How many judgments cite CIT v. United Commercial and Industrial Co (P.) Ltd.?

135 judgments on BharatTax cite CIT v. United Commercial and Industrial Co (P.) Ltd. (187 ITR 596), spanning 2009 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does CIT v. United Commercial and Industrial Co (P.) Ltd. come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 68, Section 143(3), Section 133(6), Section 143(2), Section 115BBE, Section 142(1).

CIT v. United Commercial and Industrial Co (P.) Ltd.

187 ITR 596High Court1991#756 most cited

What is CIT v. United Commercial and Industrial Co (P.) Ltd. authority for?

Under Section 68 of the Income-tax Act, the assessee must prima facie prove the identity of creditors, their creditworthiness or capacity, and the genuineness of the transactions to explain any cash credit, including share application money.

135

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2009 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. United Commercial and Industrial Co (P.) Ltd · Section 68 · cash credit · onus of proof · identity of creditors · creditworthiness of creditor · genuineness of transaction · share application money · assessee's burden · unexplained cash credit

Also reported as

56 Taxmann 304

Sections most often in play

Section 68 Section 143(3)Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 115BBE Section 142(1)Section 250 Section 69A

Issues it is cited on

source of source creditworthiness of the creditor paper company section 31 share capital and share premium section 251(2)section 251(1)(a)live link onus of proof share application money addition u/s 68 entry operator

Judgments citing CIT v. United Commercial and Industrial Co (P.) Ltd.

Sh. Kamal Galani, Mumbai vs. ACIT 23 (3), Mumbai

In the result appeal filed by the assesee for Asst

ITA 138/MUM/2019[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Sept 2020AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri G. Manjunatha

Section 144Section 144oSection 147

…sustained in the hands of the assessee on the base of seized documents. This principle 39 Shri Kamal Galani is further supported by the decision of Hon’ble Calcutta High court in the case of CIT vs United Commercial and Industrial Company Limited (1991) 187 ITR 596, where it was held that where prima-facie inference on facts is that the assessee explanation is probable, the onus will shift to the revenue. 15. In this case, on perusal of details available on record, it is very clear that the assesse right from day one has disowned the bank account. Further, the brother of the assesee has filed a letter to…

ITO, New Delhi vs. M/S. Jay Shiva Earthmovers & Construction Pvt. Ltd, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3995/DEL/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Feb 2020AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishii.T.A. No. 3995/Del/2010 Ay: 2006-07 Ito, Ward 4(2), Vs. Jay Shiva Earthmovers & Construction Pvt. Ltd., Room No. 413A, Bu-60, Sfs Flats, Outer C.R. Building, Ring Road, Pitampura, I.P. Estate, Delhi – 85 New Delhi (Pan: Aabcj1414D) (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. Satyajeet Goel, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. R.K. Gupta, Addl. CIT(DR)

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “D”, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No. 3995/DEL/2010 AY: 2006-07 ITO, WARD 4(2), VS. JAY SHIVA EARTHMOVERS & CONSTRUCTION PVT. LTD., ROOM NO. 413A, BU-60, SFS FLATS, OUTER C.R. BUILDING, RING ROAD, PITAMPURA, I.P. ESTATE, DELHI – 85 NEW DELHI (PAN: AABCJ1414D) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) Assessee by : Sh. Satyajeet Goel, Adv. Department by : Sh. R.K. Gupta, Addl. CIT(DR) ORDER PER H.S. SIDHU, JM Revenue has filed the present appeal against the impugned order dated 30.6.2010 passed by the Ld…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Ny Dox Services Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 4065/DEL/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Jan 2020AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2006-07

Section 132Section 153ASection 153CSection 68

…sions filed on 24/12/2017. A List of the decisions relied upon by the learned DR is reproduced as under: 1. Commissioner of Income-Tax Vs Precision Finance (P) ltd. 208 ITR 465 (Cal) 2. Commissioner of Income-Tax Vs United Commercial & Industries Co. (P) Ltd. 187 ITR 596 (Cal) 3. Commissioner of Income-Tax Vs Nipun Builders & Developers (P) Ltd. 350 ITR 407 (Delhi) 4. Commissioner of Income-Tax Vs Nova Promoters & Finlease (P) Ltd. 342 ITR 169 (Delhi) 5. Mukesh Shaw Vs Income-Tax Officer 204 Taxman 615 (Jharkhand) 6. Commissioner of Income-Tax Vs N.R. Portfolio (P) Ltd. 29 Taxmann.com 291 (Delhi) 7. Commissioner…

