CIT v. Sophia Finance Ltd.

205 ITR 98High Court1994#265 most cited

What is CIT v. Sophia Finance Ltd. authority for?

To discharge the burden of proof under Section 68 for share capital or share application money, an assessee must establish the identity of the shareholders and the genuineness of the transaction, confirming that the payment was truly made by them.

295

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2008 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Sophia Finance Ltd. · Section 68 · cash credit · share capital · share application money · burden of proof · identity of shareholders · genuineness of transaction · 205 ITR 98 · unexplained money

Also reported as

70 Taxmann 69

Sections most often in play

Section 1961Section 68Section 142(1)Section 148Section 68 of the Income Tax ActSection 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 143(2)

Issues it is cited on

paper companysource of sourcesection 31creditworthiness of the creditorshare capital and share premiumsection 251(2)section 251(1)(a)live linkshare application moneyentry operatoradmission of additional evidenceaddition u/s 68

Judgments citing CIT v. Sophia Finance Ltd.

M/S Oriental Power Cables Ltd., Kota vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Kota

ITA 1027/JPR/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur12 Feb 2019AY 2014-15
Section 132Section 153Section 68

…LT 97 (DB) (Del) and Commissioner of Income Tax-II Vs. MAF Academy P. Ltd., 206 (2014) DLT 277 (DB) (Del). The aforesaid decisions mentioned above refer to the earlier decisions of Delhi High Court in Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Sophia Finance Ltd., [1994] 205 ITR 98 (FB)(Delhi), CIT Vs. Divine Leasing and Finance Limited [2008] 299 ITR 268 (Delhi) and observations of the Supreme Court in CIT Vs. Lovely Exports P. Ltd. [2008] 319 ITR (St.) 5 (SC). 12. The main submission of the learned counsel for the assessee is that once the assessee had been able to show that the share holder companies were duly incorporat…

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

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

ITA 6094/DEL/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Feb 2019AY 2008-09

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

For Appellant: Sh. Suresh Kumar Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Sulekha Verma, CIT(DR) &
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 153(1)Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES : F : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI L.P. SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year : 2008-09 PUSHP STEELS & MINING (P) LTD. Vs. ITO, WARD 20(2), 751, KUNDEWALAN STREET, NEW DELHI AJMERI GATE, DELHI – 110 006 (PAN: AADCP2925K) (Assessee) (Respondent) Assessee by : Sh. Suresh Kumar Gupta, CA Department by : Smt. Sulekha Verma, CIT(DR) & Sh. Surender Pal, Sr. DR. ORDER PER L.P. SAHU, AM This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A)-7, New Delhi on 12.09.2018 in relation to the assessment yea…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Kota vs. M/S. Multi Metal Private Ltd., Kota

ITA 1230/JPR/2018[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur29 Jan 2019AY 2016-17
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153B(1)(b)

…LT 97 (DB) (Del) and Commissioner of Income Tax-II Vs. MAF Academy P. Ltd., 206 (2014) DLT 277 (DB) (Del). The aforesaid decisions mentioned above refer to the earlier decisions of Delhi High Court in Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Sophia Finance Ltd., [1994] 205 ITR 98 (FB)(Delhi), CIT Vs. Divine Leasing and Finance Limited [2008] 299 ITR 268 (Delhi) and observations of the Supreme Court in CIT Vs. Lovely Exports P. Ltd. [2008] 319 ITR (St.) 5 (SC). 12. The main submission of the learned counsel for the assessee is that once the assessee had been able to show that the share holder companies were duly incorporat…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Kota vs. M/S. Multi Metal Private Ltd., Kota

ITA 1104/JPR/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur29 Jan 2019AY 2015-16
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153B(1)(b)

…LT 97 (DB) (Del) and Commissioner of Income Tax-II Vs. MAF Academy P. Ltd., 206 (2014) DLT 277 (DB) (Del). The aforesaid decisions mentioned above refer to the earlier decisions of Delhi High Court in Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Sophia Finance Ltd., [1994] 205 ITR 98 (FB)(Delhi), CIT Vs. Divine Leasing and Finance Limited [2008] 299 ITR 268 (Delhi) and observations of the Supreme Court in CIT Vs. Lovely Exports P. Ltd. [2008] 319 ITR (St.) 5 (SC). 12. The main submission of the learned counsel for the assessee is that once the assessee had been able to show that the share holder companies were duly incorporat…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Kota vs. M/S. Multi Metal Private Ltd., Kota

