CIT v. Sanghamitra Bharali

361 ITR 481High Court2014#1913 most cited

What is CIT v. Sanghamitra Bharali authority for?

Capital gains arising from sham transactions, particularly those involving penny stocks designed to appear genuine, are not exempt under Section 10(38) but are taxable as unaccounted income brought into the books.

60

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,459 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Sanghamitra Bharali · 361 ITR 481 · Section 10(38) · bogus long term capital gain · penny stock · sham transaction · accommodation entry · genuineness of transaction · onus of proof · Section 131 · Section 147 · entry operator

Sections most often in play

Section 106Section 131Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 153ASection 1961Section 250

Issues it is cited on

onus of proofpaper companybogus long term capital gainbogus ltcgpenny stocksection 10(38)entry operatorlong term capital gainsshare application moneyaccommodation entrysection 131genuineness of the transaction

Judgments citing CIT v. Sanghamitra Bharali

Shri Nilesh Jain HUF, Indore vs. ITO 4(2), Indore

In the result Ground No.2 of the assessee’s

ITA 294/IND/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore30 Apr 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Manish Borad & Hon’Ble Madhumita Royassessment Year 2014-15

Section 10(38)Section 143(3)Section 68

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, इंदौर "यायपीठ, इंदौर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE HON’BLE MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND HON’BLE MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year 2014-15 Shri Ayush Jain, : Appellant 132, Baikunthdham Colony, Behind Anand Bazar, Indore PAN : AHOPJ6426C V/s Income Tax Officer 4(2) Indore : Respondent ITA No.617/Ind/2019 & 293/Ind/2020 Assessment Year 2015-16 & 2014-15 Shri Pritesh Jain (HUF) : Appellant 130, Baikunthdham Colony, Behind Anand Bazar, Indore PAN : AAAHJ6285J V/s Income Tax Officer 4(2) Indore : Respondent Ayush Jain & Ors ITA No.616, 6…

Pritesh Jain HUF, Indore vs. ITO 4 (2), Indore

In the result Ground No.2 of the assessee’s

ITA 293/IND/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore30 Apr 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Manish Borad & Hon’Ble Madhumita Royassessment Year 2014-15

Section 10(38)Section 143(3)Section 68

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, इंदौर "यायपीठ, इंदौर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE HON’BLE MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND HON’BLE MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year 2014-15 Shri Ayush Jain, : Appellant 132, Baikunthdham Colony, Behind Anand Bazar, Indore PAN : AHOPJ6426C V/s Income Tax Officer 4(2) Indore : Respondent ITA No.617/Ind/2019 & 293/Ind/2020 Assessment Year 2015-16 & 2014-15 Shri Pritesh Jain (HUF) : Appellant 130, Baikunthdham Colony, Behind Anand Bazar, Indore PAN : AAAHJ6285J V/s Income Tax Officer 4(2) Indore : Respondent Ayush Jain & Ors ITA No.616, 6…

I.T.O. - 25(2)(5), Mumbai vs. Smt. Leena Haresh Harde, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 6429/MUM/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jul 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Hon'Ble & Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Bleincome Tax Officer – 25(2)(5) V. Smt Leena Haresh Harde Room No. 506, C-10, 5Th Floor 502, 5Th Floor, Padmawati Palace Pratyakshakar Bhavan Nanda Patkar Road Bandra Kurla Complex Vile Parle (E), Mumbai – 400 057 Bandra (E), Mumbai - 400 051 Pan: Aaxph1737Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Rushabh Mehta Department By : Shri Michael Jerald

For Appellant: Shri Rushabh MehtaFor Respondent: Shri Michael Jerald
Section 132Section 133(6)Section 145(3)Section 148Section 68

…nd the creditor, and it is not the burden of the assessee to find out the source of creditworthiness of the lender to prove the genuineness of the transaction. This issue is dealt by the Gauhati High Court in the case of CIT v. Smt. Sanghamitra Bharali (2014) 361 ITR 481 (Gau). The aforesaid points were also affirmed in the past by the Apex Court in the case of CIT v. Orissa Corporation P. Ltd reported in (1986) 159 ITR 78 (SC). In the case of CIT v. Varinder Rawley (2014) 366 ITR 232 (P & H) the court held that "where the assessee shows that the entries regarding credit in a third party's account were in fact re…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax 24(1), Mumbai vs. Abani Sarbeswar Das, Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of Revenue are dismissed

ITA 232/MUM/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 May 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Nk Pradhan, Am

