Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Commissioner of Income Tax v. Navodaya Castles Pvt. Ltd. come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 1961, Section 68, Section 143(3), Section 131, Section 14A, Section 142(1).

Commissioner of Income Tax v. Navodaya Castles Pvt. Ltd.

Q: How many judgments cite Commissioner of Income Tax v. Navodaya Castles Pvt. Ltd.?

195 judgments on BharatTax cite Commissioner of Income Tax v. Navodaya Castles Pvt. Ltd. (367 ITR 306), spanning 2015 to 2026.

367 ITR 306High Court2014#475 most cited

What is Commissioner of Income Tax v. Navodaya Castles Pvt. Ltd. authority for?

For an addition under Section 68 relating to share application money or unsecured loans, the Assessing Officer must conduct proper inquiries and rebut the evidence provided by the assessee regarding identity, genuineness, and creditworthiness; additions cannot be sustained merely on suspicion or without investigation if the assessee has discharged its initial onus.

195

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Navodaya Castles · Commissioner of Income Tax v. Navodaya Castles · Section 68 · Section 131 · Section 133(6) · Section 143(3) · share application money · unexplained cash credit · genuineness of transaction · creditworthiness of investors · onus of proof · Assessing Officer enquiries

Also reported as

226 Taxmann 190

Sections most often in play

Section 1961 Section 68 Section 143(3)Section 131 Section 14A Section 142(1)Section 133(6)Section 133(6) of the Income-tax Act

Issues it is cited on

paper company share application money genuineness of the transaction section 133(6)unexplained cash credit section 68 previous year section 143(2)company person total income document

Judgments citing Commissioner of Income Tax v. Navodaya Castles Pvt. Ltd.

M/S SAPPHIRE FINTECH PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DCIT-3(3)(1), MUMBAI

ITA 594/MUM/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Jan 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sandeep Singh Karhailshri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: Shri Mahaveer Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Swapnil Choudhary, Sr.AR

Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250Section 68

…would justify addition of the said amount to the income of the Assessee.” (emphasis supplied) 20. In this regard, it is also relevant to note the following observations of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in CIT vs. Navodaya Castles (P.) Ltd., reported in [2014] 367 ITR 306 (Delhi): -…

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-9(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. S G S FASHION PRIVATE LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 729/KOL/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Oct 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shripradip Kumar Choubey, Jm Income Tax Officer, Ward 9(1), Sgs Fashion Private Limited 5Th Floor, Room No.5/12/2B, 49/1/1, Cotton Street, Barabazar, Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, H.O. Kolkata-700007, Vs. Chowringhee Square, West Bengal Kolkata-700069, West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aancs2236G Assessee By : Shri Manish Tiwari, Ar Revenue By : Shri Manas Mondal, Dr Date Of Hearing: 18.09.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 15.10.2025

For Appellant: Shri Manish Tiwari, ARFor Respondent: Shri Manas Mondal, DR

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

…relied on the decision of the CIT Vs Orissa Corporation (P) ltd. (1986) 159 ITR 78 (SC), and the decision of the Punjab and Haryana High Courtin case of Jawahar Lal Oswal reported at 382 ITR 453, (Punjab and Haryana)& CIT VS. Navodaya Castles (P.) Ltd. (2014) 367 ITR 306 (Delhi). 06. After hearing the rival contentions and perusing the materials available on record, we find that in this case the assessee company is engaged in trading in services. We note that during the year the assessee issued 1,93,500 equity shares of face value of ₹10 each at a premium of ₹90 to four entities, details whereof were given by th…

M/S MOOL RAJ VIJAY KUMAR, KAUSHAMBI vs. DY./ACIT(CC), ALLAHABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands dismissed

ITA 39/ALLD/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad25 Aug 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

Section 143(3)

