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.

Nadidwala Grandson Entertainment Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT CC-4(4), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee i

ITA 1494/MUM/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Jun 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Ms.Kavitha Rajagopalita Nos.1492 To 1497/Mum/2021 (A.Ys. 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2013-14 To 2016-17) Nadiadwala Grandson Vs. Dcit, Cc-4(4), Entertainment Pvt. Ltd. 19Th Floor, Air India 1701, 17Th Floor, Lotus Building, Nariman Point, Grandeur, Off Veera Desai Mumbai - 400021 Road, Andheri West, Mumbai – 400053 स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./ Pan/Gir No: Aaccn0909J Appellant .. Respondent Ita Nos.2221 To 2223, 2237 & 2238/Mum/2021 (A.Ys. 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2013-14, 2015-16 & 2016-17) Asst. Commissioner Of Vs. Nadiadwala Grandson Income Tax, Central Circle- Entertainment Pvt. Ltd. 4(4),Central Range-4 Nadiadwala Villa, Ocean Pr.Cit(C)-2,R.No. 1922, View, Jp Road, Versova, 19Th Floor, Air India Andheri (West), Building, Nariman Point, Mumbai - 400061 Mumbai - 400021 स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./ Pan/Gir No: Aaccn0909J Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Mani Jain & Prateek Jain Respondent By : Dr. Mahesh Akhade Date Of Hearing 24.03.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 07.06.2022

For Appellant: Mani Jain &For Respondent: Dr. Mahesh Akhade
Section 132(1)Section 68

…Goa Sponge and Power Ltd (13/02/2012) Tax Appeal No. 16 of 2012 (High Court-Bombay) 2. CIT vs. Creative World Tele films Ltd.(2011) 333 ITR 100 (Bom-High Court) 3. CIT vs. Lovely Exports (P) Ltd (2008) 216 CTR 195(SC) 4. CIT vs. Stellar Investment Ltd (2001) 251 ITR 263(SC) (Civil Appeal) 5. CIT vs. Nav Bharat Duolex Ltd. (2013) 35 Taxmann.com289(AII- High Court) 6. CIT vs. JayDee Securities & Finance Ltd. (2013) 32 Taxmann.com91 (All- High Court) 7. ACIT vs. Venkateshwarlspat Pvt. Ltd (2009) 319 ITR 393 (Chhatisgarh- High Court) 8. Mod Creations Pvt. Ltd vs. ITO (2013)354 ITR 282 (Del_High Court) 9. CIT vs. Al…

Nadidwala Grandson Entertainment Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT CC-4(4), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee i

ITA 1493/MUM/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Jun 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Ms.Kavitha Rajagopalita Nos.1492 To 1497/Mum/2021 (A.Ys. 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2013-14 To 2016-17) Nadiadwala Grandson Vs. Dcit, Cc-4(4), Entertainment Pvt. Ltd. 19Th Floor, Air India 1701, 17Th Floor, Lotus Building, Nariman Point, Grandeur, Off Veera Desai Mumbai - 400021 Road, Andheri West, Mumbai – 400053 स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./ Pan/Gir No: Aaccn0909J Appellant .. Respondent Ita Nos.2221 To 2223, 2237 & 2238/Mum/2021 (A.Ys. 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2013-14, 2015-16 & 2016-17) Asst. Commissioner Of Vs. Nadiadwala Grandson Income Tax, Central Circle- Entertainment Pvt. Ltd. 4(4),Central Range-4 Nadiadwala Villa, Ocean Pr.Cit(C)-2,R.No. 1922, View, Jp Road, Versova, 19Th Floor, Air India Andheri (West), Building, Nariman Point, Mumbai - 400061 Mumbai - 400021 स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./ Pan/Gir No: Aaccn0909J Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Mani Jain & Prateek Jain Respondent By : Dr. Mahesh Akhade Date Of Hearing 24.03.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 07.06.2022

For Appellant: Mani Jain &For Respondent: Dr. Mahesh Akhade
Section 132(1)Section 68

