CIT v. Orchid Industries Pvt. Ltd.

397 ITR 136High Court2017#402 most cited

What is CIT v. Orchid Industries Pvt. Ltd. authority for?

Mere non-compliance with summons issued under Section 131 does not automatically disprove a transaction, and the Assessing Officer cannot disregard other documentary evidence furnished by the assessee when making additions under Section 68.

222

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2018 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Orchid Industries Pvt. Ltd. · Orchid Industries · Section 68 · Section 131 · share application money · cash credit · onus of proof · burden of proof · summon non-compliance · documentary evidence · genuineness of transaction · existence of creditor

Also reported as

88 Taxmann.com 502

Sections most often in play

Section 68Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 131Section 148Section 69CSection 153A

Issues it is cited on

source of sourcecreditworthiness of the creditorsummons under section 131onus of proofsection 131(1)share application moneyshare capital and share premiumpermanent account numbersection 158bbshell companyaddition u/s 68genuineness of the transaction

Judgments citing CIT v. Orchid Industries Pvt. Ltd.

Income Tax Officer, Aayakar Bhawan, Poorva vs. Amodini Vyapar Pvt Ltd, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1481/KOL/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Dec 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm Amodini Vyapar Pvt. Ltd. Income Tax Officer, Kalpanalaya, Avirampur, Po- 7Th Floor, Nadt Building, Aaykar Bhavan Poorva, 110 Shantipally, Budge Budge, Vs. Kolkata-700107 Kolkata-700137, West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aacca2332G Assessee By : Shri Sunil Surana, Ar Revenue By : Shri Pradip Kumar Biswas, Dr Date Of Hearing: 26.11.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 31.12.2024

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Surana, ARFor Respondent: Shri Pradip Kumar Biswas, DR
Section 131Section 131(1)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 14ASection 68Section 68o

…e AO in the summons issued u/s. 131 of the Act were duly complied. The ld AR thus heavily defended the appellate order by relying on the following decisions: (i) CIT Vs. Orissa Corporation Pvt. Ltd. (1986) 159 ITR 78 (SC); (ii) CIT Vs. Orchid Industries Ltd. 397 ITR 136 (Bom); (iii) Crystal Networks Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT 353 ITR 171 (Kol); (iv) ITO Vs. M/s. Cygnus Developers India Pvt. Ltd.(ITA No. 282/Kol/2012) and (v) Joy Consolidated Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ITO (ITA No. 547/Kol/2020. 07. After hearing the rival contentions and perusing the material on record, we find that the assessee has furnished before the AO as well as…

DCIT, Kolkata vs. Vinod Nirman Private Limited, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and cross objection by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1540/KOL/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 Dec 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm Vinod Nirman Private Dcit Limited 5Th Floor, 110, Shantipally, Vill Kalachara, Chanditala Aaykar Bhavan Poorva, Kolkata- Vs. P.O. Kolkata, Kolkata- 700107, West Bengal 712702, West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaccv5313J Co No. 44/Kol/2024 (Arising In Ita No. 1540/Kol/2024 For A.Y. 2013-14) Vinod Nirman Private Dcit Limited 5Th Floor, 110, Shantipally, Vill Kalachara, Chanditala Aaykar Bhavan Poorva, Kolkata- Vs. P.O. Kolkata, Kolkata- 700107, West Bengal 712702, West Bengal (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Sunil Surana, Ar Revenue By : Shri Jitendra Kantilal Surti, Dr Date Of Hearing: 03.12.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 20.12.2024

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Surana, ARFor Respondent: Shri Jitendra Kantilal Surti, DR
Section 131Section 143Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 26Section 68