For Appellant: Shri RA Dhyani, DRFor Respondent: Shri Bhupendra Shah, AR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 147Section 68

…responsibility of the assessee to find out the source of creditors or the capacity of the creditors in order to prove the genuineness of transactions as has been held by the Hon’ble Gauhati High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Smt. Sangmitra Bharali reported in 361 ITR 481. He further, argued that the addition was made out of unsecured loans raised by the assessee from the group concern of Praveen Kumar Jain Group engaged in providing accommodation entries. On the contrary, there was no indication or proof that loans taken by the assessee were merely accommodation entries and the money actually gone back to the len…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax 24(1), Mumbai vs. Abani Sarbeswar Das, Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of Revenue are dismissed

ITA 193/MUM/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 May 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Nk Pradhan, Am

For Appellant: Shri RA Dhyani, DRFor Respondent: Shri Bhupendra Shah, AR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 147Section 68

…responsibility of the assessee to find out the source of creditors or the capacity of the creditors in order to prove the genuineness of transactions as has been held by the Hon’ble Gauhati High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Smt. Sangmitra Bharali reported in 361 ITR 481. He further, argued that the addition was made out of unsecured loans raised by the assessee from the group concern of Praveen Kumar Jain Group engaged in providing accommodation entries. On the contrary, there was no indication or proof that loans taken by the assessee were merely accommodation entries and the money actually gone back to the len…

DCIT CC 7(2), Mumbai vs. Manba Finance Ltd, Mumbai

ITA 1448/MUM/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Oct 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am & Shri Ram Lal Negi, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Chaudhary Arunkumar SinghFor Respondent: Dr. P. Daniel
Section 133ASection 68

…is further submitted that the assessee is not to prove the sources of the source as held by the following Courts, (1)Nemichand Kothari v. CIT (2003) 264 ITR 254 (Gauh.) (2)Dy. CIT v. Rohini Builders 256 ITR 360 (Guj) (3) CIT v. Smt. Sanghamitra Bharali (2014) 361 ITR 481 (Gauhati) In the case of NEMI CHAND KOTHARI v. C.LT. (2003) 264 ITR 254 (Gauhati) it was held by the Gauhati High Court as under: "A person may have funds from any source and an assessee, on such information received, may take a loan from such a person. It is not the business of the assessee to find out whether the source or sources from which th…

Chandraprakash Paharia, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer-30(1)(2), Mumbai

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

ITA 6442/MUM/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Sept 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Ramlal Negi (Jm)

Section 148Section 68

…h credits. He submitted that in the following cases, it has been held that the source of sources need not be proved by the assessee:- 5 Chandraprakash Paharia  Nemi Chand Kothari Vs. CIT and Ors. (2003) 264 ITR 254  CIT Vs. Smt. Sanghamitra Bharali (2014) 361 ITR 481 10. The Ld A.R further submitted that identical additions relating to loans taken from Bhanwarlal Jain group of companies have been deleted by the co- ordinate benches of Tribunal in the following cases:-  ACIT Vs. Shri Vashu Bhagnani (ITA No. 5648/Mum/2016)  Jitendra Kitawat Vs. ITO (ITA No. 7049 & 7050/Mum/2016) 11. Accordingly he contended…

Sunita Khemka, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle- 15, Jhandewalan Extn., New Delhi

In the result, Appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 389/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Aug 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini

For Appellant: Shri Raj Kumar, C.A. &For Respondent: Shri S.L. Anuragi, Sr. D.R
Section 10Section 10(38)

…companies. Therefore, human probabilities have also to be applied to comprehend the transactions and to see the real intention behind entering into these transactions. In similar circumstances, the honourable Gauhati High Court of CIT Vs Sanghamitra Bharali (361 ITR 481) had held that the capital gains are sham transactions entered only to give colour of 33 ITA.No.389/Del./2018 Smt. Sunita Khemka, New Delhi. genuineness and therefore, held that the capital gain arising out of these transactions cannot be believed as genuine and upheld taxing the said amount as unaccounted income brought into books in the guise o…

DCIT 25(1), Mumbai vs. Yrv International, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1414/MUM/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Jul 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: S/Shri B.R.Baskaran (Am) & Amarjit Singh (Jm)