…Goa Sponge and Power Ltd (13/02/2012) Tax Appeal No. 16 of 2012 (High Court-Bombay) 2. CIT vs. Creative World Tele films Ltd.(2011) 333 ITR 100 (Bom-High Court) 3. CIT vs. Lovely Exports (P) Ltd (2008) 216 CTR 195(SC) 4. CIT vs. Stellar Investment Ltd (2001) 251 ITR 263(SC) (Civil Appeal) 5. CIT vs. Nav Bharat Duolex Ltd. (2013) 35 Taxmann.com289(AII- High Court) 6. CIT vs. JayDee Securities & Finance Ltd. (2013) 32 Taxmann.com91 (All- High Court) 7. ACIT vs. Venkateshwarlspat Pvt. Ltd (2009) 319 ITR 393 (Chhatisgarh- High Court) 8. Mod Creations Pvt. Ltd vs. ITO (2013)354 ITR 282 (Del_High Court) 9. CIT vs. Al…

Nadiadwala Grandson Entertainment Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT CC-4(4), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee i

ITA 1492/MUM/2021[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Jun 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Ms.Kavitha Rajagopalita Nos.1492 To 1497/Mum/2021 (A.Ys. 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2013-14 To 2016-17) Nadiadwala Grandson Vs. Dcit, Cc-4(4), Entertainment Pvt. Ltd. 19Th Floor, Air India 1701, 17Th Floor, Lotus Building, Nariman Point, Grandeur, Off Veera Desai Mumbai - 400021 Road, Andheri West, Mumbai – 400053 स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./ Pan/Gir No: Aaccn0909J Appellant .. Respondent Ita Nos.2221 To 2223, 2237 & 2238/Mum/2021 (A.Ys. 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2013-14, 2015-16 & 2016-17) Asst. Commissioner Of Vs. Nadiadwala Grandson Income Tax, Central Circle- Entertainment Pvt. Ltd. 4(4),Central Range-4 Nadiadwala Villa, Ocean Pr.Cit(C)-2,R.No. 1922, View, Jp Road, Versova, 19Th Floor, Air India Andheri (West), Building, Nariman Point, Mumbai - 400061 Mumbai - 400021 स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./ Pan/Gir No: Aaccn0909J Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Mani Jain & Prateek Jain Respondent By : Dr. Mahesh Akhade Date Of Hearing 24.03.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 07.06.2022

For Appellant: Mani Jain &For Respondent: Dr. Mahesh Akhade
Section 132(1)Section 68

…Goa Sponge and Power Ltd (13/02/2012) Tax Appeal No. 16 of 2012 (High Court-Bombay) 2. CIT vs. Creative World Tele films Ltd.(2011) 333 ITR 100 (Bom-High Court) 3. CIT vs. Lovely Exports (P) Ltd (2008) 216 CTR 195(SC) 4. CIT vs. Stellar Investment Ltd (2001) 251 ITR 263(SC) (Civil Appeal) 5. CIT vs. Nav Bharat Duolex Ltd. (2013) 35 Taxmann.com289(AII- High Court) 6. CIT vs. JayDee Securities & Finance Ltd. (2013) 32 Taxmann.com91 (All- High Court) 7. ACIT vs. Venkateshwarlspat Pvt. Ltd (2009) 319 ITR 393 (Chhatisgarh- High Court) 8. Mod Creations Pvt. Ltd vs. ITO (2013)354 ITR 282 (Del_High Court) 9. CIT vs. Al…

ACIT, Ncc - 3, Chennai vs. Shri Pakkeer Tulkarnai Gulam Alam, Chennai

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

ITA 2486/CHNY/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai13 May 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2486/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2016-17

For Appellant: Mr.M.Karunakaran, AdvFor Respondent: Mr.Sanat Kumar Raha
Section 68

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘बी’ !ायपीठ, चे$ई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH: CHENNAI "ी महावीर िसंह, माननीय उपा"", एवं 'ी जी. मंजूनाथा, , माननीय लेखा सद) के सम" BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, HON’BLE VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI G. MANJUNATHA, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.2486/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2016-17 v. The Asst. Commissioner- Mr.Pakkeer Tulkarnai- of Income Tax, Gulam Alam Shah, No.1, 4th Avenue, Non-Corporate Circle-3, Chennai. Harrington Road, Chetpet, Chennai. [PAN: ACXPA 8156 G] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) Department by : Mr.Sanat Kumar Raha, Addl.CIT…