…e ground for making any addition in the hands of assessee u/s 68 of the Act. Similar ratio has been laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in CIT Vs. Orissa Corporation Pvt. Ltd. (1986) 159 ITR 78 (SC), Hon’ble Bombay High Court in CIT Vs. Orchid Industries Ltd. 397 ITR 136 (Bom). 07. In view of the facts and the ratio laid down in the various decisions as discussed above, we find no infirmity in the order of the ld. CIT (A) and consequently uphold the same. The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed. 08. Coming to CO of the assessee, the assessee has raised legal issue. We find that the ld. AO in the reasons recorded…

Evaluationz India Private Limited, Bengaluru vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result, we do not find any reason to uphold the orders of the learned lower authorities confirming the disallowance of Rs

ITA 1103/BANG/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 Dec 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Soundararajan K.Assessment Year : 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri Padamchand Khincha, CAFor Respondent: Shri V. Parithivel, Jt.CIT(DR), ITAT, Bengaluru
Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 234BSection 250Section 69C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI SOUNDARARAJAN K., JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment year : 2018-19 Evaluationz India Pvt. Ltd., Vs. The Deputy Commissioner # 305, Royal Heritage, of Income, Old Madras Road, TIN Factory, Circle 2(1)(1), Benniganahalli, Doorvani Nagar, Bangalore. Bengaluru – 560 016. PAN: AABCE 5590M APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : Shri Padamchand Khincha, CA Respondent by : Shri V. Parithivel, Jt.CIT(DR), ITAT, Bengaluru. Date of hearing : 09.12.2024 Date of Pronouncement : 20.12.2024 O R D E R Per Prashant Maharis…

DCIT CC 7(4), Mumbai vs. Poddar Renaissance Reality Pvt Ltd (Now Known As Imperial Renaissaice Reniasance Reality Pvt. Ltd), Mumbai

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

ITA 2045/MUM/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Dec 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhaildcit, Cc-7(4), Mumbai V/S. Poddar Renaissance Reality Room No. 659, Aaykar बनाम Pvt. Ltd. (Now Known As Bhavan, M.K. Road, Imperial Renaissance Mumbai-400020 Renaissance Reality Pvt. Ltd.) 501/601, Aqua Marine, Carter Road, Mumbai-400050030 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aagcp2657R Appellant/अपीलाथ" .. Respondent/"ितवादी

For Appellant: Mr. Rishabh MehtaFor Respondent: Mr. R. A. Dhyani
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 68Section 69

…IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL“C” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL, JUDICIAL MEMBER DCIT, CC-7(4), Mumbai v/s. Poddar Renaissance Reality Room No. 659, Aaykar बनाम Pvt. Ltd. (Now known as Bhavan, M.K. Road, Imperial Renaissance Mumbai-400020 Renaissance Reality Pvt. Ltd.) 501/601, Aqua Marine, Carter Road, Mumbai-400050030 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No: AAGCP2657R Appellant/अपीलाथ" .. Respondent/"ितवादी Assessee by : Mr. Rishabh Mehta Revenue by : Mr. R. A. Dhyani Date of Hearing 15.10.2024 Date of Pronouncement 20.12.2024 आदेश / O R D E R PE…

Rapid Commotrade Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-7(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 768/KOL/2024[2012-13]Status: HeardITAT Kolkata09 Dec 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 131Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 68

…as well as subscribers when all the corroborating evidences are furnished before the authorities. We find support from the following decisions in our conclusion namely CIT Vs. Orissa Corporation Pvt. Ltd. (1986) 159 ITR 78 (SC), CIT Vs. Orchid Industries Ltd. 397 ITR 136 (Bom), Crystal Networks Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT 353 ITR 171 (Kol), ITO Vs. M/s. Cygnus Developers India Pvt. Ltd.(ITA No. 282/Kol/2012) and Joy Consolidated Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ITO (ITA No. 547/Kol/2020.Considering these facts and circumstances, we are inclined to set aside the order of Ld. CIT(A) and direct the AO to delete the addition. The ground of appea…

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Meerut vs. Smt. Kamlesh, Delhi