…sions, reliance was placed by learned D.R. on the following case laws: (a) [2019] 412 ITR 161 (SC) Pr.CIT vs. NRA Iron & Steel (P.) Ltd. (assessment year 2009-10) (b) [2015] 230 taxman 268 (SC), Navodaya Castle (P.) Ltd. vs. CIT Dismissing SLP against [2014] 367 ITR 306 (Delhi) (c) [2014] 227 Taxman 373 (SC) N. Tarika Property Invest (P.) Ltd. vs. CIT dismissing SLP against [2014] 221 Taxman 14 (Delhi) (d) [2021] 277 Taxman 594 (SC), Sadiq Sheikh vs. CIT Dismissing assessee’s SLP against [2020] 122 taxmann.com 39 (Bom.) (e) [2018] 258 Taxman 160 (SC), Pavankumar M. Sanghvi vs. Income Tax Officer, Dismissing SLP…

ITO, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. MARATHON FINLEASE LTD.,, DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is partly allowed

ITA 4766/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Jul 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: MS. MADHUMITA ROY (Judicial Member), SHRI MANISH AGARWAL (Accountant Member)

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250(6)Section 68

…pletely ignoring the ratio decidendi laid down by Hon'ble Delhi High Court on the issue on the cases of CIT v N.R. Portfolio Pvt. Ltd. (2014) 2 ITR-OL-68, CIT v Nipun Builders and Developers Pvt. Ltd (2013) 350 ITR 407, CIT v Novodaya Castles Pvt. Ltd. (2014) 367 ITR 306 and Developers Pvt. Ltd. (2013) 350 ITR 407, CIT v Novodaya Castles Pvt. Ltd. (2014) 367 ITR 306? 6. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Id. CIT(A) is legally justified in deleting the disallowance of Legal and professional charges amounting to Rs. 13,00,000/- even when the assessee has failed to discharge its onus…

M/S CREATIVE CAPITAL SERVICES P. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 223/CHANDI/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh24 Jun 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 223/Chd/2016 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10 Creative Capital Services Pvt.Ltd. The Dcit, S-16, 2Nd Floor, Pandav Nagar Extn, Vs Central Circle-1, New Delhi. Chandigarh. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aaacc5540L अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Assessee By : None Revenue By : Shri Manav Bansal, Cit, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing : 08.05.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 24.06.2025 Physical Hearing O R D E R

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Manav Bansal, CIT, Sr.DR

Section 132(1)Section 153ASection 68

…understand its meaning is concerned, there is no much difficulty. The difficulty arises when we apply the conditions formulated in this Section on the given facts and circumstances. The Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs Navodaya Castles Pvt. Ltd. 367 ITR 306 has considered a large number of decisions including the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs Durga Prasad More 82 ITR 540. According to the Hon'ble Delhi High Court, basically there are two sides of judgement. In one side of case, the assessee produced necessary documents/evidence to show and establish identity of shareholder,…

ITO, WARD-5(1),, KOLKATA vs. M/S. SHIVRASHI INFRAPROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED, KOLKATA

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

ITA 2328/KOL/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Jun 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 68

…78 (SC), the decision of Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of Jawahar Lal Oswal reported in 382 ITR 453 and the decision of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT v. Navodaya Castles (P.) Ltd. [2014] 50 taxmann.com 110/226 Taxman 190 (Mag.)/367 ITR 306 and has held in para 7.4 that “The AO has not discussed the contents of the assessee's submissions in the assessment order and has decided the case solely on the basis of high premium. No enquiries have been made to rebut the information filed by the appellant. Therefore, the case clearly falls under the first category as discussed by the Hon'ble…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), NAGPUR vs. M/S. FUELCO COAL INDIA LTD., NAGPUR

Appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 90/NAG/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur14 Feb 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri V. Durgarao & Shrik.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Kishore P. DewaniFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(iii)Section 40Section 40aSection 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR BEFORE SHRI V. DURGARAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRIK.M. ROY, ACCOUNTANT, MEMBER ITA no.90/Nag./2022 (Assessment Year : 2014–15) Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax ……………. Appellant Central Circle–1(2), Nagpur v/s M/s. Fuel Co. Coal India Ltd. 926–A, Fulwani Palace ……………. Respondent Central Avenue, Despande Layout Nagpur 440 008 PAN – AAACF8231B Assessee by : Shri Kishore P. Dewani Revenue by : Shri Sandipkumar Salunke Date of Hearing – 30/01/2025 Date of Order – 14/02/2025 O R D E R PER V. DURGA RAO, J.M. The appeal by the assessee is emanating from the impu…