The ITO, Ward-1(1)(2), Vadodara vs. M/S. Dukraft Paper Distributor Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

ITA 452/AHD/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad27 Apr 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pramod M. Jagtap & Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri S. S. Shukla, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Shri M. K. Patel, A.R
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI PRAMOD M. JAGTAP, VICE PRESIDENT & Ms. MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No. 452/Ahd/2016 (Assessment Year: 2012-13) ITO Vs. M/s. Dukraft Paper Ward-1(1)(2), Distributor Pvt. Ltd. 107, 1st Floor, City Mall, Vadodara-390007 New Link Road, Andheri West Mumbai-400053 [PAN No.AADCD0768Q] (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri S. S. Shukla, Sr. DR Respondent by : Shri M. K. Patel, A.R. Date of Hearing 31.03.2022 Date of Pronouncement 27.04.2022 O R D E R PER MADHUMITA ROY, JM: The instant appeal filed by the Revenue is directed agai…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax-4(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Qmax Synthetics Private Limited, Mumbai

ITA 4378/MUM/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Apr 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhailacit-4(3)(1) Vs. M/S Qmax Synthetics R. No. 649, 6Th Floor, Pvt. Ltd., 5-B/174, Aayakar Bhavan, Sanjay Building, Mittal Mumbai – 400 020 Industrial Estate, Andheri (E), Mumbai 400 059 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aaacq0206D Respondent .. Appellant

For Appellant: Ashok BansalFor Respondent: T. Shankar
Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 68

…1 ITA No.4378/Mum/2017 A.Y.2008-09 ACIT-4(3)(1) Vs. M/s Qmax Synthetics pvt. Ltd. THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL, JUDICIAL MEMBER ACIT-4(3)(1) Vs. M/s Qmax Synthetics R. No. 649, 6th Floor, Pvt. Ltd., 5-B/174, Aayakar Bhavan, Sanjay Building, Mittal Mumbai – 400 020 Industrial Estate, Andheri (E), Mumbai 400 059 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No: AAACQ0206D Respondent .. Appellant Appellant by : Ashok Bansal Respondent by : T. Shankar Date of Hearing 23.02.2022 Date of Pronouncement 27.04.2022 आदेश / O R D E…

M/S Davalagiri Property Developers Private Limited, Bangalore vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-2(1)(2), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed

ITA 568/BANG/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore11 Apr 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri V. Srinivasan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Priyadarshi Mishra, Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 133(6)Section 234Section 68

…orts, 216 CTR 195 (SC) and the judgment of the Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT v. ASK Brothers Ltd., 333 ITR 111 (Kar) and CIT v. Arunananda Textiles P. Ltd. , 333 ITR 116 (Kar) and the judgment of the Supreme Court in CIT v. Stellar Investments Ltd., 251 ITR 263 (SC). Being so, in our opinion, the assessee discharged all the burden cast upon it with regard to identity and capacity of the lender and genuineness of the transaction and the department is not able to bring on record any material contrary to these facts brought on record by the assessee. Therefore, we are of the view that the share application…

Rukmani Infra Projects Pvt. Ltd., Bhubaneswar vs. ACIT, Circle-1(2), Bhubaneswar

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

ITA 358/CTK/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack30 Mar 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं./Ita No.358/Ctk/2017 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2013-2014) Rukmani Infra Projects Ltd., Vs Acit, Circle-1(2), Bhubaneswar Plot No.251, District Centre, C.S.Pur, Bhubaneswar-16 Pan No. : Aaecr 1585 L (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. यनधागररती की ओर से /Assessee By : None : Shri Manoj Kumar Goutam, Cit-Dr राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 08/03/2022 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 30/03/2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Arun Khodpia, Am : This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Has Been Directed Against The Order Passed By The Ld. Cit(A)-1, Bhubaneswar, Dated 16.06.2017, For The Assessment Year 2013-2014. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Extracted From The Available Records Are That, The Assessee, A Company Incorporated Under The Companies Act, 1956, Engaged In The Business Of Erection, Commissioning, Technical & Maintenance Service To Different Power Plants. The Return Of Income For The Ay 2013-14 Was Filed By The Assessee On 01.10.2013 Declaring A Total Income Of Rs.1,65,91,030/-. The Case Of The Assessee Was Selected Under Cass. Notice U/S 143(2) & 143(1) Were Issued & Served On The Assessee. Assessment Proceedings Were Completed By The Ao & Concluded With An Addition Of Rs.3,58,95,574/- Under Four Different