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 2152/DEL/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Dec 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri M. Balaganeshassessment Year: 2014-15 Dcit, Vs. Smt. Kamlesh, Central Circle, 1402/1403, Vidhyanchal Meerut Tower, Kaushambi, Ghaziabad Pan :Akypk3905E (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Sh. Rohit Agarwal, Ca Department By Ms. Jaya Choudhary, Cit(Dr)

Section 153ASection 56(2)(vi)Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI BENCH: ‘E’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI M. BALAGANESH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2014-15 DCIT, Vs. Smt. Kamlesh, Central Circle, 1402/1403, Vidhyanchal Meerut Tower, Kaushambi, Ghaziabad PAN :AKYPK3905E (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Sh. Rohit Agarwal, CA Department by Ms. Jaya Choudhary, CIT(DR) Date of hearing 26.11.2024 Date of pronouncement 06.12.2024 ORDER PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JM This Revenue’s appeal for assessment year 2014-15, arises against the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-3 [in short, the “C…

Varima Jewels Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward - 8(2), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1257/KOL/2024[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata02 Dec 2024AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar&Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey]

Section 131Section 143(1)Section 68

…the AO as well as ld CIT(A) and the AO has not pointed out any defect or deficiency in those evidences. We find support from a series of decisions namely namely (i)CIT Vs. Orissa Corporation Pvt. Ltd. (1986) 159 ITR 78 (SC);(ii)CIT Vs. Orchid Industries Ltd. 397 ITR 136 (Bom);(iii) Crystal Networks Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT 353 ITR 171 (Kol);(iv) ITO Vs. M/s. Cygnus Developers India Pvt. Ltd.(ITA No. 282/Kol/2012) and (v) Joy Consolidated Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ITO (ITA No. 547/Kol/2020. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Orissa Corporation Ltd. (supra)has observed and held as under: “That in this case the respondent had…

Chandrakumar Madhusudanji Jajodia, Thane vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Amravati Circle

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 399/NAG/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur28 Nov 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Kishore P. DewaniFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 148Section 234ASection 36(1)(iii)Section 68Section 69A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI K.M. ROY, ACCOUNTANT, MEMBER ITA no.399/Nag./2023 (Assessment Year : 2013–14) Chandrakumar Madhusudanji Jajodia SA 10 to 13, 2nd Floor, Chitalsar ……………. Appellant Manpada B.O. 400 607 PAN–AAPPJ3021M v/s Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax ……………. Respondent Amravati Circle, Amravati Assessee by : Shri Kishore P. Dewani Revenue by : Shri Abhay Y. Marathe Date of Hearing – 07/11/2024 Date of Order – 28/11/2024 O R D E R PER K.M. ROY, A.M. The assessee has filed the captioned appeal challenging the impugned…

M/S Titivate Vyapaar Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-91(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 578/KOL/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata27 Nov 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rajesh Kumar]

Section 131Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 68

…he information sought by the AO in the summons issued u/s. 131 of the Act were duly complied. In defense of his argument he relied on the following decisions: (i) CIT Vs. Orissa Corporation Pvt. Ltd. (1986) 159 ITR 78 (SC); (ii) CIT Vs. Orchid Industries Ltd. 397 ITR 136 (Bom); (iii) Crystal Networks Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT 353 ITR 171 (Kol); (iv) ITO Vs. M/s. Cygnus Developers India Pvt. Ltd.(ITA No. 282/Kol/2012) and (v) Joy Consolidated Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ITO (ITA No. 547/Kol/2020. 6. The Ld. D.R strongly controverted and opposed the arguments as put forth by the Ld. A.R by submitting that the share application money was…

Sahil Singla, Chandigarh vs. Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, CC-2, Chandigarh

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 1018/CHANDI/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh04 Nov 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI. AAKASH DEEP JAIN (Vice President), SHRI. SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri T.N. Singla, C.AFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal, CIT, DR
Section 271ASection 68Section 69Section 69A

