Officer-4(1), Raipur (C.G.)

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Kumar Agrawal, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR &

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

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण "यायपीठ रायपुर म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, RAIPUR BENCH, RAIPUR BEFORE SHRI RAVISH SOOD, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ARUN KHODPIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.12/RPR/2021 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13 The Income Tax Officer-4(1), Raipur (C.G.) .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/s. M/s. Bhagyaarna Gems & Jewellery Pvt. Ltd. 202, Jessore Road, Kolkata-700 089 (W.B.) PAN: AAECT0981A ……""यथ" / Respondent Assessee by : Shri Sunil Kumar Agrawal, CA Revenue by : Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR & Smt. Anubhaa Tah. Goel, Sr. DR सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date of Hearing : 14.0…

ACIT, Cenral Circle-20, New Delhi vs. Rajesh Kaushik, Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 8530/DEL/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Nov 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Sh.S Rifaur Rahman & Sh. Sudhir Kumarassessment Year: 2016-17 Acit, Central Circle -20 Vs. Rajesh Kaushik Ara Centre-269A, 460/1A,Street No 17 F-2Jhandewalan, Shahdara Vishwas Nagar New Delhi Delhi Pan No.Alnpk4140R (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 142(1)Section 143Section 143(2)

…tted that the loan was received through regular banking channel. The assessee has proved the identity and creditworthiness of the lander and genuineness of the transactions. Reliance has placed on the following judgments; 1. CIT Vs. Oasis Hospitality P. Ltd. 333 ITR 119 (Del- HC) = [2011] 238 CTR 402 2. Abhik Jain Vs. ITO, (2012) 18 ITR 0497 (Delhi-Trib.) = [2013] 33 taxmann.com 577 3. ACIT Vs. Shyam Indus Power Solutions (P) Ltd. (2018) 62 ITR (Trib.) 0512 (Delhi)= [2018] 90 taxmann.com 424 7. We have heard the parties and perused the material available on record. 8. The ld. CIT(A) has deleted the addition made…

Heritage Hospitals Ltd, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle-11(1), New Delhi

ITA 4090/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Oct 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Anand Kumar Pandey, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sandeep Kumar Mishra, Sr. DR

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 68

…t worthiness of the subscriber companies could not be proved. 15. The Ld DR relied upon various judicial pronouncements as below: i) Lovely Exports Limited and ii) Divine Leasing and Finance Limited 299 ITR 268(Del) iii) CIT Vs. Oasis Hospitalities Pvt Ltd 333 ITR 119 iv) CIT vs. Nova Promoters and Finance Lease Pvt limited 342 ITR 169 Nivendan Vanijya Niyojay Limited Calcutta v) vi) Hindustan Tea Trading Company Limited;182 CTR 585(Cal) vii) M/ s Rathi Finlease Limited; 215 CTR 429(MP) viii) Dasrath Lal Agrawal, Ratlam vs Department Of Income Tax on 9 November, 2011 ITA 0.158/Ind/2009 ITAT Indore 16. In its…

Samarth Lifestyle Retailing Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur vs. DCIT, Circle-6, Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 621/JPR/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur17 Oct 2024AY 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri P. C. Parwal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Nargas, Addl. CIT

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

…and credible evidence, that the investments made in share capital are genuine borrowings, since the facts are exclusively within the assessee's knowledge. 8.5 The Delhi High Court in CIT v. Oasis Hospitalities (P) Ltd. [2011] 9 taxmann.com 179/198 Taxman 247/333 ITR 119, held that: "The initial onus is upon the assessce to establish three things necessary to obviate the mischief of Section 68. Those are: (i) identity of the investors (4) thoir creditworthiness/investments; and (iii) genuineness of the transaction. Only when these three ingredients are established prima facie, the department is required to undert…

Vashisth Builders and Engineers Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle- 26(1), New Delhi