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 68

…to observe that the onus placed upon the assessee is discharged, if he proves the three main ingredients viz., (i) identity of the creditor; (ii) the genuineness of the transaction and (iii) genuineness of transactions. (a) CIT Vs. Sanghamitra Bharali (2014)(361 ITR 481)(Gau) (b) CIT Vs. Orissa Corporation P Ltd (159 ITR 78)(SC) (c) CIT Vs. Varinderrawley (2014)(366 ITR 232)(P & H) (d) Namichand Kothari Vs. CIT (264 ITR 254)(Gau) 3 M/s. YRV International (e) CIT Vs. Smt. Sushiladevi Khdaria (2009)(319 ITR ….) (f) ITO vs. Anant Shelters (P) Ltd (2012)(51 SOT 234) 5. The Ld CIT(A) also took support of decision…

Shikha Dhawan, Gurgaon vs. ITO, Ward- 4(2), Gurgaon

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3035/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Jun 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh.Bhavnesh Saini[Assessment Year: 2014-15] Vs Smt. Shikha Dhawan, Ito, C-101, Centre Park, Ward-4(2), Sector-42, Gurgaon. Gurgaon. Pan-Ccbps1718L (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Sh. Gautam Jain & Sh. Peeyush Kamal, Advocate Respondent By Sh. S.L.Anuragi, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 11.06.2018 Date Of Pronouncement 27.06.2018

Section 10(38)Section 68

…companies. Therefore, human probabilities have also to be applied to comprehend the transactions and to see the real intention behind entering into these transactions. In similar circumstances, the honourable Gauhati High Court of CIT Vs Sanghamitra Bharali (361 ITR 481) had held that the capital gains are sham transactions entered only to give colour of genuineness and therefore, held that the capital gain arising out of these transactions cannot be believed as genuine and upheld taxing the said amount as unaccounted income brought into books in the guise of exempted capital gains. 3.12 The Assessing Officer h…

Jitendra M Kitavat, Mumbai vs. ITO 18(1)(5), Mumbai

In the result,appeals filed by the AO are rejected and the appeals of the assessee stand partly allowed

ITA 7049/MUM/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Apr 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: S/Shri Rajendra & Sandeep Gosainआयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./I.T.A./7049 & 7050/Mum/2016,िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Ays: 2009-10 & 2007-08 आयकर आयकर आयकर अपील अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" Jitendra M. Kitavat Ito 18(1)(5) Prop. Of M/S. Jivraj Exports Mumbai. 61, Purnima Apartment Vs. 43, Ridge Road, Mumbai-400 006. Pan: Aabpk9960C (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) आयकर आयकर आयकर आयकर अपील संसंसंसं././././I.T.A./7099 & 7102/Mum/2016,िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Ay.S: 2009-10 & 2007-08 अपील अपील अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" Ito 18(1)(5) Vs. Jitendra M. Kitavat Mumbai. Mumbai-400 006 (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) Revenue By: Shri Rajesh Kumar Yadav-Cit-Dr Assessee By: Shri Vimal Punmiya

For Appellant: Shri Vimal PunmiyaFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar Yadav-CIT-DR
Section 143(1)Section 148Section 254(1)Section 69

…responsibility of the assessee to find out the source of creditors or the capacity of the creditors in order to prove the genuineness of transactions as has been held by the Hon’ble Gauhati High Court in the case of CIT V/s Smt. Sangmitra Bharali reported in 361 ITR 481). The ld AR further submitted that the addition was made out of unsecured loans raised by the assessee from the group concern of Bhanwarilal Jain Group engaged in providing accommodation entries. On the contrary , there was no indication or proof that loans taken by the assessee were merely accommodation entries and the money actually gone back t…

ITO 18(1)(5), Mumbai vs. Jitendra Madanlal Kitawat (HUF), Mumbai

In the result,appeal filed by the AO is rejected and the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 7100/MUM/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Apr 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: S/Shri Rajendra & Sandeep Gosainआयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./I.T.A./7047/Mum/2016,िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Year: 2007-08 आयकर आयकर आयकर अपील अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" Jitendra M. Kitavat (Huf) Ito 18(1)(5) Prop. Of M/S. Jivraj Exports Mumbai. 61, Purnima Apartment Vs. 43, Ridge Road, Mumbai-400 006. Pan:Assesseebpk 9960 C (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./I.T.A./7100/Mum/2016,िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Year: 2007-08 आयकर आयकर अपील अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" Ito 18(1)(5) Vs. Jitendra M. Kitavat(Huf) Mumbai. Mumbai-400 006 (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) Revenue By: Shri Rajesh Kumar Yadav-Cit-Dr Assessee By: Shri Vimal Punmiya

For Appellant: Shri Vimal PunmiyaFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar Yadav-CIT-DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 254(1)Section 69