Sri Jagdish Prasad Sharma, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ghaziabad

The appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 104/DEL/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Jan 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri K.N.Charysri Jagdish Prasad Sharma, Vs. Ito, C/O. Mr. Sandeep Bhatnagar, Ward-1(3), Flat No. 12, 2Nd Floor, Sheel Tara Ghaziabad House, 4866/24, Ansari Road, Darya Ganj, New Delhi Pan: Azpps2130R (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Ms. Timsi Sharma, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Rakhi Vimal, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)

…INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “SMC +C”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI K.N.CHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER Sri Jagdish Prasad Sharma, Vs. ITO, C/o. Mr. Sandeep Bhatnagar, Ward-1(3), Flat No. 12, 2nd Floor, Sheel Tara Ghaziabad House, 4866/24, Ansari Road, Darya Ganj, New Delhi PAN: AZPPS2130R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Ms. Timsi Sharma, CA Revenue by: Ms. Rakhi Vimal, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 14/10/2019 Date of pronouncement 13/01/2020 O R D E R PER PRASHANT MAHARISHI, A. M. 1. This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld CIT(A), Ghaziaba…

ACIT, Circle-1, Burdwan vs. M/S. Bardhaman Dharmaraj Paper Mill Pvt. Ltd., Burdwan

ITA 910/KOL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 Jan 2020AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Sainiassessment Year : 2015-16

Section 143(3)Section 68

…(1978) 114 ITR 689 (Cal); C. Kant & Co. Vs. CIT, (1980) 126 ITR 63 (Cal); Prakash Textile Agency Vs. CIT, (1980) 121 ITR 890 (Cal); Oriental wire Industries P. Ltd. Vs. CIT, (1981) 131 ITR 688 (Cal); CIT Vs. United Commercial & Industries Co. (P) Ltd., (1991) 187 ITR 596, 599 (Cal); M.A. UnneeriKutti Vs. CIT, (1992) 198 ITR 147,150 (Ker), Special Leave Petition dismissed by the Supreme Court (1993) 201 ITR (St.) 23 (SC); CIT Vs. Precision Finance Pvt. Ltd .. (1994) 208 ITR 465, 470 (Cal). It is also reiterated that the manner of payment by the account payee cheque is also not sacrosanct and this cannot make a bog…

M/S. Bardhaman Dharmaraj Paper Mill Pvt. Ltd., Burdwan vs. ACIT, Circle-2, Burdwan

ITA 1187/KOL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 Jan 2020AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Sainiassessment Year : 2015-16

Section 143(3)Section 68

ITO-3(2), Indore vs. M/S Ocean Motors Pvt. Ltd, Indore

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue stands dismissed

ITA 444/IND/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore18 Dec 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradassessment Year: 2014-15 Ito 3(2) M/S Ocean Motors Pvt. Ltd. बनाम/ Indore Plot No.49, Commercial Mandi Vs. Near Cat Square, Ring Road, Indore (Appellant) (Revenue) Pan: Aabc04536F Revenue By Shri Rajib Jain, Sr. Dr Respondent By Shri S. S. Solanki, Ca Date Of Hearing: 05.12.2019 Date Of Pronouncement: 18 .12.2019 आदेश / O R D E R Per Manish Borad, A.M: This Appeal At The Instance Of Revenue Pertaining To A.Y. 2014-15 Is Directed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)-1, Indore, (In Short ‘Cit’), Dated 22.02.2018 Which Is Arising Out Of The Order U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act 1961(Hereinafter Called As The ‘Act’) Framed On 30.12.2016 By Ito- 3(2), Indore.

Section 131Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 68

…not sacrosanct nor can it make a non-genuine transaction genuine. (x) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) was justified in ignoring the decision laid down in case of CIT vs. United Commercial and Industrial Co. (Pvt.) Ltd (1991) 187 ITR 596 (Cal.) that the onus does not get discharged merely by filing confirmatory letters. ” 3. Though the revenue has raised 10 grounds of appeal but the sole grievance is with regard to deletion of addition of Rs.1,94,98,000/- which was made by the Ld. AO on account of unexplained cash credit u/s 68 of the Act. 4. Brief facts as culled out from the…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle 6(2), Mumbai vs. Shri Sarvajit Patel, Mumbai

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

ITA 879/MUM/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Oct 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2009-10