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, च"ीगढ़ "ायपीठ “बी” , च"ीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH BENCH “B”, CHANDIGARH HEARING THROUGH: PHYSICAL MODE "ी आकाश दीप जैन, उपा"" एवं "ी कृणव" सहाय, लेखा सद" BEFORE: SHRI. AAKASH DEEP JAIN, VP & SHRI. SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY, AM आयकर अपील सं./ ITA NO.1018/Chd/2024 (Assessment Year: 2018-19) Sahil Singla बनाम The Asst. CIT SCO 80-81, 3rd Floor Sector 17-C Central Circle-2, Chandigarh Chandigarh "ायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: AUIPS7844N अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""थ"/Respondent Stay Application No. 27/Chd/2024 In आयकर अपील सं./ ITA NO.1018/Chd/2024 (Assessment Year: 2018-19) Sahil Singla बनाम…

Assistnat Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-6(4), Mumbai vs. Neuzen Finance Private Limited, Mumbai

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

ITA 1511/MUM/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Oct 2024AY 2020-21
Section 143(3)Section 35DSection 35D(2)Section 68

…documentary evidence has been furnished, mere non-appearance of the parties in person cannot be a sufficient reason to treat the transaction as non-genuine as had been decided by the Jurisdictional High Court in the cases of CIT v. Orchid Industries Pvt Ltd (397 ITR 136), CIT v. Creative World Telefilms Ltd (333 ITR 100) and CIT vs. Nikunj Eximp Pvt Ltd (35 Taxmann.com 384) As regards, the argument of the AO that the lending parties had meagre income, the appellant has contended that it is not the result in the Profit and Loss account which determines the capacity of the lender to extend the loan but it is the B…

Neuzen Finance Private Limited, Mumbai vs. The Assessment Unit, Nafac, Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed

ITA 1247/MUM/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Oct 2024AY 2020-21
Section 143(3)Section 35DSection 35D(2)Section 68

…documentary evidence has been furnished, mere non-appearance of the parties in person cannot be a sufficient reason to treat the transaction as non-genuine as had been decided by the Jurisdictional High Court in the cases of CIT ν. Orchid Industries Pvt Ltd (397 ITR 136), CIT v. Creative World Telefilms Ltd (333 ITR 100) and CIT vs. Nikunj Eximp Pvt Ltd (35 Тахтапп.com 384) As regards, the argument of the AO that the lending parties had meagre income, the appellant has contended that it is not the result in the Profit and Loss account which determines the capacity of the lender to extend the loan but it is the B…

Income Tax Officer, Chandigarh vs. Sanbir Singh, Chandigarh

In the result, the appeal is dismissed

ITA 455/CHANDI/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh18 Oct 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI A.D.JAIN (Vice President), SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Sahil Singla, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Dharam Vir, JCIT, Sr. DR
Section 133(6)Section 148

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण,च"डीगढ़ "यायपीठ , च"डीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH BENCH ‘B’ CHANDIGARH BEFORE: SHRI A.D.JAIN, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No. 455/CHD/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19 The ITO, Shri Sanbir Singh, बनाम Chandigarh. House No. 1065, Sector 39, VS Chandigarh. "थायी लेखा सं./PAN /TAN No: AULPS3130Q अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent & CO No.02/CHD/2023 in आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No. 455/CHD/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19 Shri Sanbir Singh, The ITO, बनाम C/o Kansal Singla & Associates, Chandigarh. VS SCO…

Leading Age Developers Private Limited, Mumbai vs. ACIT CC 2(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 1114/MUM/2024[2011-12]Status: HeardITAT Mumbai17 Oct 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Shri Vimal Punmiya, CAFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar Sinha, Sr. DR
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 148Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)Section 68