ITA 1103/JPR/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur29 Jan 2019AY 2013-14
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153B(1)(b)

…LT 97 (DB) (Del) and Commissioner of Income Tax-II Vs. MAF Academy P. Ltd., 206 (2014) DLT 277 (DB) (Del). The aforesaid decisions mentioned above refer to the earlier decisions of Delhi High Court in Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Sophia Finance Ltd., [1994] 205 ITR 98 (FB)(Delhi), CIT Vs. Divine Leasing and Finance Limited [2008] 299 ITR 268 (Delhi) and observations of the Supreme Court in CIT Vs. Lovely Exports P. Ltd. [2008] 319 ITR (St.) 5 (SC). 12. The main submission of the learned counsel for the assessee is that once the assessee had been able to show that the share holder companies were duly incorporat…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Kota vs. M/S. Multi Metal Private Ltd., Kota

ITA 1102/JPR/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur29 Jan 2019AY 2012-13
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153B(1)(b)

…LT 97 (DB) (Del) and Commissioner of Income Tax-II Vs. MAF Academy P. Ltd., 206 (2014) DLT 277 (DB) (Del). The aforesaid decisions mentioned above refer to the earlier decisions of Delhi High Court in Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Sophia Finance Ltd., [1994] 205 ITR 98 (FB)(Delhi), CIT Vs. Divine Leasing and Finance Limited [2008] 299 ITR 268 (Delhi) and observations of the Supreme Court in CIT Vs. Lovely Exports P. Ltd. [2008] 319 ITR (St.) 5 (SC). 12. The main submission of the learned counsel for the assessee is that once the assessee had been able to show that the share holder companies were duly incorporat…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Kota vs. M/S. Multi Metal Private Ltd., Kota

ITA 1101/JPR/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur29 Jan 2019AY 2011-12
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153B(1)(b)

…LT 97 (DB) (Del) and Commissioner of Income Tax-II Vs. MAF Academy P. Ltd., 206 (2014) DLT 277 (DB) (Del). The aforesaid decisions mentioned above refer to the earlier decisions of Delhi High Court in Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Sophia Finance Ltd., [1994] 205 ITR 98 (FB)(Delhi), CIT Vs. Divine Leasing and Finance Limited [2008] 299 ITR 268 (Delhi) and observations of the Supreme Court in CIT Vs. Lovely Exports P. Ltd. [2008] 319 ITR (St.) 5 (SC). 12. The main submission of the learned counsel for the assessee is that once the assessee had been able to show that the share holder companies were duly incorporat…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Kota vs. M/S. Multi Metal Private Ltd., Kota

ITA 1100/JPR/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur29 Jan 2019AY 2010-11
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153B(1)(b)

…LT 97 (DB) (Del) and Commissioner of Income Tax-II Vs. MAF Academy P. Ltd., 206 (2014) DLT 277 (DB) (Del). The aforesaid decisions mentioned above refer to the earlier decisions of Delhi High Court in Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Sophia Finance Ltd., [1994] 205 ITR 98 (FB)(Delhi), CIT Vs. Divine Leasing and Finance Limited [2008] 299 ITR 268 (Delhi) and observations of the Supreme Court in CIT Vs. Lovely Exports P. Ltd. [2008] 319 ITR (St.) 5 (SC). 12. The main submission of the learned counsel for the assessee is that once the assessee had been able to show that the share holder companies were duly incorporat…

M/S. Multi Metal Private Ltd., Kota vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Kota

ITA 1026/JPR/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur29 Jan 2019AY 2015-16
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153B(1)(b)