For Appellant: Mr. Malav P. Sheth, ARFor Respondent: Ms. Vidisha Kalra, CIT(DR)

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “G” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY (JUDICIAL MEMBER) AND SHRI N.K. PRADHAN (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) Assessment Year: 2009-10 Deputy Commissioner of Shri Sarvajit Patel, Income Tax, Circle Vs. Flat No. 1101, Uttung Central-6(2), Room No. CHS Ltd., D.L., Vaidya 1903, 19th floor, Air India Road, Dadar (W), Building, Nariman Point, Mumbai-28. Mumbai-400021. PAN No. ALBPP6642B Appellant Respondent C.O. No. 106/MUM/2019 (ITA No. 879/MUM/2018) Assessment Year: 2009-10 Shri Sarvajit Patel, DCIT Circle Central-6(2), Flat No. 1101, Uttung CHS Vs. Room No. 1903, 19th Ltd.,…

ACIT 33(2), Mumbai vs. J.K. Industries, Mumbai

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

ITA 3361/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Sept 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2012-13 Dcit/Acit-33(2), Room M/S J.K. Industries F1-Gyan No. 608, 6Th Floor, Bldg. C- Darshan, S.V.P. Road, Kandivali Vs. 12, Pratyakshakar Bhavan, (W), Mumbai-400067. Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (E), Mumbai- 400051. Pan No. Aaafj0696B Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. Nishit Gandhi, ARFor Respondent: Ms. Harkamal Sohi Sandhu, DR

Section 143(3)Section 44ASection 68

…books of the assessee. It is well-settled that after the assessee has adduced evidence, the onus shifts to the Department for addition u/s 68 of the Act. It has been held so in Shankar Ind v. CIT 114 ITR 689; Prakash Textile v. CIT 121 ITR 890; CIT v. United 187 ITR 596; Rajshree v. CIT 256 ITR 331; Ashokpal v. CIT 220 ITR 452, 454; CIT v. Metachem 245 ITR 160; CIT v. Shree Gopal 204 ITR 285. In the instant case, the AO has failed to discharge the onus shifted to him. He has made the addition on surmises. Therefore, we confirm the order of the CIT(A) and dismiss the 1st ground of appeal. 7. The 2nd ground of app…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. Shri Ramit Vohra, New Delhi

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

ITA 4373/DEL/2012[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Sept 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

For Appellant: Shri G.S. Kohli, CAFor Respondent: Shri Surender Pal, Sr. DR

…FIT FOR PUBLICATION (JM) (AM) IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH: ‘F’: NEW DELHI) BEFORE SHRI H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ANADEE NATH MISSHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No:- 4373/Del/2012 (Assessment Year: 2009-10) ACIT, Shri Ramit Vohra, Circle 39(1), Vs. New Delhi. New Delhi. PAN No: AAEPV7263Q APPELLANT RESPONDENT Revenue by : Shri Surender Pal, Sr. DR Assessee by : Shri G.S. Kohli, CA ORDER Per Anadee Nath Misshra, AM (A) This appeal by Revenue is filed against the order of Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-XXVIII, New Delhi, [“Ld. CIT(A)”, for short], dated 29.06.2012…

Verma Service Station, Firozabad vs. ACIT, Firozabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 212/AGR/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Agra11 Sept 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar,And Dr. Mitha Lal Meena

Section 68

…ication of the source and the nature of the source, so that the genuineness or otherwise could be inferred. 5.6.2 The onus does not get discharged merely by such confirmatory letters as found in CIT Vs. United Commercial and Industrial Co. (Pvt.) Ltd, (1991) 187 ITR 596 (Cal), nor is the fact that the amount is received by account payee cheques is sacrosanct as was pointed out in CIT vs. Precision Finance Pvt. Ltd. (1994) 208 ITR 465 (Cal). This view was further held in the case of Nemi Chand Kothari v. CIT [2003] 264 ITR 254 (Gau.) where in it was held that it cannot be said that a transaction, which takes plac…

M/S Manish Finlease (P) Ltd, Patna vs. ITO, Ward-2(1), Patna

ITA 25/PAT/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Patna09 Aug 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2010-2011 Manish Finlease Pvt Ltd., Vs. Ito, Ward 2(1), Patna Chandi House Exhibition Road, Patna Pan/Gir No.Aaccm 6252 B (Appellant) .. ( Respondent) Assessee By : Shri A.K.Rastogi & Rakesh Kumar, Ars Revenue By : Shri Indrajeet Singh, Dr Date Of Hearing : 20/06/ 2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 09/08/ 2019 O R D E R Per Bench This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Cit(A)-1, Patna Dated 27.9.2018 For The Assessment Year 2010-2011. 2. The Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Delayed By 51 Days. The Assessee Has Filed Application For Condonation Of Delay Stating The Reasons For Not Filing The Appeal In Time Before The Tribunal. After Hearing The Submissions Of The Parties, We Are Satisfied That The Assessee Had A Bonafide Reason For Not Filing The Appeal In Time. Therefore, We Condone The Delay & Proceed To Decide The Appeal Of The Assessee On Merits.