For Appellant: None
Section 143(2)Section 68

…d, bank statement of the company Mahabali Enclave Pvt Ltd., the investment company to whom the shares were allotted by the assessee 5 company. Assessee has further submitted following case laws to substantiate its contention: i) CIT Vs Stellar investment Ltd 251 ITR 263 [SC] ii) CIT Vs Lovely Exports (P) Ltd 216 CTR 195[SC] iii) CIT, Meerut Vs M/s VAN Resorts & Hotels (P) Ltd. Allahabad HC iii) CIT, Meerut Vs Nav Bharat Duples Ltd. Allahabad HC iv) CIT Vs Oasis Hospitalities Pvt Ltd & UP Bone Mills India Ltd. Delhi HC v) Vijay power generators Ltd & Director of Income Tax, Delhi HC 6.3 In conclusion to submissio…

Arvind Hanjarimal Jain, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT 31 (2), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 270/MUM/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Mar 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Amarjit Singh, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Jain DixitFor Respondent: Shri Mehul Jain
Section 132Section 133(6)Section 139Section 143Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 154

…CTR 195 (SC) "If the share application money is received by the assessee company from alleged bogus shareholders, whose names are given to the AO, then the Department is free to proceed to reopen their assessee company." CIT vs. Steller Investment Ltd (2001) 251 ITR 263 (SC) (civil appeal) "That the increase in subscribed capital of the respondent company could not be a device of converting black money into white with the help of formation of an investment company, on the round that, even if it be assumed that the subscribers to the increased capital were not genuine, tinder no circumstances could the amount of…

Arvind Hanjarimal Jain, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT 31 (2), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 269/MUM/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Mar 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Amarjit Singh, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Jain DixitFor Respondent: Shri Mehul Jain
Section 132Section 133(6)Section 139Section 143Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 154

…CTR 195 (SC) "If the share application money is received by the assessee company from alleged bogus shareholders, whose names are given to the AO, then the Department is free to proceed to reopen their assessee company." CIT vs. Steller Investment Ltd (2001) 251 ITR 263 (SC) (civil appeal) "That the increase in subscribed capital of the respondent company could not be a device of converting black money into white with the help of formation of an investment company, on the round that, even if it be assumed that the subscribers to the increased capital were not genuine, tinder no circumstances could the amount of…

Arvind Hanjarimal Jain, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT 31 (2), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 268/MUM/2020[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Mar 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Amarjit Singh, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Jain DixitFor Respondent: Shri Mehul Jain
Section 132Section 133(6)Section 139Section 143Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 154

…CTR 195 (SC) "If the share application money is received by the assessee company from alleged bogus shareholders, whose names are given to the AO, then the Department is free to proceed to reopen their assessee company." CIT vs. Steller Investment Ltd (2001) 251 ITR 263 (SC) (civil appeal) "That the increase in subscribed capital of the respondent company could not be a device of converting black money into white with the help of formation of an investment company, on the round that, even if it be assumed that the subscribers to the increased capital were not genuine, tinder no circumstances could the amount of…

Arvind Hanjarimal Jain, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT 31 (2), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 267/MUM/2020[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Mar 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Amarjit Singh, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Jain DixitFor Respondent: Shri Mehul Jain
Section 132Section 133(6)Section 139Section 143Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 154

…CTR 195 (SC) "If the share application money is received by the assessee company from alleged bogus shareholders, whose names are given to the AO, then the Department is free to proceed to reopen their assessee company." CIT vs. Steller Investment Ltd (2001) 251 ITR 263 (SC) (civil appeal) "That the increase in subscribed capital of the respondent company could not be a device of converting black money into white with the help of formation of an investment company, on the round that, even if it be assumed that the subscribers to the increased capital were not genuine, tinder no circumstances could the amount of…