…LT 97 (DB) (Del) and Commissioner of Income Tax-II Vs. MAF Academy P. Ltd., 206 (2014) DLT 277 (DB) (Del). The aforesaid decisions mentioned above refer to the earlier decisions of Delhi High Court in Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Sophia Finance Ltd., [1994] 205 ITR 98 (FB)(Delhi), CIT Vs. Divine Leasing and Finance Limited [2008] 299 ITR 268 (Delhi) and observations of the Supreme Court in CIT Vs. Lovely Exports P. Ltd. [2008] 319 ITR (St.) 5 (SC). 12. The main submission of the learned counsel for the assessee is that once the assessee had been able to show that the share holder companies were duly incorporat…

M/S. Multi Metal Private Ltd., Kota vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Kota

ITA 1025/JPR/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur29 Jan 2019AY 2013-14
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153B(1)(b)

…LT 97 (DB) (Del) and Commissioner of Income Tax-II Vs. MAF Academy P. Ltd., 206 (2014) DLT 277 (DB) (Del). The aforesaid decisions mentioned above refer to the earlier decisions of Delhi High Court in Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Sophia Finance Ltd., [1994] 205 ITR 98 (FB)(Delhi), CIT Vs. Divine Leasing and Finance Limited [2008] 299 ITR 268 (Delhi) and observations of the Supreme Court in CIT Vs. Lovely Exports P. Ltd. [2008] 319 ITR (St.) 5 (SC). 12. The main submission of the learned counsel for the assessee is that once the assessee had been able to show that the share holder companies were duly incorporat…

M/S. Multi Metal Private Ltd., Kota vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Kota

ITA 1024/JPR/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur29 Jan 2019AY 2010-11
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153B(1)(b)

…LT 97 (DB) (Del) and Commissioner of Income Tax-II Vs. MAF Academy P. Ltd., 206 (2014) DLT 277 (DB) (Del). The aforesaid decisions mentioned above refer to the earlier decisions of Delhi High Court in Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Sophia Finance Ltd., [1994] 205 ITR 98 (FB)(Delhi), CIT Vs. Divine Leasing and Finance Limited [2008] 299 ITR 268 (Delhi) and observations of the Supreme Court in CIT Vs. Lovely Exports P. Ltd. [2008] 319 ITR (St.) 5 (SC). 12. The main submission of the learned counsel for the assessee is that once the assessee had been able to show that the share holder companies were duly incorporat…

ITO, WD-5(2), Kolkata vs. M/S Purbasa Commercial Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

ITA 1179/KOL/2015[2008-2009]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata25 Jan 2019AY 2008-2009

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Sainiassessment Year :2008-09 Income Tax Officer, V/S. M/S Purbasa Commercial Pvt. Ltd. 5/5 Clive Row, 4Th Ward-5(2), P-7, Chowringhee Square, Floor, Room No.26, 8Th Floor, Room No.6, Kolkata-700001 Kolkata-700 069 [Pan No.Aaecp 1267B] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Shri Saurabh Kumar, Addl. Cit-Dr अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri Subash Agarwal, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 15-01-2019 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 25-01-2019 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S.Godara:- This Revenue’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2008-09 Arises Against The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Kolkata’S Order Dated 29.06.2015, Passed In Case No.1575/Cit(A)-2/2015-16, In Proceedings U/S. 144 R.W.S 263 R.W.S. 143(3) R.W.S 147 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961; In Short ‘The Act’. Case File Perused. 2. The Revenue’S Sole Substantive Ground Raised In The Instant Appeal Seeks To Revere The Cit(A)’S Action Deleting Unexplained Cash Credits Addition Of ₹3.14 Lac Made In The Course Of Assessment Framed On 19.03.2015. The Assessee’S Case Before Assessing Officer Was That This Sum Represented Its Share Application / Premium Raised During The Course Of Relevant Previous Year. The Assessing Officer Held In The Course Of Assessment That Assessee Had Failed To Prove Identity, Genuineness & Creditworthiness Of The Investors