…establish the existence of the subscriber companies, the burden would shift on the revenue to establish its case. 7.2. We also draw our force from the decision of Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court of Bombay in the case of CIT vs. Orchid Industries Pvt. Ltd. 397 ITR 136 (Bom) wherein it was held that mere non-compliance of summon under section 131 would not disprove the transaction and other documents filed on record cannot be brushed aside by the Ld. Assessing Officer. The relevant extract from the said decision is reproduced as under: "The Assessing Officer added Rs.95 lakhs as income under Section 68 of the…

Leading Age Developers Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Central Circle 2(2), Central Building

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 1113/MUM/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Oct 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Shri Vimal Punmiya, CAFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar Sinha, Sr. DR
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 148Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)Section 68

…establish the existence of the subscriber companies, the burden would shift on the revenue to establish its case. 7.2. We also draw our force from the decision of Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court of Bombay in the case of CIT vs. Orchid Industries Pvt. Ltd. 397 ITR 136 (Bom) wherein it was held that mere non-compliance of summon under section 131 would not disprove the transaction and other documents filed on record cannot be brushed aside by the Ld. Assessing Officer. The relevant extract from the said decision is reproduced as under: "The Assessing Officer added Rs.95 lakhs as income under Section 68 of the…

Sarika Tyagi, Ghazibad vs. DCIT, Central Circle, Ghazaibad

Accordingly, Ground No. 2 raised by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1414/DEL/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Oct 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumardcit, Vs. Sushil Tyagi, Central Circle, A-2, Ganpati Ghaziabad Apartments, Civil Lines, New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Aejpt6739A Dcit, Vs. Yogender Singh, Central Circle, J-6A, Sector-23, Ghaziabad Sanjay Nagar, Ghaziabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Bgcos8548E Yogender Singh, Vs. Dcit, J-6A, Sector-23, Central Circle, Sanjay Nagar, Ghaziabad Ghaziabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Bgcos8548E Naveen Tyagi, Vs. Dcit, G-302, Vvip Central Circle, Addresses, Raj Nagar Ghaziabad Extention, Ghaziabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Admpt6420A Sarika Tyagi, Vs. Dcit, H-100, Patel Nagar,- Central Circle, 3, Ghaziabad Ghaziabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Afapt5986P Assessee By : Shri Rajeev Khandelwal, Ca Shri Gagan Khandelwal, Adv Shri Jaind Jaiswal, Adv Revenue By: Ms. Sapna Bhatia, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 23/08/2024 Date Of Pronouncement /10/2024

For Appellant: Shri Rajeev Khandelwal, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Sapna Bhatia, CIT DR
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 68

…ness of transaction and creditworthiness of the creditor, the AO cannot make the addition without making inquiries :- -CIT vs. Laxman Industrial Resources Pvt. Ltd. [2017] 397 ITR 106 -CIT Vs. Rakam Money Matters Pvt. Ltd. -CIT vs. Orchid Industries Pvt. Ltd. 397 ITR 136 -CIT v Fair Finvest Ltd [2014] 44 Taxmann.com 356 -CIT v Gangeshwari Metal Pvt. Ltd. (2013) 30 Taxman.com 328 (Delhi) -Pr. CIT v Oriental International Company Pvt. Ltd. 2018 101 CCH 0004 Del 7. Looking into factual matrix of the case and after careful analysis of various judicial, interpretations of section 68 of IT Act in which genuineness of c…

Yogender Singh, Ghaziabad vs. DCIT, Central Circle, Ghaziabad

Accordingly, Ground No. 2 raised by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1413/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Oct 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumardcit, Vs. Sushil Tyagi, Central Circle, A-2, Ganpati Ghaziabad Apartments, Civil Lines, New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Aejpt6739A Dcit, Vs. Yogender Singh, Central Circle, J-6A, Sector-23, Ghaziabad Sanjay Nagar, Ghaziabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Bgcos8548E Yogender Singh, Vs. Dcit, J-6A, Sector-23, Central Circle, Sanjay Nagar, Ghaziabad Ghaziabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Bgcos8548E Naveen Tyagi, Vs. Dcit, G-302, Vvip Central Circle, Addresses, Raj Nagar Ghaziabad Extention, Ghaziabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Admpt6420A Sarika Tyagi, Vs. Dcit, H-100, Patel Nagar,- Central Circle, 3, Ghaziabad Ghaziabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Afapt5986P Assessee By : Shri Rajeev Khandelwal, Ca Shri Gagan Khandelwal, Adv Shri Jaind Jaiswal, Adv Revenue By: Ms. Sapna Bhatia, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 23/08/2024 Date Of Pronouncement /10/2024