Sejal Jewellers Pvt. Ltd., Surat vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(1)(2), Surat

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 435/AHD/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Surat28 Feb 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shripawan Singh, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.435/Ahd/2017 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2012-13) (Virtual Court Hearing) Sejal Jewellers Pvt. Ltd, Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(1)(2), V Ug-4/5 Rangila Park, Ghod Dod Surat, Aaykar Bhavan, Majura Gate, S. Road, Surat-395007 Surat "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaqcs 8686 P (Appellant ) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Rasesh Shah, CAFor Respondent: Shri H.P. Meena– CIT-DR
Section 131Section 131(1)(d)Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 68

…ced the money. How this amount of increased share capital could be assessed in the hands of the company itself was beyond understanding. The Hon'ble Supreme Court has agreed with this view, and dismissed the SLP of Revenue in CIT v/s Stellar Investment Ltd in 251 ITR 263 (SC). 22. The Hon'ble jurisdictional ITAT in the case of Pankaj Enka v/s DCIT in ITA No.816/Ahd/2013 has held that: “ the assessee has discharged the primary onus to prove as genuine share application money. On perusal of bank statement, no cash has been deposited by them before issue of cheque to the assessee towards share application money. I…

Dy CIT Central Circle-4(1), Mumbai vs. M/S Vinodkumar Bajaj & Company HUF, Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 1873/MUM/2020[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jan 2022AY 2009-10
For Appellant: Ms. Hema SharmaFor Respondent: Shri S.N. Kabra
Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 68

…Dy. CIT,CC-4(1) Vs. M/s Vinodkumar Bajaj & Company, M/s Ramniwas Bajaj & Company 2. CIT vs. Creative World tele films Ltd.(2011) 333 ITR 100 (Bom- High Court) 3. CIT vs. Lovely Exports Pvt. Ltd (2008) 216 CTR 195 (SC) 4. CIT vs. Stellar Investment Ltd (2001) 251 ITR 263(SC) (Civil Appeal) 5. CIT vs. Nav Bharat Duolex Ltd (20l3) 35 Taxmann.com 289 (AII- High 6. CIT vs. JayDee Securities & Finance Ltd, (2013), 32 Taxmann.com 91 (All High Court) 7. ACIT vs. Venkateshwarlspat Pvt. Ltd (2009) 319 ITR 393 (Chhatisgarh-High Court) 8. Mod Creations Pvt. Ltd vs. ITO (2013) 354 ITR 282 (Delhi High Court) 9. CIT vs. Al Ana…

ACIT CC-3(2), Chennai vs. Suryadev Alloys & Power P Ltd, Chennai

ITA 1982/CHNY/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 Dec 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.:1982, 1746, 1747, 1748, 1749, 1750 & 1751/Chny/2017 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2013-14, 2007-08, 2008-09, 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2012-13 The Acit, M/S. Suryadev Alloys & Central Circle – 3(2), Power Pvt. Ltd., V. Chennai – 600 034. No.497 & 498, Isana Building, 8Th Floor, Poonamallee High Road, Arumbakkam, Chennai – 600 106. Pan: Aakcs 1246B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) & आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.:1788/Chny/2017 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/S. Suryadev Alloys & Power The Acit, Pvt. Ltd., Central Circle – 3(2), V. No.497 & 498, Isana Building, Chennai – 600 034. 8Th Floor,Poonamallee High Road, Arumbakkam, Chennai – 600 106. Pan: Aakcs 1246B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) &

For Appellant: Shri S. Sridhar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri S. Bharat, CIT-DR
Section 113Section 153BSection 68

…ineness and credit worthiness are deeper and obstrusive aspects. 2.4 The ld. CI”F(A) ought to have appreciated that the decisions of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of M/s Lovely Exports Pvt Ltd (216 CTR 195 - January 2008) and M/s Steller Investments Ltd (251 ITR 263 - July 2000) are distinguishable one to the facts of the case of the assessee in that, in the present case, the investing companies were non-existent and as such the question of reopening of assessment in the hands of the non-existent investors does not arise. 2.5 The ld.CIT(A) ought to have appreciated that the decision of Hon’ble High Court of…