…responsibility of the assessee to find out the source of creditors or the capacity of the creditors in order to prove the genuineness of transactions as has been held by the Hon’ble Gauhati High Court in the case of CIT V/s Smt. Sangmitra Bharali reported in 361 ITR 481). The ld AR further submitted that the addition was made out of unsecured loans raised by the assessee from the group concern of Bhanwarilal Jain Group engaged in providing accommodation entries. On the contrary , there was no indication or proof that loans taken by the assessee were merely accommodation entries and the money actually gone back t…

Mathura Enterprises, Mumbai vs. Joint Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 21(1), Mumbai

In the result the appeals by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 7096/MUM/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Mar 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Rajesh Kumarassessment Year: 2011-12

For Appellant: Dr. P. Daniel, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Debashish Chandra,D.R
Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 234Section 68

…ls of various entries without any signatures and certification are 13 ITA Nos.7096/M/2017 & Ors. M/s. Mathura Enterprises nothing less than dumb document as has been held by the Hon’ble Gauhati High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Smt. Sanghamitra Bharali (2014) 361 ITR 481 (Gau) at p. 482. It was also contended that the AO has not expressed any dissatisfaction with regard to the evidences filed by the assessee nor any type of enquiries were made by the AO. The Ld. A.R. submitted that receiving information from a survey party is only a starting point for enquiry to be conducted and not the final conclusion. In the p…

ITO 25(3)(5), Mumbai vs. Vikram Muktilal Vora, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 842/MUM/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 May 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am Ito 25(3)(5), Vs. M/S. Vikram Muktilal Vora, Mumbai – 400 051 702/703, Kshem Kalyan Building, Sanyas Ahram, B.S.Road, Mumbai – 400 056 Pan/Gir No. Aaapv4747P Appellant) Respondent) ..

Section 131Section 144Section 148Section 68

…sessee and the creditor, and it is not the burden of the assessee to find out the source of creditworthiness of the lender to prove the genuineness of the transaction. This is held by the Gauhati High Court in the case of cn v Srlt. Sanghamitra Bharali (2014) 361 ITR 481 (Gau) at page 482.(Copy enclosed) The aforesaid points were also affirmed in the past by the Appex Court in the use of CIT v. Orissa Corporation P. Ltd reported in (1986) 159 ITR 78 (Se). In tl-e case of CIT v. Varinder Rawley (2014) 366 ITR 232 (P & H) the court held that "where the assessee shows that the entries regarding credit in a third par…

Reliance Corporation, Mumbai vs. ITO WD 32(3)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and that of revenue stands dismissed

ITA 1071/MUM/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Apr 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri D.T.Garasia, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am

For Appellant: Dr.P.DanielFor Respondent: Shri Purushottam Kumnar
Section 132Section 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68Section 69C

…responsibility of the assessee to find out the source of creditors or the capacity of the creditors in order to prove the genuineness of transactions as has been held by the Hon’ble Gauhati High Court in the case of CIT V/s Smt. Sangmitra Bharali reported in 361 ITR 481). The ld AR further submitted that the addition was made out of unsecured loans raised by the assessee from the group concern of Bhanwarilal Jain Group engaged in providing accommodation entries. On the contrary , there was no indication or proof that loans taken by the assessee were merely accommodation entries and the money actually gone back t…

Reliance Corporation, Mumbai vs. ITO WD 32(3)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and that of revenue stands dismissed

ITA 1070/MUM/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Apr 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri D.T.Garasia, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am

For Appellant: Dr.P.DanielFor Respondent: Shri Purushottam Kumnar
Section 132Section 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68Section 69C

…responsibility of the assessee to find out the source of creditors or the capacity of the creditors in order to prove the genuineness of transactions as has been held by the Hon’ble Gauhati High Court in the case of CIT V/s Smt. Sangmitra Bharali reported in 361 ITR 481). The ld AR further submitted that the addition was made out of unsecured loans raised by the assessee from the group concern of Bhanwarilal Jain Group engaged in providing accommodation entries. On the contrary , there was no indication or proof that loans taken by the assessee were merely accommodation entries and the money actually gone back t…

Reliance Corporation, Mumbai vs. ITO WD 32(3)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and that of revenue stands dismissed

ITA 1069/MUM/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Apr 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri D.T.Garasia, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am

For Appellant: Dr.P.DanielFor Respondent: Shri Purushottam Kumnar
Section 132Section 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68Section 69C

