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 367,154 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.

M/S Joy Consolidated Pvt Ltd, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-3(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 547/KOL/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata12 Jun 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Hon’Bleassessment Year: 2012-13 M/S. Joy Consolidated Pvt. Ltd. Ito, Ward-3(1), Kolkata C/O. Rajesh Mohan & Associates, Unit No. 18 5Th Floor, Vs. Bagati House, 34, Ganesh Chandra Avenue. Kolkata-13 Pan: Aaccm 0673 Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Appellant By : Shri Sunil Surana, Ca Respondent By : Shri G. Hukugha Sema, Cit Date Of Hearing : 30.05.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 12.06.2023 O R D E R Per Rajesh Kumar, Am: This Appeal Of The Assessee For The Assessment Year 2012-13 Is Directed Against The Order Dated 01.10.2019 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)-17, Kolkata [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Ld. Cit(A)’].

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Surana, CAFor Respondent: Shri G. Hukugha Sema, CIT
Section 131Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 68

…e evidence on which a conclusion could be arrived at, no question of law as such arose. The High Court was right in refusing to state a case.” 7. Similar ratio has been laid down by the Hon’ble Mumbai High Court in the case of CIT Vs Orchid Industries (P) Ltd 397 ITR 136 by holding that provisions of section 68 of the Act can not be invoked for the reasons that the person has not appeared before the AO where the assessee had produced on records documents to establish genuineness of the parties such as PAN ,financial and bank statements showing share application money . 8. The case of the assessee is also squarel…

Aroto Trade India Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward-9(1), Kolkata

ITA 1637/KOL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata11 Apr 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Sonjoy Sarma

Section 131Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 234Section 250Section 68

…ly on the ground that Directors of the share subscribers did not appear before the AO for verification. Gainful reference in this regard may be made to following observations made the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Orchid Industries Limited (397 ITR 136). “6. The Tribunal has considered that the Assessee has produced on record the documents to establish the genuineness of the party such as PAN of all the creditors along with the confirmation, their bank statements showing payment of share application money. It was also observed by the Tribunal that the Assessee has also produced the entire recor…

Cotton Nation, Mumbai vs. ACIT-26(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed and both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 4182/MUM/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Feb 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Rahul Chaudhary (Jm)

Section 68

…re not in existence, once assessee had produced documentary evidence to establish existence of companies, burden would shift on to revenue to establish initiation of reassessment arid, thus, reassessment be set aside." (b) CIT vs. Orchid Industries Pvt. Ltd. 88 Taxmann.com 502 (Bombay HC): "Held that the assessee had produced on record the documents to establish the genuineness of the party such as PAN of all the creditors along with the confirmation, their bank statements showing payment of share application money. The assessee had also produced the entire record regarding issuance of shares, i.e., allotment of…

Cotton Nation, Mumbai vs. JCIT-26(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed and both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 4181/MUM/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Feb 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Rahul Chaudhary (Jm)

Section 68

…re not in existence, once assessee had produced documentary evidence to establish existence of companies, burden would shift on to revenue to establish initiation of reassessment arid, thus, reassessment be set aside." (b) CIT vs. Orchid Industries Pvt. Ltd. 88 Taxmann.com 502 (Bombay HC): "Held that the assessee had produced on record the documents to establish the genuineness of the party such as PAN of all the creditors along with the confirmation, their bank statements showing payment of share application money. The assessee had also produced the entire record regarding issuance of shares, i.e., allotment of…

M/S Lucky Agency Pvt Ltd, Kolkata vs. I.T.O, Ward-1(4), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2501/KOL/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 Feb 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 131Section 143(3)Section 68