Section 144Section 68

…nvestment in Share Capital. 9. The CIT has also relied on following Judgment: i) Rampyari Devi Saraogivs.CIT 67 ITR 84 (SC) ii) Tara Devi Agarwal vs CIT 88 ITR 323 (SC) iii) Gee Vee Enterprises vs Addl. CIT 99 ITR 375, 386 (Del) iv) CIT vs Sophia Finance Ltd. 205 ITR 98 (Del) v) CIT vs Active Traders P. Ltd. 214 ITR 583 (Cal) ITA No.1179/Kol/2015 A.Y. 2008-09 ITO Wd-5(2), Kol. Vs. M/s Purbasa Commercial Pvt. Ltd. Page 5 vi) CIT vs NivedanVanijya Niyojan Ltd. 263 ITR 623 (Cal) vii) CIT vs Bhagwati Jewels Ltd. 201 ITR 461 (Del) 10. However, the fact of the above case are distinguishable as observed herein above th…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Kota vs. M/S Baran Roller Flour Mills Pvt. Ltd., Kota

ITA 1207/JPR/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur11 Jan 2019AY 2011-12
For Appellant: Shri Vijay Goyal (CA)For Respondent: Shri Varinder Mehta (CIT) fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@
Section 14ASection 68

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES, JAIPUR Jh fot; iky jkWo] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh foØe flag ;kno] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JM AND SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA Nos. 1206 & 1207/JP/2018 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years : 2010-11 & 11-12 cuke Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, M/s. Baran Roller Flour Mills P. Ltd. Vs. Central Circle, 6/7, Multimetals Campus, Kota. Large Scale Industrial Area, Kota. LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN No. AABCB 7695 N vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent C.O. Nos. 45 & 46/JP/2018 (Ari…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Kota vs. M/S Baran Roller Flour Mills Pvt. Ltd., Kota

ITA 1206/JPR/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur11 Jan 2019AY 2010-11
For Appellant: Shri Vijay Goyal (CA)For Respondent: Shri Varinder Mehta (CIT) fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@
Section 14ASection 68

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES, JAIPUR Jh fot; iky jkWo] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh foØe flag ;kno] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JM AND SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA Nos. 1206 & 1207/JP/2018 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years : 2010-11 & 11-12 cuke Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, M/s. Baran Roller Flour Mills P. Ltd. Vs. Central Circle, 6/7, Multimetals Campus, Kota. Large Scale Industrial Area, Kota. LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN No. AABCB 7695 N vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent C.O. Nos. 45 & 46/JP/2018 (Ari…

M/S Kota Dall Mill, Kota vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Kota

ITA 998/JPR/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur31 Dec 2018AY 2011-12
For Appellant: Shri Vijay Goyal & Shri Gulshan Agarwal (CAs)For Respondent: Shri Varinder Mehta (CIT)
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153B(1)(b)Section 68

…LT 97 (DB) (Del) and Commissioner of Income Tax-II Vs. MAF Academy P. Ltd., 206 (2014) DLT 277 (DB) (Del). The aforesaid decisions mentioned above refer to the earlier decisions of Delhi High Court in Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Sophia Finance Ltd., [1994] 205 ITR 98 (FB)(Delhi), CIT Vs. Divine Leasing and Finance Limited [2008] 299 ITR 268 (Delhi) and observations of the Supreme Court in CIT Vs. Lovely Exports P. Ltd. [2008] 319 ITR (St.) 5 (SC). 12. The main submission of the learned counsel for the assessee is that once the assessee had been able to show that the share holder companies were duly incorporat…

M/S Kota Dall Mill, Kota vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Kota

ITA 997/JPR/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur31 Dec 2018AY 2010-11
For Appellant: Shri Vijay Goyal & Shri Gulshan Agarwal (CAs)For Respondent: Shri Varinder Mehta (CIT)
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153B(1)(b)Section 68

…LT 97 (DB) (Del) and Commissioner of Income Tax-II Vs. MAF Academy P. Ltd., 206 (2014) DLT 277 (DB) (Del). The aforesaid decisions mentioned above refer to the earlier decisions of Delhi High Court in Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Sophia Finance Ltd., [1994] 205 ITR 98 (FB)(Delhi), CIT Vs. Divine Leasing and Finance Limited [2008] 299 ITR 268 (Delhi) and observations of the Supreme Court in CIT Vs. Lovely Exports P. Ltd. [2008] 319 ITR (St.) 5 (SC). 12. The main submission of the learned counsel for the assessee is that once the assessee had been able to show that the share holder companies were duly incorporat…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Kota vs. M/S Kota Dall Mill, Kota

