CIT v. Steller Investment Ltd.

251 ITR 263Supreme Court of India2001#379 most cited

What is CIT v. Steller Investment Ltd. authority for?

An increase in a company's subscribed share capital cannot be treated as the company's undisclosed income under section 68, even if the subscribers to the capital are found not to be genuine. The amount of share capital cannot be regarded as undisclosed income of the company itself.

233

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2010 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Steller Investment Ltd. · Section 68 Income Tax Act · bogus share capital · share application money · creditworthiness of subscriber · genuineness of transaction · onus of proof · undisclosed income of company · paper company · conversion of black money

Also reported as

115 Taxmann 99

Sections most often in play

Section 68Section 143(3)Section 133(6)Section 147Section 131Section 139(1)Section 153ASection 69C

Issues it is cited on

bogus share capitalcreditworthiness of the creditoronus of proofsource of sourceretracted statementpaper companyshare capital and share premiumshare application moneyaddition under section 68addition u/s 68genuineness of the transactionsection 132(1)

Judgments citing CIT v. Steller Investment Ltd.

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

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 4707/DEL/2012[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Dec 2015AY 2009-10

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

For Appellant: Sh. C.S. Anand, CAFor Respondent: Sh. T.Vasanthan, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 50C(1)Section 68

…f the appellant Hon'ble Delhi High Court, while deciding the cases of Divine Leasing & Finance Ltd., General Exports & Credits Ltd. and Lovely Exports Pvt. Ltd. (299 ITR 268), had taken care of the 11 earlier decisions in the cases of Stellar Investment Ltd. (251 ITR 263-SC}, Sumati Dayal (214 ITR 801-SC}, Sophia Finance Ltd (205 ITR 98-Del), Korley Trading Co. Ltd. (232 ITR 820-Cal), Shankar Industries (114 ITR 689-Cal), Precision Finance P. Ltd. (208 ITR 465- Cal), United Commercial and Industrial Company Pvt. Ltd. (187 ITR S96-Cal). It may be worth pointing out here that the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India has…

DCIT CC-45, Mumbai vs. Paramshkti Distributors P. Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed, whereas appeal of the revenue is allowed in part in terms indicated hereinabove

ITA 9224/MUM/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Oct 2015AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Pawan Singh, Jm आमकय अऩीर सिं./Ita No.8748/Mum/2010 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2005-2006) M/S Paramshakti Distributors Pvt. Vs. Acit, Cent. Cir-45, Ltd., 501-B, Elegant Business Mumbai Park, Andheri-Kurla Road, J.B.Nagar, Andheri(E), Mumbai- 400059 स्थममी रेखम सिं./ जीआइआय सिं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aabcp 5835 C (अऩीरमथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. & आमकय अऩीर सिं./Ita Nos.9223&9224/Mum/2010 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Years :2005-06 & 2006-07) Acit, Cent. Cir-45, Mumbai Vs. M/S Paramshakti Distributors Pvt. Ltd., 501-B, Elegant Business Park, Andheri-Kurla Road, J.B.Nagar, Andheri(E), Mumbai-400059 स्थममी रेखम सिं./ जीआइआय सिं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aabcp 5835 C (अऩीरमथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. यनधमवरयती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Vijay Mehta यमजस्र् की ओर से /Revenue By :Shri Deepkant Prasad & Shri Nimesh Yadav सुनर्मई की तमयीख / Date Of Hearing : 26/08/2015 घोषणम की तमयीख/Date Of Pronouncement 09/10/2015 आदेश / O R D E R Per R.C.Sharma (A.M):

For Appellant: Shri Vijay MehtaFor Respondent: Shri Deepkant Prasad & Shri Nimesh Yadav
Section 143(3)Section 68