…ndustries (India) Pvt. Ltd. in ITA 1231 of 2017 (Bom-HC) ii) CIT vs. Gangadeep Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. in ITA 1613 of 2014 (Bom-HC) 4 I.T.A. No. 2501/Kol/2019 Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/s Lucky Agencies Pvt. Ltd. iii) CIT vs. Orchid Industries Pvt. Ltd. in 397 ITR 136 (Bom-HC) iv) Pr. CIT vs. Apeak Infotech in 397 ITR 148 (Bom-HC) v) Pr. CIT vs. Laxman Industrial Resources Ltd. in 397 ITR 106 (Del-HC) vi) CIT vs. Expo Globe India Ltd. in 361 ITR 147 (Del-HC) vii) CIT vs. Lovely Exports Ltd., in 216 ITR 195 (SC) viii) CIT vs. Steller Investment Ltd. in 251 ITR 263 (SC) The Ld. A.R therefore prayed that th…

Income Tax Officer -32(2) (1), Mumbai vs. M/S. Kinjal Enterprises, Mumb

In the result, the appeal of the revenue stand dismissed

ITA 60/MUM/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Feb 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri Amarjit Singhita Nos. 60/Mum/2022 Ita Nos. 2464/Mum/2021 (A.Ys. 2013-14 & 2014-15)

For Appellant: Soumendu Kumar DashFor Respondent: Shashank Mehta
Section 132Section 143(2)

…tners, who in fact, did not render services to the assesse in the present case, the appellant obtained loan which was confirmed by the loan creditor and the said loan was repaid in the subsequent year. In the case of CIT vs Orchid Industries Pvt Ltd report in 397 ITR 136, the Honble Jurisdictional High Court held as under:- “………..only because those persons had not appeared before the Assessing Officer would not negate the case of the assesse. The judgement in case of Gagandeep Infrastructure (P) Ltd. (supra) would be applicable in the facts and circumstances of the present case.” 5.1.10 The appellant placed relia…

ITO 32(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Kinjal Enterprises, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the revenue stand dismissed

ITA 2464/MUM/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Feb 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri Amarjit Singhita Nos. 60/Mum/2022 Ita Nos. 2464/Mum/2021 (A.Ys. 2013-14 & 2014-15)

For Appellant: Soumendu Kumar DashFor Respondent: Shashank Mehta
Section 132Section 143(2)

…tners, who in fact, did not render services to the assesse in the present case, the appellant obtained loan which was confirmed by the loan creditor and the said loan was repaid in the subsequent year. In the case of CIT vs Orchid Industries Pvt Ltd report in 397 ITR 136, the Honble Jurisdictional High Court held as under:- “………..only because those persons had not appeared before the Assessing Officer would not negate the case of the assesse. The judgement in case of Gagandeep Infrastructure (P) Ltd. (supra) would be applicable in the facts and circumstances of the present case.” 5.1.10 The appellant placed relia…

ITO, Ward-4(4), Kolkata vs. M/S Kemex Engineering (P) Ltd, Kolkata

ITA 75/KOL/2021[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata01 Feb 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri P. P. Barman, Addl. CITFor Respondent: Shri Akkal Dudhwewala, AR
Section 131Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 68

…ly on the ground that Directors of the share subscribers did not appear before the AO for verification. Gainful reference in this regard may be made to following observations made the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Orchid Industries Limited (397 ITR 136). “6. The Tribunal has considered that the Assessee has produced on record the documents to establish the genuineness of the party such as PAN of all the creditors along with the confirmation, their bank statements showing payment of share application money. It was also observed by the Tribunal that the Assessee has also produced the entire recor…