ACIT, Chennai vs. Bmp Steels P Ltd, Thiruvallur

ITA 1981/CHNY/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 Dec 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.:1982, 1746, 1747, 1748, 1749, 1750 & 1751/Chny/2017 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2013-14, 2007-08, 2008-09, 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2012-13 The Acit, M/S. Suryadev Alloys & Central Circle – 3(2), Power Pvt. Ltd., V. Chennai – 600 034. No.497 & 498, Isana Building, 8Th Floor, Poonamallee High Road, Arumbakkam, Chennai – 600 106. Pan: Aakcs 1246B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) & आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.:1788/Chny/2017 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/S. Suryadev Alloys & Power The Acit, Pvt. Ltd., Central Circle – 3(2), V. No.497 & 498, Isana Building, Chennai – 600 034. 8Th Floor,Poonamallee High Road, Arumbakkam, Chennai – 600 106. Pan: Aakcs 1246B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) &

For Appellant: Shri S. Sridhar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri S. Bharat, CIT-DR
Section 113Section 153BSection 68

…ineness and credit worthiness are deeper and obstrusive aspects. 2.4 The ld. CI”F(A) ought to have appreciated that the decisions of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of M/s Lovely Exports Pvt Ltd (216 CTR 195 - January 2008) and M/s Steller Investments Ltd (251 ITR 263 - July 2000) are distinguishable one to the facts of the case of the assessee in that, in the present case, the investing companies were non-existent and as such the question of reopening of assessment in the hands of the non-existent investors does not arise. 2.5 The ld.CIT(A) ought to have appreciated that the decision of Hon’ble High Court of…

ACIT CC-3(2), Chennai vs. Suryadev Alloys & Power P Ltd, Chennai

ITA 1751/CHNY/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 Dec 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.:1982, 1746, 1747, 1748, 1749, 1750 & 1751/Chny/2017 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2013-14, 2007-08, 2008-09, 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2012-13 The Acit, M/S. Suryadev Alloys & Central Circle – 3(2), Power Pvt. Ltd., V. Chennai – 600 034. No.497 & 498, Isana Building, 8Th Floor, Poonamallee High Road, Arumbakkam, Chennai – 600 106. Pan: Aakcs 1246B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) & आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.:1788/Chny/2017 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/S. Suryadev Alloys & Power The Acit, Pvt. Ltd., Central Circle – 3(2), V. No.497 & 498, Isana Building, Chennai – 600 034. 8Th Floor,Poonamallee High Road, Arumbakkam, Chennai – 600 106. Pan: Aakcs 1246B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) &

For Appellant: Shri S. Sridhar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri S. Bharat, CIT-DR
Section 113Section 153BSection 68

…ineness and credit worthiness are deeper and obstrusive aspects. 2.4 The ld. CI”F(A) ought to have appreciated that the decisions of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of M/s Lovely Exports Pvt Ltd (216 CTR 195 - January 2008) and M/s Steller Investments Ltd (251 ITR 263 - July 2000) are distinguishable one to the facts of the case of the assessee in that, in the present case, the investing companies were non-existent and as such the question of reopening of assessment in the hands of the non-existent investors does not arise. 2.5 The ld.CIT(A) ought to have appreciated that the decision of Hon’ble High Court of…

ACIT CC-3(2), Chennai vs. Suryadev Alloys & Power P Ltd, Chennai

ITA 1750/CHNY/2017[ 2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 Dec 2021

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.:1982, 1746, 1747, 1748, 1749, 1750 & 1751/Chny/2017 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2013-14, 2007-08, 2008-09, 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2012-13 The Acit, M/S. Suryadev Alloys & Central Circle – 3(2), Power Pvt. Ltd., V. Chennai – 600 034. No.497 & 498, Isana Building, 8Th Floor, Poonamallee High Road, Arumbakkam, Chennai – 600 106. Pan: Aakcs 1246B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) & आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.:1788/Chny/2017 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/S. Suryadev Alloys & Power The Acit, Pvt. Ltd., Central Circle – 3(2), V. No.497 & 498, Isana Building, Chennai – 600 034. 8Th Floor,Poonamallee High Road, Arumbakkam, Chennai – 600 106. Pan: Aakcs 1246B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) &