For Appellant: Shri A.K.Rastogi & Rakesh Kumar, ARsFor Respondent: Shri Indrajeet Singh, DR

Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148(1)Section 68

…` IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, PATNA BENCH, PATNA BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA MOHAN GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year : 2010-2011 Manish Finlease Pvt Ltd., Vs. ITO, Ward 2(1), Patna Chandi House Exhibition Road, Patna PAN/GIR No.AACCM 6252 B (Appellant) .. ( Respondent) Assessee by : Shri A.K.Rastogi & Rakesh Kumar, ARs Revenue by : Shri Indrajeet Singh, DR Date of Hearing : 20/06/ 2019 Date of Pronouncement : 09/08/ 2019 O R D E R Per Bench This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the CIT(A)-1, Patna dated 27.9.2018 for the assessment year 2010-2…

ITO 16(1)(5), Mumbai vs. Realstone Entertainment P.Ltd, Mumbai

ITA 1271/MUM/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jul 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2009-10 Income Tax Officer- M/S Realstone 16(1)(5), Room No. Vs. Entertainment Pvt. Ltd. A- 439, 4Th Floor, Aayakar 601, Crystal Palace, Link Bhavan M.K. Road, Road, Malad (W), Mumbai- Mumbai-400020. 400064. Pan No. Aaccr8558F Appellant Respondent C.O. No. 201/Mum/2018 (Ita No. 1271/Mum/2017) Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/S Realstone Income Tax Officer- Entertainment Pvt. Ltd. C/O Vs. 16(1)(5), Room No. 439, Ajay Daga& Co. Cas, 401-A, 4Th Floor, Aayakarbhavan Pearl Arcade, Opp P K M.K. Road, Mumbai- Jewellers, Dawoodbaug 400020. Lane, Off J P Road, Andheri (W), Mumbai-400058. Pan No. Aaccr8558F Appellant Respondent Revenue By : Mr. Chaitanya Anjaria & Mr. Sachidanand Debe, Drs Assessee By : Mr. R.C. Jain, Ar Last Date Of Hearing : 03/05/2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 24/07/2019

For Appellant: Mr. R.C. Jain, ARFor Respondent: Mr. Chaitanya Anjaria &

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 68

…ction. It is also well settled that after the assessee has adduced evidence to establish prima facie the aforesaid, the onus shifts to the department. It is has been held so in Shankar Ind v. CIT 114 ITR 689; Prakash Textile v. CIT 121 ITR 890 ; CIT v. United 187 ITR 596; Rajshree v. CIT 256 ITR 331; Ashokpal v. CIT 220 ITR 452, 454; CIT v. Metachem 245 ITR 160; CIT v. Shree Gopal 204 ITR 285; MOD Creations P. Ltd. v. ITO 354 ITR 282. As mentioned earlier at para 6, the assessee filed before the AO the relevant details and supporting documents with regard to issue of shares at a premium. A perusal of the assessme…

Gaurav Garg, Ghaziabad vs. DCIT, Ghaziabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 5716/DEL/2015[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Jul 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Surender Pal, Sr. DR

Section 131Section 132ASection 13ASection 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 68Section 69A

…ITA No. -5716/Del/2015. Gaurav Garg. IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH: ‘F’: NEW DELHI) BEFORE SHRI KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ANADEE NATH MISSHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No:- 5716/Del/2015 (Assessment Year: 2012-13) Gaurav Garg, Commissioner of Income Tax 152, New Gandhi Nagar, Vs. (Appeals), Ghaziabad. Ghaziabad. PAN No: AGEPG5300K APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : None Revenue by : Shri Surender Pal, Sr. DR ORDER PER ANADEE NATH MISSHRA, AM This appeal by Assessee is filed against the order of Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals, [“Ld. CIT(A)”, for short], Ghaziab…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax-4(2)(2), Mumbai vs. M/S.Jamini Nidustries Private Limited, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 5516/MUM/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Jul 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2014-15