Ams Trading & Investment Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cent . Cir 2(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1814/MUM/2021[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jan 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri M. Balaganesh, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No. 1814/Mum/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Ams Trading & Investment बिधम/ Dcit, Central Circle-2(3) Room No. 803, 8Th Floor, Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Shatrunjay Apartments, 1St Old Cgo Annexe Floor, 28 Sindhi Lane, Building, M. K. Road, Nanubhai Desai Road, Mumbai-400020. Greater Mumbai-400004. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aafca6183N (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Ajay Singh Revenue By: Smt Vranda Matkari सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 13/01/2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 31/01/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: This Is An Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Company Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-48 Dated 26.07.2021 For Assessment Year 2012-13. 2. The Assessee Has Raised Three (3) Grounds Of Appeal. The Main Grievance Of The Assessee Is Against The Action Of The Ld.Cit(A) Confirming The Addition Of Share Capital & Share Premium Received To The Tune Of Rs. 30,00,000/- From M/S Emporis Projects Ltd (Herein After “M/S. Epl”). The Facts As Noted By The Ao Is That Assessee Has Filed The Return Of Income Declaring Total Income Of Rs. Nil On 09.03.2012; & Later The Case Of The Assessee Was Reopened By Issuing Notice U/S 148 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter ‘The Act’) Dated 27.03.2015. After Recording The Reason For Reopening Which Shows That He Received Information From The Office Of The Dgit

For Appellant: Shri Ajay SinghFor Respondent: Smt Vranda Matkari
Section 148Section 68

…aced on the decisions of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in case of Principle CIT vs SDB Estate private Ltd (ITA no 1356-2015) dated 27.03.2015 Bombay and Principle CIT vs. Paradise Inland Shipping P. Ltd (2018) 400 ITR 439, CIT vs Orchid Industries private Ltd 397 ITR 136 and several other cases, and we agree with the assessee that the AO could not have brought to tax the share premium of Rs. 29,40,000/- u/s 68 of the Act. Be that as it may, we also note that assessee has discharged the burden casted on it to prove prima- facie to prove identity by filling the PAN of M/s Emporis Projects Ltd (refer page 66 PB) the…

DCIT- Circle- 1, Thane vs. Darshan Enterprises, Thane

In the result, the both appeals filed by the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 463/MUM/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Jan 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Amarjit Singh, Am आयकरअपीलसं/ I.T.A. No.462 /Mum/2019 & I.T.A.No.463/Mum/2019 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) बिधम/ Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax M/S Darshan Enterprises Circle-1,6Th Floor, Ashar It Park, 2Nd Floor, Rosa Vista, Vs. B Wing Wagle Industrial Estate Ghodbunder Road, Thane- 400604 Opp. Suraj Water Park, Thane(West) 400615 स्थधयीलेखधसं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. : Aadfd8612N (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Shashi Tulsian Revenue By: Ms. Mahita Nair, Sr Ar सुनवाईकीतारीख / Date Of Hearing: 26/10/2022 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 13/01/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: These Are Appeals Preferred By The Revenue Against The Action Of The Ld.Cit(A)-Nashik Dated 5-11-2018 For Ay 2010-11. [One I.E. Ita 462 Is Against The Quantum Deleted By Ld.Cit(A) & Ita 463 Is Against The Penalty U/S 271(1)(C) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961(Hereinafter “The Act”) Deleted By Ld.Cit(A)]. 2. First Of All We Will Take Up The Quantum Appeal Preferred By The Revenue Wherein The Revenue Challenges The Action Of The Ld. Cit(A) To Have Deleted The Addition Made By The Assessing Officer (Hereinafter Referred To As Ao) Under Section 68 Of The Act. 3. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Partnership Firm Had Filed Return Of Income On 22.09.2010 Declaring Income Of Rs. Rs. 1,47,73,191/-. Later The Case For The Relevant Assessment Year Was Selected For Scrutiny & The Ao Noted That

For Appellant: Shri Shashi TulsianFor Respondent: Ms. Mahita Nair, Sr AR
Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 68

…t / Case Laws Citation Tribunal ITA No. ITO Vs Superline Construction Pvt Ltd Mumbai ITAT 3645/Mum/2014 168 TTJ 751 ACIT Vs Sanjay M Jhaveri Mumbai ITAT (2015) Nemi Chand Kothari Vs CIT and 264 ITR 254(2003) Gauhati HC Another CIT Vs Orchid Industries Pvt Ltd 397 ITR 136 Bombay HC CIT Vs Vacmet Packaging (India) Pvt 367 ITR 217 Allahabad HC Ltd (2014) CIT Vs Dwarkadhish Investment Pvt Ltd 330 ITR 298 Delhi HC (2011) CIT Vs Oasis Hospitalitites P LTd 333 ITR 119 Delhi HC 35 ITA. 462& 463/MUM/2019 AY 2010-11 M/s Darshan Enterprises CIT vs Kamdhenu Steel & Alloys Ltd 361 ITR 220 Delhi HC CIT Vs Lovely Exports Pvt L…