…responsibility of the assessee to find out the source of creditors or the capacity of the creditors in order to prove the genuineness of transactions as has been held by the Hon’ble Gauhati High Court in the case of CIT V/s Smt. Sangmitra Bharali reported in 361 ITR 481). The ld AR further submitted that the addition was made out of unsecured loans raised by the assessee from the group concern of Bhanwarilal Jain Group engaged in providing accommodation entries. On the contrary , there was no indication or proof that loans taken by the assessee were merely accommodation entries and the money actually gone back t…

ACIT 32(3), Mumbai vs. Reliance Corporation, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and that of revenue stands dismissed

ITA 4946/MUM/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Apr 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri D.T.Garasia, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am

For Appellant: Dr.P.DanielFor Respondent: Shri Purushottam Kumnar
Section 132Section 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68Section 69C

…responsibility of the assessee to find out the source of creditors or the capacity of the creditors in order to prove the genuineness of transactions as has been held by the Hon’ble Gauhati High Court in the case of CIT V/s Smt. Sangmitra Bharali reported in 361 ITR 481). The ld AR further submitted that the addition was made out of unsecured loans raised by the assessee from the group concern of Bhanwarilal Jain Group engaged in providing accommodation entries. On the contrary , there was no indication or proof that loans taken by the assessee were merely accommodation entries and the money actually gone back t…

Swastik Realtors, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT 15(3), Mumbai

ITA 800/MUM/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Oct 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.800/Mum/2012 & 6314/Mum/2012 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2007-08 & 2008-09) Swastik Realtors The Assistant बनाम/ 312, Swastik Disha Commissioner Of Income V. Corporate Park , Kohinoor Tax – 15(3), Textile Printing Compound Matru Mandir I T Office Opp. Shreyas Cinema, Lbs Nana Chowk Marg, Ghatkopar(W) Grant Road Mumbai-400 086 Mumbai. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Abafs2576A (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent)

For Respondent: Shri Sanjeev Kashyap
Section 133ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)

…002) 256 ITR 360(Guj. HC), CIT v. ABT Limited (2015) 370 ITR 159(Mad.HC), CIT v. Kapoor Chand Magnesh Chand(2003) 218 Taxman 157(Mag.)(All. HC) , CIT v. Chandela Trading Company Private Limited (2015) 372 ITR 232(Cal. HC), CIT v. Smt Sanghamita Bharali (2014) 361 ITR 481(Gau. HC), CIT v. Jai Kumar Bakliwal (2014) 366 ITR 217(Raj. HC), CIT v. Nemichand Kothari (2003) 264 ITR 254(Gau. HC), CIT v. Shiv Dhooti Pearls and Investment Limited(2016) 237 Taxman 104(Del HC), CIT v. Khader Khan Sons (2013) 352 ITR 480(SC) . Our attention was also drawn to instruction no. F.No. 286/2/2003-IT(Inv.) dated 10-03-2003 issued by…

Swastik Realtors, Mumbai vs. A.C.I.T.15(3), Mumbai

ITA 6314/MUM/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Oct 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.800/Mum/2012 & 6314/Mum/2012 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2007-08 & 2008-09) Swastik Realtors The Assistant बनाम/ 312, Swastik Disha Commissioner Of Income V. Corporate Park , Kohinoor Tax – 15(3), Textile Printing Compound Matru Mandir I T Office Opp. Shreyas Cinema, Lbs Nana Chowk Marg, Ghatkopar(W) Grant Road Mumbai-400 086 Mumbai. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Abafs2576A (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent)

For Respondent: Shri Sanjeev Kashyap
Section 133ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)

…002) 256 ITR 360(Guj. HC), CIT v. ABT Limited (2015) 370 ITR 159(Mad.HC), CIT v. Kapoor Chand Magnesh Chand(2003) 218 Taxman 157(Mag.)(All. HC) , CIT v. Chandela Trading Company Private Limited (2015) 372 ITR 232(Cal. HC), CIT v. Smt Sanghamita Bharali (2014) 361 ITR 481(Gau. HC), CIT v. Jai Kumar Bakliwal (2014) 366 ITR 217(Raj. HC), CIT v. Nemichand Kothari (2003) 264 ITR 254(Gau. HC), CIT v. Shiv Dhooti Pearls and Investment Limited(2016) 237 Taxman 104(Del HC), CIT v. Khader Khan Sons (2013) 352 ITR 480(SC) . Our attention was also drawn to instruction no. F.No. 286/2/2003-IT(Inv.) dated 10-03-2003 issued by…