For Appellant: Shri Rajeev Khandelwal, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Sapna Bhatia, CIT DR
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 68

…ness of transaction and creditworthiness of the creditor, the AO cannot make the addition without making inquiries :- -CIT vs. Laxman Industrial Resources Pvt. Ltd. [2017] 397 ITR 106 -CIT Vs. Rakam Money Matters Pvt. Ltd. -CIT vs. Orchid Industries Pvt. Ltd. 397 ITR 136 -CIT v Fair Finvest Ltd [2014] 44 Taxmann.com 356 -CIT v Gangeshwari Metal Pvt. Ltd. (2013) 30 Taxman.com 328 (Delhi) -Pr. CIT v Oriental International Company Pvt. Ltd. 2018 101 CCH 0004 Del 7. Looking into factual matrix of the case and after careful analysis of various judicial, interpretations of section 68 of IT Act in which genuineness of c…

Naveen Tyagi, Ghaziabad vs. DCIT, Central Circle, Ghaziabad

Accordingly, Ground No. 2 raised by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1412/DEL/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Oct 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumardcit, Vs. Sushil Tyagi, Central Circle, A-2, Ganpati Ghaziabad Apartments, Civil Lines, New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Aejpt6739A Dcit, Vs. Yogender Singh, Central Circle, J-6A, Sector-23, Ghaziabad Sanjay Nagar, Ghaziabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Bgcos8548E Yogender Singh, Vs. Dcit, J-6A, Sector-23, Central Circle, Sanjay Nagar, Ghaziabad Ghaziabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Bgcos8548E Naveen Tyagi, Vs. Dcit, G-302, Vvip Central Circle, Addresses, Raj Nagar Ghaziabad Extention, Ghaziabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Admpt6420A Sarika Tyagi, Vs. Dcit, H-100, Patel Nagar,- Central Circle, 3, Ghaziabad Ghaziabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Afapt5986P Assessee By : Shri Rajeev Khandelwal, Ca Shri Gagan Khandelwal, Adv Shri Jaind Jaiswal, Adv Revenue By: Ms. Sapna Bhatia, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 23/08/2024 Date Of Pronouncement /10/2024

For Appellant: Shri Rajeev Khandelwal, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Sapna Bhatia, CIT DR
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 68

…ness of transaction and creditworthiness of the creditor, the AO cannot make the addition without making inquiries :- -CIT vs. Laxman Industrial Resources Pvt. Ltd. [2017] 397 ITR 106 -CIT Vs. Rakam Money Matters Pvt. Ltd. -CIT vs. Orchid Industries Pvt. Ltd. 397 ITR 136 -CIT v Fair Finvest Ltd [2014] 44 Taxmann.com 356 -CIT v Gangeshwari Metal Pvt. Ltd. (2013) 30 Taxman.com 328 (Delhi) -Pr. CIT v Oriental International Company Pvt. Ltd. 2018 101 CCH 0004 Del 7. Looking into factual matrix of the case and after careful analysis of various judicial, interpretations of section 68 of IT Act in which genuineness of c…