…आयकर अपीऱीय अधिकरण, म ुंबई न्यायपीठ ‘सी’, म ुंबई । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C”, BENCH MUMBAI सर्वश्री आय.सी.शभमव, रेखम सदस्म एवुं श्री ऩर्न ससिंह, न्ममयमक सदस्म BEFORE SHRI R.C.SHARMA, AM & SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JM आमकय अऩीर सिं./ITA No.8748/Mum/2010 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2005-2006) M/s Paramshakti Distributors Pvt. Vs. ACIT, Cent. Cir-45, Ltd., 501-B, Elegant Business Mumbai Park, Andheri-Kurla Road, J.B.Nagar, Andheri(E), Mumbai- 400059 स्थममी रेखम सिं./ जीआइआय सिं./ PAN/GIR No. : AABCP 5835 C (अऩीरमथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. AND आमकय अऩीर सिं./ITA Nos.9223&9224/Mum/2010 (नििा…

DCIT CC-45, Mumbai vs. Paramshkti Distributors P. Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed, whereas appeal of the revenue is allowed in part in terms indicated hereinabove

ITA 9223/MUM/2010[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Oct 2015AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Pawan Singh, Jm आमकय अऩीर सिं./Ita No.8748/Mum/2010 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2005-2006) M/S Paramshakti Distributors Pvt. Vs. Acit, Cent. Cir-45, Ltd., 501-B, Elegant Business Mumbai Park, Andheri-Kurla Road, J.B.Nagar, Andheri(E), Mumbai- 400059 स्थममी रेखम सिं./ जीआइआय सिं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aabcp 5835 C (अऩीरमथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. & आमकय अऩीर सिं./Ita Nos.9223&9224/Mum/2010 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Years :2005-06 & 2006-07) Acit, Cent. Cir-45, Mumbai Vs. M/S Paramshakti Distributors Pvt. Ltd., 501-B, Elegant Business Park, Andheri-Kurla Road, J.B.Nagar, Andheri(E), Mumbai-400059 स्थममी रेखम सिं./ जीआइआय सिं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aabcp 5835 C (अऩीरमथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. यनधमवरयती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Vijay Mehta यमजस्र् की ओर से /Revenue By :Shri Deepkant Prasad & Shri Nimesh Yadav सुनर्मई की तमयीख / Date Of Hearing : 26/08/2015 घोषणम की तमयीख/Date Of Pronouncement 09/10/2015 आदेश / O R D E R Per R.C.Sharma (A.M):

For Appellant: Shri Vijay MehtaFor Respondent: Shri Deepkant Prasad & Shri Nimesh Yadav
Section 143(3)Section 68

…आयकर अपीऱीय अधिकरण, म ुंबई न्यायपीठ ‘सी’, म ुंबई । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C”, BENCH MUMBAI सर्वश्री आय.सी.शभमव, रेखम सदस्म एवुं श्री ऩर्न ससिंह, न्ममयमक सदस्म BEFORE SHRI R.C.SHARMA, AM & SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JM आमकय अऩीर सिं./ITA No.8748/Mum/2010 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2005-2006) M/s Paramshakti Distributors Pvt. Vs. ACIT, Cent. Cir-45, Ltd., 501-B, Elegant Business Mumbai Park, Andheri-Kurla Road, J.B.Nagar, Andheri(E), Mumbai- 400059 स्थममी रेखम सिं./ जीआइआय सिं./ PAN/GIR No. : AABCP 5835 C (अऩीरमथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. AND आमकय अऩीर सिं./ITA Nos.9223&9224/Mum/2010 (नििा…

Parashakti Distributors P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT Cen Cir 45, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed, whereas appeal of the revenue is allowed in part in terms indicated hereinabove