For Appellant: Mr. Bhupendra Shah, ARFor Respondent: Mr. Rajeev K. Gubgotra, DR

Section 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “F” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (JUDICIAL MEMBER) AND SHRI N.K. PRADHAN (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) Assessment Year: 2014-15 DCIT-4(2)(2), Room No. M/s Jamini Industries Pvt. 640, 6th floor, Aayakar Ltd., 11-13, Rupa Sadan, Vs. Bhavan, M.K. Road, Malharrao, Wadi, Kalbadevi, Mumbai-400020. Mumbai-400002 PAN No. AAACI1312A Appellant Respondent Revenue by : Mr. Rajeev K. Gubgotra, DR Assessee by : Mr. Bhupendra Shah, AR Date of Hearing : 16/04/2019 Date of pronouncement : 10/07/2019 ORDER PER N.K. PRADHAN, AM This is an appeal filed by the Revenue. The relevan…

Mannat Hospitality (P) Ltd., Delhi vs. ITO, Ward- 16(2), New Delhi

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

ITA 7348/DEL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Jun 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. R. K. Panda & Sh. Kuldip Singhassessment Year: 2009-10 Mannat Hospitality (P) Ltd. Income Tax Officer 325, Jagirit Enclave, Vs Ward – 16 (2) Delhi-110092 New Delhi Pan No.Aagcm0506Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Sh. Repudaman Thakur, Ca Respondent By Ms. Rinku Singh, Sr Dr Date Of Hearing: 11/03/2019 Date Of Pronouncement: 07/06/2019 Order

Section 132Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘E’, NEW DELHI BEFORE SH. R. K. PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2009-10 Mannat Hospitality (P) Ltd. Income Tax Officer 325, Jagirit Enclave, Vs Ward – 16 (2) Delhi-110092 New Delhi PAN No.AAGCM0506Q (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) Appellant by Sh. Repudaman Thakur, CA Respondent by Ms. Rinku Singh, Sr DR Date of hearing: 11/03/2019 Date of Pronouncement: 07/06/2019 ORDER PER R.K. PANDA, AM: This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 10.09.2018 of the CIT(A)-6, Delhi relating to A. Y. 2009-10.…

Titan Engineering Co. Pvt. Ltd., Durgapur vs. DCIT, Circle - 1(2), Kolkata

Appeal is partly allowed in above terms

ITA 2250/KOL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata17 May 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Sainiassessment Year :2012-13 Titan Engineering Co. Pvt. V/S. Dcit, Circle-1(2), Ltd., Sanjibi Sarani, Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, 7Th Floor, Chowringhee Durgapur-713210 [Pan No.Aabct 4321 K] Square, Kolkata-69 .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Shri H.V. Bhardwaj, Fca अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shrishankar Halder, Jcit-Sr-Dr ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 07-05-2019 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 17-05-2019 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S.Godara:- This Assessee’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2012-13 Arises Against The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Kolkata’S Order Dated 05.09.2018 Passed In Case No.18161/Cit(A)-1/Kol./Cir.-1(2)/2015-16, Involving Proceedings U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961; In Short ‘The Act’. Heard Both The Parties. Case File Perused. 2. Learned Counsel Representing Assessee Does Not Press For First Substantive Ground Raised In The Instant Appeal Challenging Liquidated Damage Disallowance Of ₹85,099/- Made In Both The Lower Proceedings Keeping In Mind Smallness Of The Amount. 3. This First Substantive Ground Is Rejected As Not Pressed. 4. Next Comes The Estimated Ad Hoc Disallowance Of Site Expense Amounting To ₹4,74,241/- In Both The Lower Proceedings. The Cit(A)’S Detailed Discussion To This Effect Reads As Follows:-

Section 143(3)

…[2002] 254 ITR 576 (Gauhati); CIT v. Precision Finance Pvt. Ltd. [1994] 208 ITR 465 (Cal); Rajshree Synthetics Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT [2002] 256 ITR 331 (Raj); R. B. Mittal v. CIT [2000] 246 ITR 283 (AP) ; CIT v. United Commercial and Industrial Co. P. Ltd. [1991] 187 ITR 596 (Cal); M. A. UnneeriKutty v. CIT [1992] 198 ITR 147 (Ker); Nemi Chand Kothari v. CIT [2003] 264 ITR 254 (Gauhati); and Hindusthan Tea Trading Co. Ltd. v. CIT [2003] 263 ITR 289 (Cal) support the view that Revenue authorities are entitled to consider genuineness of the transactions and to penetrate the veil in order to ascertain the truth. They ar…