For Appellant: Shri S. Sridhar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri S. Bharat, CIT-DR
Section 113Section 153BSection 68

…ineness and credit worthiness are deeper and obstrusive aspects. 2.4 The ld. CI”F(A) ought to have appreciated that the decisions of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of M/s Lovely Exports Pvt Ltd (216 CTR 195 - January 2008) and M/s Steller Investments Ltd (251 ITR 263 - July 2000) are distinguishable one to the facts of the case of the assessee in that, in the present case, the investing companies were non-existent and as such the question of reopening of assessment in the hands of the non-existent investors does not arise. 2.5 The ld.CIT(A) ought to have appreciated that the decision of Hon’ble High Court of…

ACIT CC-3(2), Chennai vs. Suryadev Alloys & Power P Ltd, Chennai

ITA 1749/CHNY/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 Dec 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.:1982, 1746, 1747, 1748, 1749, 1750 & 1751/Chny/2017 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2013-14, 2007-08, 2008-09, 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2012-13 The Acit, M/S. Suryadev Alloys & Central Circle – 3(2), Power Pvt. Ltd., V. Chennai – 600 034. No.497 & 498, Isana Building, 8Th Floor, Poonamallee High Road, Arumbakkam, Chennai – 600 106. Pan: Aakcs 1246B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) & आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.:1788/Chny/2017 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/S. Suryadev Alloys & Power The Acit, Pvt. Ltd., Central Circle – 3(2), V. No.497 & 498, Isana Building, Chennai – 600 034. 8Th Floor,Poonamallee High Road, Arumbakkam, Chennai – 600 106. Pan: Aakcs 1246B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) &

For Appellant: Shri S. Sridhar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri S. Bharat, CIT-DR
Section 113Section 153BSection 68

…ineness and credit worthiness are deeper and obstrusive aspects. 2.4 The ld. CI”F(A) ought to have appreciated that the decisions of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of M/s Lovely Exports Pvt Ltd (216 CTR 195 - January 2008) and M/s Steller Investments Ltd (251 ITR 263 - July 2000) are distinguishable one to the facts of the case of the assessee in that, in the present case, the investing companies were non-existent and as such the question of reopening of assessment in the hands of the non-existent investors does not arise. 2.5 The ld.CIT(A) ought to have appreciated that the decision of Hon’ble High Court of…

ACIT CC-3(2), Chennai vs. Suryadev Alloys & Power P Ltd, Chennai

ITA 1748/CHNY/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 Dec 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.:1982, 1746, 1747, 1748, 1749, 1750 & 1751/Chny/2017 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2013-14, 2007-08, 2008-09, 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2012-13 The Acit, M/S. Suryadev Alloys & Central Circle – 3(2), Power Pvt. Ltd., V. Chennai – 600 034. No.497 & 498, Isana Building, 8Th Floor, Poonamallee High Road, Arumbakkam, Chennai – 600 106. Pan: Aakcs 1246B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) & आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.:1788/Chny/2017 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/S. Suryadev Alloys & Power The Acit, Pvt. Ltd., Central Circle – 3(2), V. No.497 & 498, Isana Building, Chennai – 600 034. 8Th Floor,Poonamallee High Road, Arumbakkam, Chennai – 600 106. Pan: Aakcs 1246B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) &

For Appellant: Shri S. Sridhar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri S. Bharat, CIT-DR
Section 113Section 153BSection 68

…ineness and credit worthiness are deeper and obstrusive aspects. 2.4 The ld. CI”F(A) ought to have appreciated that the decisions of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of M/s Lovely Exports Pvt Ltd (216 CTR 195 - January 2008) and M/s Steller Investments Ltd (251 ITR 263 - July 2000) are distinguishable one to the facts of the case of the assessee in that, in the present case, the investing companies were non-existent and as such the question of reopening of assessment in the hands of the non-existent investors does not arise. 2.5 The ld.CIT(A) ought to have appreciated that the decision of Hon’ble High Court of…