ITA 8748/MUM/2010[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Oct 2015AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Pawan Singh, Jm आमकय अऩीर सिं./Ita No.8748/Mum/2010 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2005-2006) M/S Paramshakti Distributors Pvt. Vs. Acit, Cent. Cir-45, Ltd., 501-B, Elegant Business Mumbai Park, Andheri-Kurla Road, J.B.Nagar, Andheri(E), Mumbai- 400059 स्थममी रेखम सिं./ जीआइआय सिं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aabcp 5835 C (अऩीरमथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. & आमकय अऩीर सिं./Ita Nos.9223&9224/Mum/2010 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Years :2005-06 & 2006-07) Acit, Cent. Cir-45, Mumbai Vs. M/S Paramshakti Distributors Pvt. Ltd., 501-B, Elegant Business Park, Andheri-Kurla Road, J.B.Nagar, Andheri(E), Mumbai-400059 स्थममी रेखम सिं./ जीआइआय सिं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aabcp 5835 C (अऩीरमथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. यनधमवरयती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Vijay Mehta यमजस्र् की ओर से /Revenue By :Shri Deepkant Prasad & Shri Nimesh Yadav सुनर्मई की तमयीख / Date Of Hearing : 26/08/2015 घोषणम की तमयीख/Date Of Pronouncement 09/10/2015 आदेश / O R D E R Per R.C.Sharma (A.M):

For Appellant: Shri Vijay MehtaFor Respondent: Shri Deepkant Prasad & Shri Nimesh Yadav
Section 143(3)Section 68

…आयकर अपीऱीय अधिकरण, म ुंबई न्यायपीठ ‘सी’, म ुंबई । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C”, BENCH MUMBAI सर्वश्री आय.सी.शभमव, रेखम सदस्म एवुं श्री ऩर्न ससिंह, न्ममयमक सदस्म BEFORE SHRI R.C.SHARMA, AM & SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JM आमकय अऩीर सिं./ITA No.8748/Mum/2010 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2005-2006) M/s Paramshakti Distributors Pvt. Vs. ACIT, Cent. Cir-45, Ltd., 501-B, Elegant Business Mumbai Park, Andheri-Kurla Road, J.B.Nagar, Andheri(E), Mumbai- 400059 स्थममी रेखम सिं./ जीआइआय सिं./ PAN/GIR No. : AABCP 5835 C (अऩीरमथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. AND आमकय अऩीर सिं./ITA Nos.9223&9224/Mum/2010 (नििा…

Onassis Axles Private Limited vs. Commissioner of Income Tax

ITA/31/2013HC Delhi13 Feb 2014
Section 131Section 68

…ntion of the Court to the remand report called for and considered by the CIT (Appeals) and underlined the fact that the impugned order entirely overlooked these circumstances. 10. It was argued that the Supreme Court, in CIT v. Stellar Investment Ltd., (2001) 251 ITR 263 (SC), has held that mere inability to ensure the presence of the share applicants/investors does not justify a conclusion of bogus investment. Likewise, the decision of the Madras High Court in the case of CIT v. Electropolychem Ltd., (2007) 294 (ITR) 661 (Mad) has been relied on. 11. In this case, the AO had sought for details of the bank accoun…

Commissioner of Income Tax

ITA/497/2010HC Delhi08 Nov 2012
Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 148(2)Section 260ASection 68

…6791-DB ITA No.497/2010 Page 7 of 9 8. The Tribunal referred to the judgment of the Supreme Court in CIT vs. Stellar Investment Ltd (2001) 251 ITR 263 (SC) and the judgments of the Delhi High Court in Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Sophia Finance Ltd. (1994) 205 ITR 98 and CIT vs. Lovely Export (Supra) and thereafter in paragraph 11 noted that the share applicants confirmed having made the investment in the assessee company along with other documents such as income tax returns etc. and thus…

Gupta Citi Shelters Ltd vs. Commissioner of Income Tax New Delhi

Appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA/1324/2008HC Delhi23 Dec 2011

Bench: CASES PERTAINING TO SPL.DIVISION BENCHES

…lowing the judgments of the Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Lovely Exports (P) Ltd. reported in (20089) 216 CTR (SC 195) and also in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Steller Investment Ltd. reported in (2001) 251 ITR 263 (SC) has ruled that it not for the assessee to place material before the Assessing Officer in regard to creditworthiness of the shareholders. If the company has given the addresses of the shareholders and their identity is not in dispute, where they were capable of investing, the assessing officer shall investigate. It is not for the a…