ITA 1057/JPR/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur31 Dec 2018AY 2010-11
For Appellant: Shri Vijay Goyal & Shri Gulshan Agarwal (CAs)For Respondent: Shri Varinder Mehta (CIT)
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153B(1)(b)Section 68

…LT 97 (DB) (Del) and Commissioner of Income Tax-II Vs. MAF Academy P. Ltd., 206 (2014) DLT 277 (DB) (Del). The aforesaid decisions mentioned above refer to the earlier decisions of Delhi High Court in Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Sophia Finance Ltd., [1994] 205 ITR 98 (FB)(Delhi), CIT Vs. Divine Leasing and Finance Limited [2008] 299 ITR 268 (Delhi) and observations of the Supreme Court in CIT Vs. Lovely Exports P. Ltd. [2008] 319 ITR (St.) 5 (SC). 12. The main submission of the learned counsel for the assessee is that once the assessee had been able to show that the share holder companies were duly incorporat…

M/S Kota Dall Mill, Kota vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Kota

ITA 999/JPR/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur28 Dec 2018AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Shri Vijay Goyal & Shri Gulshan Agarwal (CAs)For Respondent: Shri Varinder Mehta (CIT)
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153B(1)(b)Section 68

…LT 97 (DB) (Del) and Commissioner of Income Tax-II Vs. MAF Academy P. Ltd., 206 (2014) DLT 277 (DB) (Del). The aforesaid decisions mentioned above refer to the earlier decisions of Delhi High Court in Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Sophia Finance Ltd., [1994] 205 ITR 98 (FB)(Delhi), CIT Vs. Divine Leasing and Finance Limited [2008] 299 ITR 268 (Delhi) and observations of the Supreme Court in CIT Vs. Lovely Exports P. Ltd. [2008] 319 ITR (St.) 5 (SC). 12. The main submission of the learned counsel for the assessee is that once the assessee had been able to show that the share holder companies were duly incorporat…

Paras Kumar Jain, Jaipur vs. ITO, Kota

ITA 279/JPR/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur13 Dec 2018AY 2008-09
For Appellant: Shri N. Kataria (CA)For Respondent: Shri Jai Singh (JCIT)
Section 139Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…s 68, but the principle behind introducing entries on the receipt side of the books of accounts is guided by the principle of genuineness of the source of such receipts. In a similar context, the Special Bench in the case of CIT v. Sophia Finance Ltd. (1994) 205 ITR 98/70 Taxman 69 (Delhi) opined that section 68 is very widely worded and an Income-tax officer is not precluded from making an enquiry as to the true nature and source thereof even if the same is credited as receipt of share application money. Mere fact that thepayment was received by cheque or that the applicants were companies, borne on the file of…

Stryton Exim India P.Ltd, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-24(2), New Delhi

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

ITA 5982/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Oct 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishisa No. 665/Del/2018 (In Ita No. 5982/Del/2018) (Assessment Year: 2014-15) Stryton Exim India Pvt Ltd, Vs. Ito, C/O. R Khare & Associates, Ward-24(2), 7/6, Sarvapriya Vihar, New Delhi New Delhi Pan: Aaics0797B (Appellant) (Respondent) Stryton Exim India Pvt Ltd, Vs. Ito, C/O. R Khare & Associates, Ward-24(2), 7/6, Sarvapriya Vihar, New Delhi New Delhi Pan: Aaics0797B (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Rahul Khare, AdvFor Respondent: Shri K Tewari, Sr. DR
Section 56(2)(viib)Section 68

…under:- 5: While setting aside the order of the Commissioner of Income- tax (Appeals); the Tribunal relied upon two decisions of this court, namely CIT v. Stellar Investment Ltd. [1991] 192 ITR 287 and a Full Bench decision in CIT v. Sophia Finance Ltd [1994] 205 ITR 98. Several other decisions have been rendered by this Court following the above two decisions^ The principle that has been laid down by the various decisions rendered by this Court from time to time is that if the existence of the applicant is proved, normally no further inquiry is necessary. 6. Learned counsel for the Revenue submits that the credi…