CIT v. Steller Investment Ltd.

M/S Hinal Estate Pvt Ltd., Mumbai vs. Pr CIT 10, Mumbai

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman () & Shri Ravish Sood () Ita No.7938 /Mum/2019 (Assessment Year: 2009-10) M/S Hinal Estate Private Ltd. Principal Commissioner Of A-1 Hinal Estate, Patel Wadi, Vs. Income Tax-10, Room No. 416, 4Th Floor, S.V. Road, Borivali West, Mumbai – 400 057 Aaykar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai- 400 020 Pan No. Aabch6287J (Assessee) (Revenue) Assessee By : Shri. Naresh Jain, A.R Revenue By : Shri Sandeep Raj, D.R Date Of Hearing : 08/02/2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 08/03/2021

…ase of CIT Vs. Stellar Investments Ltd. (1991) 192 ITR 287 (Del). It was submitted by the ld. A.R that the aforesaid order of the Hon‟ble High Court of Delhi had thereafter been upheld by the Hon‟ble Supreme Court in CIT Vs. Stellar Investments Limited (2001) 251 ITR 263 (SC), wherein the “Special Leave Petition”(for short “SLP”) filed by the revenue was dismissed. Also, reliance was drawn by the A.R on the judgment of the Hon‟ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Lovely Exports Pvt. Ltd. 317 ITR 218 (SC). In the backdrop of his aforesaid contentions it was averred by the ld. A.R that as the A.O while framing…

Shakti Share Shoppee Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. ITO, WD-13(2)(3), Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Amarjit Singh

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH “G”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos.4100 & 4101/M/2017 Assessment Years: 2008-09 & 2009-10 M/s. Shakti Share The Income-Tax Officer, Shoppee Pvt. Ltd., Ward-13(2)(3), B-302, Rangoli Vasant Aayakar Bhavan, Utsav, Vs. Mumbai - 400020 Thakur Village, Kandivali (East), Mumbai – 400 101 PAN: AAACS 9220 K (Appellant) (Respondent) Present for: Assessee by : Shri Vishnu Agarwal, A.R. Revenue by : Shri T.S. Khalsa, D.R. Date of Hearing : 15.12.2020 Date of Pronouncement : 23.12.2020 O R D E R Per Raj…

Nisa Industrial Services Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. ACIT- WD -10(3)(1), Mumbai

Bench: Shri C. N. Prasad, Jm & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am

…of said transaction and, therefore, it is held, assessing officer cannot make any addition to income of assessee in respect of said share application money by treating same as unexplained cash credit under section 68. (8) CIT v. Steller Investment Ltd. [2001] 251 ITR 263/115 Taxman 99 (SC) where the Supreme Court held that even if it was argued that the subscribers to the increased capital were not genuine, under no circumstances could the amount of share capital be regarded as undisclosed income. Reliance is also placed on the following decisions: Hon'ble Delhi High Court in case of Commissioner of Income tax v…

Vodafone India Limited, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 7(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

…en to the AO, then the Department is free to proceed to reopen their individual assessments in accordance with law. Hence, we find no infirmity with the impugned judgment.” 14 Vodafone India Limited vs DCIT, Circle 8(3), Mumbai CIT v Steller Investments Ltd 251 ITR 263. The relevant extract of the judgment is under 4. It is evident that even if it be assumed that the subscribers to the increased share capital were not genuine, nevertheless, under no circumstances can the amount of share capital be regarded as an undisclosed income of the assessee. It may be that there are some bogus shareholders in whose name t…

Income Tax Officer 6(3)(3), Mumbai vs. M/S.Kalash Metals Private Limited, Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is allowed, and appeal of the Assessing Officer is dismissed

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 504/Mum/2018 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2009-10)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “H” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JM & SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, AM आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 504/Mum/2018 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2009-10) M/s Kalash Metals Pvt. ITO 6(3)(3), Ltd. Room No. 524, 5TH Floor, बिधम/ 41, 4th floor, Kalpataru Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Vs. CHS, Seth Motisha, Lane Road, Mumbai-400 020 Byculla, Mumbai-400 010 स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN No. AACCK8464F (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : अपीलाथीकीओरसे/ Appellant : Shri K. Bhoopati, DR by प्रत्यथीकीओरसे/Respondentby : Shri S.C. Tiwari & Ms. Rutuja N Pawar, ARs सुनवाईकीतारीख/ : 29.01.…