M/S.M.L.Realty, Mumbai vs. ACIT 22(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 795/MUM/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 May 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri G. Manjunatha, Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/S M. L. Realty, Acit-22(2), Mumbai 411/A Sunder Villa, S. V. बनाम/ Road, Santacruz (W), Vs. Mumbai ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) P.A. No.Aaqfm3360H

Section 147Section 148Section 148(1)Section 148(2)Section 292BSection 68

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, मुंबई "यायपीठ, ‘डी’,मुंबई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES “D”, MUMBAI "ी संद"प गोसाई , "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी जी. मंजूनाथ, लेखा सद"य, के सम" Before Shri SANDEEP GOSAIN, Judicial Member AND Shri G. MANJUNATHA, Accountant Member, Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/s M. L. Realty, ACIT-22(2), Mumbai 411/A Sunder Villa, S. V. बनाम/ Road, Santacruz (W), Vs. Mumbai ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) P.A. No.AAQFM3360H "नधा"रती क" ओर से / Assessee by Shri Keshav B. Bhujle Shri D.G. Pansari राज"व क" ओर से / Revenue by 02/05/2019 सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date of Hearing : 17/05/2019 आदेश क" तार"…

ITO 12(1)(4), Mumbai vs. Consultshah Financial Services P.Ltd, Mumbai

ITA 6893/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 May 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sandeed Gosain () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2011-12 Income Tax Officer- M/S Consultshah 12(1)(4), Room No. 145A, Vs. Financial Services Pvt. Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Ltd., 426, 4Th Floor, Road, Churchgate, Sujata Niketan, Rani Sati Mumbai-400020. Road, Malad East, Mumbai-400097. Pan No. Aadcc3362K Appellant Respondent Revenue By : Mr. Abi Rama Kartikiyen, Dr Assessee By : Dr. Prayag Jha & Mr. Prateek Jha, Ars Date Of Hearing : 21/02/2019 Date Of Pronouncement: 16/05/2019

For Appellant: Dr. Prayag Jha & Mr. Prateek Jha, ARsFor Respondent: Mr. Abi Rama Kartikiyen, DR

Section 143(3)Section 68

…n. M/s Consultshah Financial Services 8 After the assessee has adduced evidence to establish prima facie the aforesaid, the onus shifts to the department as held in the case of Shankar Ind v. CIT 114 ITR 689; Prakash Textile v. CIT 121 ITR 890; CIT v. United 187 ITR 596; Rajshree v. CIT 256 ITR 331; Ashokpal v. CIT 220 ITR 452, 454; CIT v. Metachem 245 ITR 160; CIT v. Shree Gopal 204 ITR 285. We find that in the instant case, the assessee has adduced evidence to establish prima facie the aforesaid. The onus shifted to the department. The AO has not made required investigation to find out the genuineness of trans…

DCIT 6(2)(2), Mumbai vs. Edesk Services Ltd, Mumbai

ITA 7113/MUM/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 May 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No.7113/Mum/2016 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2012-13) बिाम/ Dcit 6(2)(2) M/S. Edesk Services Ltd. R.No. 563, Aayakar Bhavan, 6-A, Lalwani Indl. Estate M.K Road, Churchgate, 14, G.D. Ambekar Road, V. Mumbai 400020 Wadala, Mumbai 400031 स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ Pan : Aabcb5087H

For Appellant: Shri. Jayesh DadiaFor Respondent: Shri. O.P Meena (DR)

Section 143(3)Section 68

…d against the assessee : a) CIT v. Korlay Trading Co. Ltd. 232 ITR 820(Cal.) b) CIT v. Precision Finance Private Limited 208 ITR 465(Cal.) c) K.C.N.Chandrasekhar v. ACIT , 66 TTJ 355(ITAT Bangalore) d) CIT v. United Commercial & Industrial Co. Private Limited 187 ITR 596(Cal.) The AO observed that the assessee did not comply with the requisite details asked for during the course of assessment proceedings vide notice issued u/s 142(1) of the 1961 Act and the AO considered share premium of Rs. 7,04,90,000/- as sham transaction which was then added to the income of the assessee by the AO by invoking provisions of Se…