DCIT- Circle- 1, Thane vs. Darshan Enterprises, Thane

In the result, the both appeals filed by the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 462/MUM/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Jan 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Amarjit Singh, Am आयकरअपीलसं/ I.T.A. No.462 /Mum/2019 & I.T.A.No.463/Mum/2019 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) बिधम/ Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax M/S Darshan Enterprises Circle-1,6Th Floor, Ashar It Park, 2Nd Floor, Rosa Vista, Vs. B Wing Wagle Industrial Estate Ghodbunder Road, Thane- 400604 Opp. Suraj Water Park, Thane(West) 400615 स्थधयीलेखधसं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. : Aadfd8612N (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Shashi Tulsian Revenue By: Ms. Mahita Nair, Sr Ar सुनवाईकीतारीख / Date Of Hearing: 26/10/2022 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 13/01/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: These Are Appeals Preferred By The Revenue Against The Action Of The Ld.Cit(A)-Nashik Dated 5-11-2018 For Ay 2010-11. [One I.E. Ita 462 Is Against The Quantum Deleted By Ld.Cit(A) & Ita 463 Is Against The Penalty U/S 271(1)(C) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961(Hereinafter “The Act”) Deleted By Ld.Cit(A)]. 2. First Of All We Will Take Up The Quantum Appeal Preferred By The Revenue Wherein The Revenue Challenges The Action Of The Ld. Cit(A) To Have Deleted The Addition Made By The Assessing Officer (Hereinafter Referred To As Ao) Under Section 68 Of The Act. 3. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Partnership Firm Had Filed Return Of Income On 22.09.2010 Declaring Income Of Rs. Rs. 1,47,73,191/-. Later The Case For The Relevant Assessment Year Was Selected For Scrutiny & The Ao Noted That

For Appellant: Shri Shashi TulsianFor Respondent: Ms. Mahita Nair, Sr AR
Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 68

…t / Case Laws Citation Tribunal ITA No. ITO Vs Superline Construction Pvt Ltd Mumbai ITAT 3645/Mum/2014 168 TTJ 751 ACIT Vs Sanjay M Jhaveri Mumbai ITAT (2015) Nemi Chand Kothari Vs CIT and 264 ITR 254(2003) Gauhati HC Another CIT Vs Orchid Industries Pvt Ltd 397 ITR 136 Bombay HC CIT Vs Vacmet Packaging (India) Pvt 367 ITR 217 Allahabad HC Ltd (2014) CIT Vs Dwarkadhish Investment Pvt Ltd 330 ITR 298 Delhi HC (2011) CIT Vs Oasis Hospitalitites P LTd 333 ITR 119 Delhi HC 35 ITA. 462& 463/MUM/2019 AY 2010-11 M/s Darshan Enterprises CIT vs Kamdhenu Steel & Alloys Ltd 361 ITR 220 Delhi HC CIT Vs Lovely Exports Pvt L…

Navroop Commercial Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward-13(3), Kolkata

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 613/KOL/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata11 Jan 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 131Section 133(6)Section 68

…imited company has not been established. For the reasons given above we uphold the order of Ld. CIT(A) and dismiss the appeal of the revenue.” 9. Similar ratio has been laid down by the Hon’ble Mumbai High Court in the case of CIT Vs Orchid Industries (P) Ltd 397 ITR 136 by holding that provisions of section 68 of the Act cannot be invoked for the reasons that the person has not appeared before the AO where the assessee had produced on records documents to establish genuineness of the party such as PAN ,financial and bank statements showing share application money . 10. In the instant case before us also, the as…