Income Tax Officer-1(2)(3), Mumbai vs. Money Matters Properties Private Limited, Mumbai

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL“D” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM AND SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, JM I.T.A. No.5262/M/2017 (Assessment Year: 2008-09) ITO 1(2)(3) Vs. M/s. Money Matters 527, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Properties Pvt. Ltd. 1-B, 1st Floor, 35 Court Road, Mumbai-400020. Chambers, Sir Vithaldas Thackersey Marg, Mumbai- 400020. I.T.A. No.5116/M/2017 (Assessment Year: 2008-09) M/s. Money Matters Vs. ITO 1(2)(3) Properties Pvt. Ltd. 1- 527, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. B, 1st Floor, 35 Court Road, Mumbai-400020. Chambers, Sir Vithaldas Thackersey Marg, Mumbai- 400020. स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./ PAN/GIR No. : AA…

Money Matters Properties Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer-1(2)(3), Mumbai

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL“D” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM AND SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, JM I.T.A. No.5262/M/2017 (Assessment Year: 2008-09) ITO 1(2)(3) Vs. M/s. Money Matters 527, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Properties Pvt. Ltd. 1-B, 1st Floor, 35 Court Road, Mumbai-400020. Chambers, Sir Vithaldas Thackersey Marg, Mumbai- 400020. I.T.A. No.5116/M/2017 (Assessment Year: 2008-09) M/s. Money Matters Vs. ITO 1(2)(3) Properties Pvt. Ltd. 1- 527, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. B, 1st Floor, 35 Court Road, Mumbai-400020. Chambers, Sir Vithaldas Thackersey Marg, Mumbai- 400020. स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./ PAN/GIR No. : AA…

Im.Media Pvt. Ltd. (Now Known As M/S.Saraswathi Media Pvt. Ltd.), Mumbai vs. ACIT Circle 16(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Amarjit Singhassessment Year: 2007-08 Assessment Year: 2008-09

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH “G”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2007-08 Assessment Year: 2008-09 M/s. IM Media Pvt. ACIT Circle 16(1), Ltd. (Now known as Aayakar Bhavan, M/s. Saraswathi M.K. Road, Media Pvt. Ltd.), Vs. Mumbai - 400020 411, Embassy Centre, Nariman Point, Mumbai – 400 021 PAN: AABCI 6694L (Appellant) (Respondent) Present for: Assessee by : Shri Vijay Mehta, A.R. Shri Anuj Kisnadwala, A.R. Revenue by : Shri Awungshi Limson, D.R. Date of Hearing : 11.12.2019 Date of Pronouncement : 05.03.2020 O…

Rukmani Agencies Private Limited, Mumbai vs. DCIT, Cent.Cir-5(1), Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharmarukmani Agencies Private Vs. D.C.I.T., Limited, Central Circle-5(1), 4Th Floor, Silver Metropolis, 19Th Floor, Air India Jaicoach Compound, Building, Nariman Point, Opposite Bimbisar Nagar, Mumbai-400021. Western Express, Highway Goregaon (E), Mumbai- 400063. Pan/Gir No.Aaacr 4998 P (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

…us shareholders, whose names are given to the AO, then the Department is free to proceed to reopen their individual assessments in accordance with law, but it cannot be regarded as undisclosed income of 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…

DCIT Cir 6(3)(2), Mumbai vs. Equifax Credit Information Services P.Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, these appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya (Am) & Shri Ravish Sood (Jm)

…the creditworthiness of the 9 M/s. Equifax Credit Information Services Pvt. Ltd. share capital. He also noted that the RBI’s authorization is also needed. Furthermore, he also referred to the decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in CIT Vs. Steller Investments Ltd. (251 ITR 263) and Lovely Experts (172 Taxman 44) and held that the identity of the shareholder alone is required to be proved. 28. Against this order, the Revenue is in appeal before us. 29. Learned Departmental Representative submitted that the assessee has not given information regarding creditworthiness of the concerned party. He referred to several deci…