DCIT Central Circle, Ghaziabad vs. Yogender Singh, Ghaziabad

Accordingly, Ground No. 2 raised by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1387/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Oct 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumardcit, Vs. Sushil Tyagi, Central Circle, A-2, Ganpati Ghaziabad Apartments, Civil Lines, New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Aejpt6739A Dcit, Vs. Yogender Singh, Central Circle, J-6A, Sector-23, Ghaziabad Sanjay Nagar, Ghaziabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Bgcos8548E Yogender Singh, Vs. Dcit, J-6A, Sector-23, Central Circle, Sanjay Nagar, Ghaziabad Ghaziabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Bgcos8548E Naveen Tyagi, Vs. Dcit, G-302, Vvip Central Circle, Addresses, Raj Nagar Ghaziabad Extention, Ghaziabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Admpt6420A Sarika Tyagi, Vs. Dcit, H-100, Patel Nagar,- Central Circle, 3, Ghaziabad Ghaziabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Afapt5986P Assessee By : Shri Rajeev Khandelwal, Ca Shri Gagan Khandelwal, Adv Shri Jaind Jaiswal, Adv Revenue By: Ms. Sapna Bhatia, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 23/08/2024 Date Of Pronouncement /10/2024

For Appellant: Shri Rajeev Khandelwal, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Sapna Bhatia, CIT DR
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 68

…ness of transaction and creditworthiness of the creditor, the AO cannot make the addition without making inquiries :- -CIT vs. Laxman Industrial Resources Pvt. Ltd. [2017] 397 ITR 106 -CIT Vs. Rakam Money Matters Pvt. Ltd. -CIT vs. Orchid Industries Pvt. Ltd. 397 ITR 136 -CIT v Fair Finvest Ltd [2014] 44 Taxmann.com 356 -CIT v Gangeshwari Metal Pvt. Ltd. (2013) 30 Taxman.com 328 (Delhi) -Pr. CIT v Oriental International Company Pvt. Ltd. 2018 101 CCH 0004 Del 7. Looking into factual matrix of the case and after careful analysis of various judicial, interpretations of section 68 of IT Act in which genuineness of c…

DCIT, Central Circle, Ghaziabad vs. Sushil Tyagi, Delhi

Accordingly, Ground No. 2 raised by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1386/DEL/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Oct 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumardcit, Vs. Sushil Tyagi, Central Circle, A-2, Ganpati Ghaziabad Apartments, Civil Lines, New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Aejpt6739A Dcit, Vs. Yogender Singh, Central Circle, J-6A, Sector-23, Ghaziabad Sanjay Nagar, Ghaziabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Bgcos8548E Yogender Singh, Vs. Dcit, J-6A, Sector-23, Central Circle, Sanjay Nagar, Ghaziabad Ghaziabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Bgcos8548E Naveen Tyagi, Vs. Dcit, G-302, Vvip Central Circle, Addresses, Raj Nagar Ghaziabad Extention, Ghaziabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Admpt6420A Sarika Tyagi, Vs. Dcit, H-100, Patel Nagar,- Central Circle, 3, Ghaziabad Ghaziabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Afapt5986P Assessee By : Shri Rajeev Khandelwal, Ca Shri Gagan Khandelwal, Adv Shri Jaind Jaiswal, Adv Revenue By: Ms. Sapna Bhatia, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 23/08/2024 Date Of Pronouncement /10/2024

For Appellant: Shri Rajeev Khandelwal, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Sapna Bhatia, CIT DR
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 68

…ness of transaction and creditworthiness of the creditor, the AO cannot make the addition without making inquiries :- -CIT vs. Laxman Industrial Resources Pvt. Ltd. [2017] 397 ITR 106 -CIT Vs. Rakam Money Matters Pvt. Ltd. -CIT vs. Orchid Industries Pvt. Ltd. 397 ITR 136 -CIT v Fair Finvest Ltd [2014] 44 Taxmann.com 356 -CIT v Gangeshwari Metal Pvt. Ltd. (2013) 30 Taxman.com 328 (Delhi) -Pr. CIT v Oriental International Company Pvt. Ltd. 2018 101 CCH 0004 Del 7. Looking into factual matrix of the case and after careful analysis of various judicial, interpretations of section 68 of IT Act in which genuineness of c…