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

ITA 6934/DEL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Oct 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sudhir Pareek, Judicialmember Vashisth Builders & Engineers Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Dcit, Circle-26(1), A-52, 2Nd Floor, Fiee Complex, New Delhi Okhla Industrial Area, Phase-2, New Delhi. (Pan: Aabcv3687L) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Advocate Revenue By : Shir Vivek K. Upadhyay, Sr. Dr. Date Of Hearing : 27.08.2024 Date Of Order : 11.10.2024 O R D E R Per S. Rifaur Rahman, Am : 1. This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals-10), New Delhi Dated 13.08.2018 For The Assessment Year 2012-13. Aggrieved With The Above Order, Assessee Is In Appeal Before Us By Raising Following Grounds Of Appeal :- I) The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Law & On Facts In Upholding The Assessment Order Passed By The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle 26(1), New Delhi Under Section 143(3) Of The Act, By Making An Addition Of Rs. 7,23,72,000/- Without Appreciating The Facts & 2 Circumstances Of The Case, The Law As Applicable & The Submissions & The Supporting Evidence Produced By The Appellant. Ii) The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Law & On Facts In Upholding The Disallowance / Addition Of Rs. 3,72,000/- Made By The Dcit As Notional Interest On Interest Free Loans Granted By The Appellant Out Of The Interest Expense Claimed By The Appellant Without Appreciating The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Law As Applicable & The Submissions & The Supporting Evidence Produced By The Appellant. Iii) The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Law & On Facts In Upholding The Addition Of Rs. 7,20,000/- Made By The Dcit By Treating The Share Capital Received By The Appellant During The Year As Unexplained Cash- Credit, Without Appreciating The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Law As Applicable & The Submissions & The Supporting Evidence Produced By The Appellant.

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh Gupta, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shir Vivek K. Upadhyay, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)

…arms (P) Ltd., ITA No.71/2015 (High Court of Delhi) 12  Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Gangeshwari Metal Pvt. Ltd. (2014) 361 ITR0010 (Delhi)  CIT vs Fair Finvest Ltd., (2013) 357 ITR 146, (High court of Delhi)  CIT vs Oasis Hospitalities (P) Ltd., (2011) 333 ITR 119, (High Court of Delhi)  CIT vs Value capital services (P) Ltd., (2008) 307 ITR 334 (High Court of Delhi)  CIT vs Winstral Petrochemicals (P) Ltd., (2011) 330 ITR 0603 (High Court of Delhi)  CIT vs Expo Globe India Ltd., (2014) 361 ITR 0147 (High Court of Delhi) Adverse observation of Ld. AO and Ld. CIT(A) are met as under: Adverse observation…

DCIT, Circle-6, Jaipur, Ncrb vs. Paradise Properties, Sarojni Marg, Jaipur

In the result appeal filed by the revenue is partly allowed

ITA 324/JPR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur11 Sept 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: The Ld. Cit(A).

For Appellant: Shri S. L. Poddar, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Kumar, CIT

Section 115BSection 143(3)Section 68

…. CIT [2003] 131 Taxman 155(High Court of Rajasthan, Jaipur 20-21 Bench) 6. CIT vs. R.S. Rathore[1996] 86 Taxman 20(High Court of Rajasthan)212 ITR 390 22-24 7. CIT vs. Oasis Hospitalities (P.) Ltd. [2011] 9 taxmann.com 179 (Delhi) (High Court 25-34 of Delhi)[333 ITR 119 (Delhi)] 8. Roshan Di Hatti vs. CIT [1977] 107 ITR 938 (Supreme Court of India) 35-43 9. Shankar Industries vs. CIT[1978] 114 ITR 689(High Court of Calcutta) 44-47 10. Hari Chand Virendra Pal Vs. CIT (High Court of Punjab and Haryana) [1982]11 48-50 Taxman 134 /140 ITR 148 11. CIT vs. Biju Patnaik[1986]26 Taxman 324 (SC)/[1986] 160 ITR 674(SC) 51…

Venkateshwara Wires Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 322/JPR/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur09 Sept 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: The Ld. Ao As Well As Before The Ld. Cit(A) As The Documents Submitted Was Only In Support Of Confirmations & Other Documents Already Submitted & No New Documents Were Submitted. 2. The Assessee Craves Your Indulgence To Add Amend Or Alter All Or Any Grounds Of Appeal Before Or At The Time Of Hearing.”

For Appellant: Sh. S. L. Poddar, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Anoop Singh, Addl. CIT

Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 68Section 801ASection 80I

…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. 322/JP/2024 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year: 2018-19 cuke Venkateswara Wires Pvt Ltd., Assistant Commissioner of Vs. E-55, Road No. 5, VKI Area, Income Tax, Jaipur Jaipur LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AACCV 5085 F vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Sh. S. L. Poddar, Adv. jktLo dh vksj…

Ebro India Pvt.Ltd., Delhi vs. ACIT Circle-7(1), Delhi

In the result, the ground no 4 raised by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1291/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: HeardITAT Delhi09 Sept 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar, CIT DR

Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144CSection 68

…IT return etc.  To the similar effect are the following decisions:  Orissa Corporation (P) Limited: 159 ITR 78 (SC)  CIT v. Dolphin Canpack Ltd.: 283 ITR 190 (Del.)  CIT v. Illac Investment (P) Ltd.: 287 ITR 135 (Del.)  CIT v. Oasis Hospitalities P. Ltd: 333 ITR 119 (Del.)  CIT v. Kamdhenu Steel and Alloys Ltd: 361 ITR 220 (Del.)  CIT v. Victor Electodes Ltd.: 329 ITR 271 (Del.)  CIT v. Nipuan Auto (P.) Ltd. 361 ITR 155 (Delhi)  CIT v. Sophia Finance Ltd.: 205 ITR 98 (Del)(FB)  Divine Leasing and Finance Ltd. &Ors: 299 ITR 268 (Del.) affirmed in Lovely Export (P) Ltd.: 319 ITR (St.) 5  CIT v. Dwarkadhi…

Surabhi Entertainment Private Limited ( Previously Known As Pearls Entertainment Private Limited), New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle-24(2), New Delhi

In the result, this appeal stands dismissed on merit

ITA 9736/DEL/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Sept 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 234ASection 68

…application money were not established/demonstrated beyond doubt. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of N. R. Iron and Steel Pvt. Ltd. SlP No. 29855 of 2018, referring to the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Oasis Hospitalities Pvt. Ltd. 333 ITR 119 (Del.) observed that merely proving the identity of the investor does not discharge the onus of the taxable in the capacity or creditworthiness has not been established. 10. In view of the above and following the ratio of above cited decisions, we are of the considered opinion that the 19 appellant/assessee failed to bring any material on the re…

Decent Industries P. Ltd., Bhopal vs. ITO-1(2), Bhopal

Appeal is partly allowed

ITA 356/IND/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Indore20 Aug 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani(Virtual Hearing) Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/S Decent Industries Ito-1(2), Private Ltd, Bhopal 5Th Floor, Corporate Park, बनाम/ Db City Area Hills, Vs. Opp. M.P. Nagar Zone I, Bhopal (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent) Pan: Aaeca6271G Assessee By Ms. Shilpa Gupta & Shri N.K. Gupta Revenue By Shri V.K. Singh, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 04.06.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 20.08.2024

Section 133ASection 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 14ASection 68

…old that initial onus is on the appellant to establish by cogent evidence the genuineness of the transaction, and credit-worthiness of the shareholders under Section cited below:-. (a) Hon. Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Oasis Hospitalities Pvt. Ltd. 333 ITR 119 (Delhi) (2011) held that:- “The initial onus is upon the assessee to establish three things necessary to obviate the mischief of Section 60. Those are: (i) identity of the investors; (ii) their creditworthiness/investments; and (iii) genuineness of the transaction. Only when these three ingredients are established prima facie, the department is r…

Nova Promoters and Finlease Pvt. Ltd., Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

ITA 3173/DEL/2014[2000-01]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Aug 2024AY 2000-01

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman & Ms.Madhumita Roynova Promoters & Vs. Ito, Ward 13(3) Finlease Pvt. Ltd. Ito Building, I.P. Estate 7, Kapil Vihar, Pitampura, Delhi – 34

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Anshul

Section 147Section 271(1)(c)Section 68

…above and the stand taken by the assessee before various authorities also establish the obstructionist and frivolous conduct on the part of the assessee. 4.10 The reliance placed by the AR on the decisions in the cases of CIT v. Oasis Hospitalities (P.) Lid. 333 ITR 119(DEL), Vijay Power Generators Limited v. ITO 180 Taxman 102 (Del)(Mag) and CIT v. Net Ram Ram Swarup 88 ITR 213 (ALL) are not applicable to the instant case. In the case of Oasis Hospitalities (P) Ltd. (supra) the assessee produced before the AO the 5 persons who had introduced the share capital in the company, whose statements were also recorded…

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

…oney & share premium were not established/demonstrated beyond doubt. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of N. R. Iron and Steel Pvt. Ltd. SlP No. 29855 of 2018, referring the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Oasis Hospitalities Pvt. Ltd. 333 ITR 119 (Del.) observed that merely proving the identity of the investor does not discharge the onus of the taxable in the capacity or creditworthiness has not been established. 10. In view of the above, we are of the considered opinion that the appellant/assessee failed to bring any material on the record to controvert the finding of the CIT(A). Hence,…