Navroop Commercial Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward-13(3), Kolkata

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 151/KOL/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata11 Jan 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 131Section 133(6)Section 68

…imited company has not been established. For the reasons given above we uphold the order of Ld. CIT(A) and dismiss the appeal of the revenue.” 9. Similar ratio has been laid down by the Hon’ble Mumbai High Court in the case of CIT Vs Orchid Industries (P) Ltd 397 ITR 136 by holding that provisions of section 68 of the Act cannot be invoked for the reasons that the person has not appeared before the AO where the assessee had produced on records documents to establish genuineness of the party such as PAN ,financial and bank statements showing share application money . 10. In the instant case before us also, the as…

DCIT, Central Circle-2, Surat vs. Dhanpriya Prints Pvt. Ltd., Surat

In the result, Ground No. 4 to 6 raised by the Revenue in ITA

ITA 52/SRT/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Surat23 Dec 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Hon'Ble & Dr. A. L. Saini, Hon'Ble Accountnat Member (Physical Court Hearing) Sl.

For Appellant: Shri Rasesh Shah, CAFor Respondent: Sr. DR
Section 143(3)

…as applied as shareholder. The view of taken by the Tribunal is just and proper, therefore, the issue is answered in favour of the assessee and against the department.” 37. Further, in the case of CIT v. Orchid Industries (P.) Ltd. [2017] 88 taxmann.com 502 / 397 ITR 136, the Hon’ble Bombay High Court on the issue of non-appearance of share applicants had held as under: "[5] The Assessing Officer added Rs.95 lakhs as income under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act only on the ground that the parties to whom the share certificates were issued and who had paid the share money had not appeared before the Assessing Off…

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Surat vs. Betex India Limited, Surat

In the result, Ground No. 4 to 6 raised by the Revenue in ITA

ITA 174/SRT/2021[2008-9]Status: DisposedITAT Surat23 Dec 2022

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Hon'Ble & Dr. A. L. Saini, Hon'Ble Accountnat Member (Physical Court Hearing) Sl.

For Appellant: Shri Rasesh Shah, CAFor Respondent: Sr. DR
Section 143(3)

…as applied as shareholder. The view of taken by the Tribunal is just and proper, therefore, the issue is answered in favour of the assessee and against the department.” 37. Further, in the case of CIT v. Orchid Industries (P.) Ltd. [2017] 88 taxmann.com 502 / 397 ITR 136, the Hon’ble Bombay High Court on the issue of non-appearance of share applicants had held as under: "[5] The Assessing Officer added Rs.95 lakhs as income under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act only on the ground that the parties to whom the share certificates were issued and who had paid the share money had not appeared before the Assessing Off…

Betex India Limited, Surat vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Surat

In the result, Ground No. 4 to 6 raised by the Revenue in ITA

ITA 171/SRT/2021[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Surat23 Dec 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Hon'Ble & Dr. A. L. Saini, Hon'Ble Accountnat Member (Physical Court Hearing) Sl.

For Appellant: Shri Rasesh Shah, CAFor Respondent: Sr. DR
Section 143(3)

…as applied as shareholder. The view of taken by the Tribunal is just and proper, therefore, the issue is answered in favour of the assessee and against the department.” 37. Further, in the case of CIT v. Orchid Industries (P.) Ltd. [2017] 88 taxmann.com 502 / 397 ITR 136, the Hon’ble Bombay High Court on the issue of non-appearance of share applicants had held as under: "[5] The Assessing Officer added Rs.95 lakhs as income under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act only on the ground that the parties to whom the share certificates were issued and who had paid the share money had not appeared before the Assessing Off…

