CIT v. Pradeep Kumar Gupta

Lasco Chemie Private Limited, Delhi vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-15(2), New Delhi, Delhi

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

Bench: Shri S Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumarlasco Chemie Private Vs. Income Tax Officer, Limited, Ward-15(2), Delhi 10489 Kalptaru, Sadar Thana Road Motia Khan, New Delhi 110055 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aabcl 3502 E Appellant .. Respondent

…cisions: - Kishanchand Chellaram v. CIT: 125 ITR 713 (SC) - Saraswati Industrial Syndicate Ltd v. CIT: 237 ITR I (SC) - State of Punjab v. Bhagat Ram: AIR 1974 SC 2335 - Kalra Glue Factory v. Sales Tax Tribunal: 167 ITR 498 (SC) - CIT v. Pradeep Kumar Gupta: 207 CTR 115 (Del) - Sona Electric Company v. CIT: 152 ITR 507 (Del) - CIT v. Eastern Commercial: 210 ITR 103, 110 (Cal) - P.S. Abdul Majeed v. STO 209 ITR 821. 823 (Ker) - CIT v. Sham Lal: 127 ITR 816 (P&H) P a g e | 21 Lasco Chemie (P) Ltd. (AY 2012-13) - Mukand Singh and Sons v. Presiding Officer: 107 STC 300 (P&H) - Anupam Agencies v. State of Punjab: 9…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Devine Infracon Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

Bench: M Balaganesh, Accontant Member & Ms Madhumita Royassessment Year: 2010-11 The Assistant Vs. M/S Divine Infracon Commissioner Of Income Private Limited, Plot Tax, Central Circle-09, No. 4, Sector-13, Jhandewalan, New Delhi, Dwarka City Centre, Room No.357, Ara Centre, Dwarka, New Delhi- E-2, Jhandewalan 110075 Extension, New Delhi Pan :Aaccd4476A (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Salil Aggarwal, Sr, Advocate Department By Shri T James Singson, Cit, Dr

…y the assessee from Madras and that it represented the concealed income of the assessee." [Emphasis Supplied] ii) 288 ITR 345 (Del) CIT V SMC Share Stock Brokers iii) 293 ITR 43 (Del) CIT VS M Aggarwal iv) 295 ITR 105(Del) CIT vs Dharam Pal Prem Chand Ltd iv) 207 CTR 115 CIT Vs Pradeep Kumar Gupta 5.8 - It is further submitted that appellant had produced all the evidences to substantiate the identity of the investors, genuineness of the transaction and creditworthiness of the investors, and the investors who are assessed to tax, have also duly confirmed the factum of giving loans to the appellant company, as such…

Pushp Steels & Mining (P) Ltd., Delhi vs. ITO, Ward- 20(2), New Delhi

In the result, the Appeal filed by the Assessee stands allowed

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri L.P. Sahuassessment Year : 2008-09

…oration (P) Ltd. 159 ITR 78 - CIT vs. Sophia Finance Ltd. (1994) 205 ITR 0098 (Del.) - CIT vs. Makhni and Tyagi P Ltd. (2004) 267 ITR 433 (Del.) - CIT vs. Lovely Export 299 ITR 268 (SC) - CIT vs. Gangour Investment Ltd. ITA No. 34/2007 - CIT vs. Pradeep Gupta 207 CTR 115 - CIT vs. Divine Leasing & Finance Ltd. CC 375/2008 - CIT vs. Anshika Consultants Pvt. Ltd. ITA No. 467/2014 vide order dated 16.4.2015. 4. On the contrary, Ld. CIT(DR) relied upon the orders of the authorities below and on the issue of Non-Disclosures/Incorrect Disclosure of Material, she submitted that the fact of acceptance of share applicatio…

B.R. Associates Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: : Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahu

…c. Kishni Chand Chella Ram v CIT 125 ITR 713 (SC) d. CIT V SMC Share Stock Brokers 288 ITR 345 (Del) e. CIT V S M Aggarwal 293 ITR 43 (Del) f. CIT vs Dharam Pal Prem Chand Ltd 295 ITR 105(Del) ITA Nos. 4964 to 4966/Del/2012 32 g- CIT Vs Pradeep Kumar Gupta 207 CTR 115 5.5 It is further submitted that it is settled law that where addition of undisclosed income was made on basis of mere statement under section 132(4) which was not corroborated by any material evidence, neither such statement would be a conclusive evidence, nor any addition could be made. It is submitted that in Instruction No. F no. 286/2/2003…

B.R. Associates Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: : Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahu

…c. Kishni Chand Chella Ram v CIT 125 ITR 713 (SC) d. CIT V SMC Share Stock Brokers 288 ITR 345 (Del) e. CIT V S M Aggarwal 293 ITR 43 (Del) f. CIT vs Dharam Pal Prem Chand Ltd 295 ITR 105(Del) ITA Nos. 4964 to 4966/Del/2012 32 g- CIT Vs Pradeep Kumar Gupta 207 CTR 115 5.5 It is further submitted that it is settled law that where addition of undisclosed income was made on basis of mere statement under section 132(4) which was not corroborated by any material evidence, neither such statement would be a conclusive evidence, nor any addition could be made. It is submitted that in Instruction No. F no. 286/2/2003…

B.R. Associates Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: : Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahu

…c. Kishni Chand Chella Ram v CIT 125 ITR 713 (SC) d. CIT V SMC Share Stock Brokers 288 ITR 345 (Del) e. CIT V S M Aggarwal 293 ITR 43 (Del) f. CIT vs Dharam Pal Prem Chand Ltd 295 ITR 105(Del) ITA Nos. 4964 to 4966/Del/2012 32 g- CIT Vs Pradeep Kumar Gupta 207 CTR 115 5.5 It is further submitted that it is settled law that where addition of undisclosed income was made on basis of mere statement under section 132(4) which was not corroborated by any material evidence, neither such statement would be a conclusive evidence, nor any addition could be made. It is submitted that in Instruction No. F no. 286/2/2003…

M/S. Meditronics India Pvt. Ltd., Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

The appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri I. C. Sudhir & Shri L. P. Sahui. T. Appeal No. 6251/Del/2012 Assessment Year : 2004-2005. M/S. Meditronics India Pvt. Ltd., Income Tax Officer, 41, Pocket–Ii, Jasola, Vs. Ward : 6 (3), D E L H I – 110 025. New Delhi. Pan : Aadcm 3622 Q (Appellant) (Respondent)

…ported in 176 ITR 169 at page 174. Commissioner of Income-tax v. Ashwani Gupta iii. 322 ITR 396 (Del); J.T. (India) Exports Vs. Union of India iv. 262 ITR 269 (Del) (FB) CIT vs Dharam Pal Prem Chand Ltd. v. 295 ITR 105(Del) CIT Vs Pradeep Kumar Gupta vi. 207 CTR 115. ” 3.1 The ld. AR also referred page Nos. 15 to 22, 37 and 38, 40 to 66, 103 to 146 of the paper book, which are copies of letter from Income Tax Officer communicating reasons recorded for initiating proceedings under section 147, objections raised to the reasons, the order of the Assessing Officer disposing off objections of the assessee, 15…

Hopewin Admark & Consultancy Services Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

In the result, appeal is allowed partly for statistical purpose

Bench: Sh. I.C. Sudhir & Sh. O.P. Kant

…of Andaman Timber Industries vs. CCE, 127 DTR 0241. The Ld. counsel further submitted that third-party statement cannot be basis of reopening of the assessment relying on the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT versus Sh. Pradeep Gupta 207 CTR 115(Del). 6.2 The Ld. Senior DR, on the other hand, submitted that the assessee did not ask for any such material from the Assessing Officer. As regarding the cross examination, the Ld. counsel submitted that it was the admission of the authorized signatory himself and he had not retracted from the statement. It was not a third-party who gave stateme…

ITO, New Delhi vs. M/S. Greenland Finance and Leasing Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

Appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri I. C. Sudhir & Shri O. P. Kanti.T. Appeal No. 1528/Del/2012 Assessment Year : 2003-04. Income Tax Officer, M/S. Greenland Finance & Ward : 12 (2), Vs. Leasing Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi. 306, Sharp Bhawan, Commercial Complex, Azadpur, Delhi – 110 033. Pan : Aaacg 3755 F (Appellant) (Respondent)

…194 Taxman 43 (Del.); (iii) CIT Vs. Gangour Investment Ltd. (2009) 179 Taxman 1 (Del.); (iv) CIT Vs. Kamdhenu Steel & Alloys Ltd. (2014) 361 ITR 220 (Del.); (v) CIT Vs. Value Capital Services Ltd. (2008) 307 ITR 334 (Del.); (vi) CIT Vs. Pradeep Gupta 207 CTR 115 (Del.); (vii) CIT Vs. P. Mohanakala (2007) 291 ITR 278. 3.3 The ld. AR contended further that proviso to section 68 of the Act has been introduced by the Finance Act, 2012 with effect from 1.04.2013 and thus it would be effective only from assessment year 2013-14 onward and not for the subject assessment year. In support the ld. AR has placed…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. Sh. Vivek Nagpal, New Delhi

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Sh. I.C. Sudhir & Sh. Prashant Maharishiassessment Year: 2009-10 Deputy Commissioner Of Income Vs. Sh. Vivek Nagpal, 101-C, Kundan Niwas, 1St Floor, Hari Tax, Cent. Circle 18, New Delhi. Nagar, Ashram, New Delhi. (Pan: Aaepn0284D) (Appellant) (Respondent)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: ‘H’: NEW DELHI BEFORE SH. I.C. SUDHIR, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SH. PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2009-10 Deputy Commissioner of Income Vs. Sh. Vivek Nagpal, 101-C, Kundan Niwas, 1st Floor, Hari Tax, Cent. Circle 18, New Delhi. Nagar, Ashram, New Delhi. (PAN: AAEPN0284D) (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Sh. Gaurav Dudeja, Sr.DR Respondent by Sh. Sanjeev Jain, CA ORDER PER PRASHANT MAHARISHI, A.M.: 1. This appeal preferred by the Revenue against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) dated 15.02.2013, raising the only ground of…

ITO, New Delhi vs. M/S. Ime International Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the Appeal filed by the Revenue stand dismissed

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri O.P. Kant

…ITA NO. 1873/Del/2012 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “C”, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI O.P. KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No. 1873/DEL/2012 A.Y. : 2003-04 Income Tax Officer, IME International Pvt. Ltd., Ward 11(3), VS. 211, New Delhi House, Room No. 374A, 27, Barakhamba Road, CR Building, New Delhi – 110 001 New Delhi (PAN: AAAC18126Q) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) Department by : Sh. T. Vasanthan, Sr. DR Assessee by : Sh. Kapil Goel, Adv. Date of Hearing : 09-12-2015 Date of Order : 08-01-2016 ORDER PER H.S. SIDHU : JM Revenue has filed this Appeal against the…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Hi- Tech Residency Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri O.P. Kant

…t any conclusive evidences comes to the conclusion that the share capital introduced during the year represents appellant's undisclosed income. 5.11 It is pertinent to mention here the Hon'ble Delhi High Court's decisions in the case of ClT vs. Pradeep Gupta 207 CTR 115, which has also been relied upon by the Delhi ITAT in the recent judgment in the case of Babita Gupta ITA No. 2897/06, wherein it is held that "in the facts of the case before us it may be seen that from the very beginning Ld AO had shifted entire burden upon the assessee and no material was brought by him to prove his allegation that the impugne…

ITO, New Delhi vs. M/S. Isf Securities Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the Appeal filed by the Revenue stands dismissed

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri O.P. Kant

…in credit entry, which is supported by bills and the payment have been received through banking channel, then such credit entry could not be treated as unexplained cash credit in appellant's hands. Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs Pradeep Gupta 207 CTR 115, which has also been relied upon by the Delhi ITAT in the recent judgment in the case of Babita Gupta ITA N 0.2897 106 where in it is held that in the facts of the case before us it may be seen that from the very beginning A.O had shifted entries burden upon the appellant and no material was brought by him to prove his allegation that the impugne…