Gupta Citi Shelters Ltd vs. Commissioner of Income Tax New Delhi

Appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA - 1324 / 2008HC Delhi23 Dec 2011

…lowing the judgments of the Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Lovely Exports (P) Ltd. reported in (20089) 216 CTR (SC 195) and also in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Steller Investment Ltd. reported in (2001) 251 ITR 263 (SC) has ruled that it not for the assessee to place material before the Assessing Officer in regard to creditworthiness of the shareholders. If the company has given the addresses of the shareholders and their identity is not in dispute, where they were capable of investing, the assessing officer shall investigate. It is not for the a…

Commissioner of Income Tax Delhi -IV vs. Gold Leaf Capital Corporation India Ltd

Appeal is allowed in the aforesaid terms

ITA/798/2009HC Delhi02 Sept 2011

Bench: CASES PERTAINING TO SPL.DIVISION BENCHES

Section 68

…Page 4 of 12 As regards the share capital which has been allotted of `46,07,000/-, no addition can be made in the hands of the appellant company keeping in view the Hon‟ble Supreme Court decision in the case of Stellar Investments – 251 ITR 263. However, ratio of this decision is not applicable to share application money against which shares have not been allotted. Accordingly, keeping in view the above, the addition of `1,79,50,000/- is confirmed. The appellant company is entitled to a relief of `46,07,000/-, as discussed above.” 5. Against the aforesaid order dated…

Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Up Bone Mills India Ltd

ITA/2094/2010HC Delhi31 Jan 2011

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.SIKRI,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.L. MEHTA

Section 68

…ourt following the judgments of the Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Lovely Exports (P) Ltd. reported in (20089) 216 CTR (SC 195) and also in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Steller Investment Ltd. reported in (2001) 251 ITR 263 (SC) has ruled that it not for the assessee to place material before the Assessing Officer in regard to creditworthiness of the ITA Nos.2093, 2094, 2095 of 2010, 514 of 2007 & 539 of 2008 Page 10 of 28 shareholders. If the company has given the ciddresses of & the shareholders and their identity is not in dispute, where ~ they were cap…

Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Oasis Hospitalities (Pvt.) Ltd

ITA-2093/2010HC Delhi31 Jan 2011
Section 68

…ourt following the judgments of the Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Lovely Exports (P) Ltd. reported in (20089) 216 CTR (SC 195) and also in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Steller Investment Ltd. reported in (2001) 251 ITR 263 (SC) has ruled that it not for the assessee to place material before the Assessing Officer in regard to creditworthiness of the shareholders. If the company has given the addresses of the shareholders and their identity is not in dispute, where they were capable of investing, the assessing officer shall investigate. It is not for the ass…

CIT vs. Oasis Hospitalities Pvt Ltd

ITA - 2093 / 2010HC Delhi31 Jan 2011
Section 68

…ourt following the judgments of the Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Lovely Exports (P) Ltd. reported in (20089) 216 CTR (SC 195) and also in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Steller Investment Ltd. reported in (2001) 251 ITR 263 (SC) has ruled that it not for the assessee to place material before the Assessing Officer in regard to creditworthiness of the shareholders. If the company has given the addresses of the shareholders and their identity is not in dispute, where they were capable of investing, the assessing officer shall investigate. It is not for the ass…

Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Delhi Extrusion Pvt Ltd

ITA - 571 / 2010HC Delhi03 Jun 2010

…CIT(A) accepted the contention of the Assessee after relying upon various decisions of 3 ![](_page_2_Picture_1.jpeg) ![](_page_2_Picture_2.jpeg) including the decision of the Supreme Court in Commissioner of Income Tax v. Steller Investment Ltd., (2001) 251 ITR 263(SC). 5. The Tribunal upheld the view of the CIT(A) and also noted the decision rendered by the Supreme Court in CIT V. Lovely Exports (P) Ltd., (2008) 216 CTR 195. In that case, it was observed as follows:- "Can the amount of share money be regarded as undisclosed income under s. 68 of IT Act, 1961? We find no merit in this Special Leave Petit…