ITO 1(1), Bhopal vs. M/S Amkay Colonisers & Builders P Ltd, Bhopal

In the result, this appeal of revenue is partly allowed

ITA 32/IND/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Indore20 Dec 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri B.M. Biyani(Conducted Through Virtual Court) Assessment Year: 2013-14 Ito 1(1) M/S. Amkay Colonisers & Bhopal Builders Pvt. Ltd. बनाम/ 16, Amar Stambh, Z-1, M.P. Nagar Vs. Bhopal (Appellant / Revenue ) (Respondent / Assessee) Pan: Aaeca 6272 F Assessee By None Revenue By Shri P.K. Mishra, Cit- Dr Date Of Hearing 12.12.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 20.12.2022

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)Section 68

…judgment has been followed in another judgment of the Delhi High Court in the case of CIT v. Dwarkadhish Investment (P.) Ltd. [2011] 330 ITR 298. Similar view has been taken by the Bombay High Court in the case of CIT v. Orchid Industries (P.) Limited ([2017] 397 ITR 136). The relevant extract Page 10 of 16 M/s. Amkay Colonisers and Builders Pvt. ltd. Assessment year 2013-14 is reproduced below for ready reference: "The Tribunal has considered that the Assessee has produced on record the documents to establish the genuineness of the party such as P AN of all the creditors along with the confirmation, their ba…

Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(2), Hyderabad vs. C Vamsi Krishna, Hyderabad

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes and the appeal filed by the revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 543/HYD/2020[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad15 Nov 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Shri P. Murali Mohan, CAFor Respondent: Shri M. Satish, DR
Section 132Section 153A

…sh receipt of Rs.2.00 lakhs has been shown. He submitted that these entries are recorded in the books of account prior to the search. 33. Referring to the decision of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Orchird Industries (P) Ltd reported in 88 Taxmann.com 502, he submitted that the Hon'ble High Court in the said decision has held that where the assessee has produced documents to establish the genuineness of the parties 16 C.Vamshi Krishna such as PAN No.of all creditors along with confirmation, their bank statements showing payment of share application money, etc., merely because those persons…

C Vamsi Krishna, Hyderabad vs. Dy.Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Hyderabad

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

ITA 528/HYD/2020[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad15 Nov 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2010-11 C.Vamsi Krishna V Dcit,Cc-2 Flat No.-401 S. Aaykar Bhawan Rohiwal Windsor Basheerbagh Apartment, Hill Fort Road Hyderabad-500 04 Saifabad Hyderabad-500 004

For Appellant: Shri P.Murali Mohan Rao, CAFor Respondent: Shri M. Satish,CIT-DR
Section 153CSection 1S

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad ‘B’ Bench, Hyderabad Before Shri Rama Kanta Panda, Accountant Member AND Shri Laliet Kumar, Judicial Member Assessment Year: 2010-11 C.Vamsi Krishna V DCIT,CC-2 Flat No.-401 s. Aaykar Bhawan Rohiwal Windsor Basheerbagh Apartment, Hill fort Road Hyderabad-500 04 Saifabad Hyderabad-500 004 PAN : AHPPC3352D (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by: Shri P.Murali Mohan Rao, CA Revenue by: Shri M. Satish,CIT-DR Date of hearing: 13.09.2022 Date of pronouncement: 16.11.2022 O R D E R Per Shri Rama Kanta Panda, A.M. This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the…

C.Vamsi Krishna, Hyderabad vs. Dy.Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Hyderabad

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes and the appeal filed by the revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 526/HYD/2020[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad15 Nov 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Shri P. Murali Mohan, CAFor Respondent: Shri M. Satish, DR
Section 132Section 153A

…sh receipt of Rs.2.00 lakhs has been shown. He submitted that these entries are recorded in the books of account prior to the search. 33. Referring to the decision of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Orchird Industries (P) Ltd reported in 88 Taxmann.com 502, he submitted that the Hon'ble High Court in the said decision has held that where the assessee has produced documents to establish the genuineness of the parties 16 C.Vamshi Krishna such as PAN No.of all creditors along with confirmation, their bank statements showing payment of share application money, etc., merely because those persons…