PALLAVI PAL ,NOIDA, GAUTAM BUDH NAGAR vs. ASSESSING OFFICER, ITO, WARD-2(4), NOIDA, GAUTAM BUDH NAGAR

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is partly allowed

ITA 4766/DEL/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Jan 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: MS. MADHUMITA ROY (Judicial Member), SHRI MANISH AGARWAL (Accountant Member)

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250(6)Section 68

HERITAGE HOSPITALS LTD,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-11(1), NEW DELHI

ITA 4090/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Oct 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Anand Kumar Pandey, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sandeep Kumar Mishra, Sr. DR

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 68

…ced: “11. Issue of bogus share capital in the form of accommodation entries has been subject matter of several decisions of this Court and we would like to refer to decision in CIT v. Navodaya Castles (P.) Ltd. [2014] 50 taxmann.com 110/226 Taxman 190 (Mag.)/367 ITR 306, wherein the earlier judgments were classified into two separate categories observing as under:— '11. We have heard the Senior Standing counsel for the Revenue, who has relied upon decisions of the Delhi High Court in Commissioner of Income Tax v. Nova Promoters and Finlease (P) Ltd. [2012] 342 ITR 169 (Delhi), Commissioner of Income Tax v. N.R.…

M/S.WINWOOD MARKETING PVT. LTD. ,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD-6(4), KOLKATA. , KOLKATA

ITA 675/KOL/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata24 Sept 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumari.T.A. No. 675/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2012-2013 M/S. Winwood Marketing Pvt. Limited,………Appellant 9/12, Lal Bazar Street, 3Rd Floor, Kolkata-700001 [Pan:Aabcw3528M] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,………………………….……Respondent Ward-6(4), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata-700069 Appearances By: Shri Ankit Jalan, A.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri Arun Kumar Meena, Addl. Cit, Sr. D.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing: July 02, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: September 24, 2024 O R D E R

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 68

…lanation about the nature and source of such credit found in the books, or (d) the explanation offered by the assessee is not, in the opinion of the Assessing Officer, satisfactory. The Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT v. Novadaya Castles (P.) Ltd. 367 ITR 306 has 11 M/s. Winwood Marketing Pvt. Limited considered a large number of decisions including the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Durga Prasad [1971] 82 ITR 540 (SC). According to the Hon'ble Delhi High Court, basically there are two sets of judgments. In one set of cases, the assessee produced necessary documents/evidence…

SURABHI ENTERTAINMENT PRIVATE LIMITED ( PREVIOUSLY KNOWN AS PEARLS ENTERTAINMENT PRIVATE LIMITED),NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-24(2), NEW DELHI

In the result, this appeal stands dismissed on merit

ITA 9736/DEL/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Sept 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 234ASection 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘G’: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI AVDHESH KUMAR MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.9736/Del/2019, A.Y.2011-12) Surabhi Entertainment Pvt. DCIT, Ltd. (Previously known as Circle-24(2) Pearls Entertainment Pvt. Ltd.) Vs. New Delhi 705, 7th Floor, Manjusha Building, 57, Nehru Place, New Delhi PAN: AAECP3922F (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by None Respondent by Sh. Anuj Garg, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 05/06/2024 Date of Pronouncement /09/2024 ORDER PER AVDHESH KUMAR MISHRA, AM This appeal for the Assessment Year (hereinafter, the ‘AY…

HEAVEN VYAPAAR PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD-5(4), KOLKATA

ITA 27/KOL/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 Aug 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A. No. 27/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2012-2013 Heaven Vyapaar Pvt. Limited,…………………Appellant 7, Red Cross Place, 4Th Floor, Kolkata-700001 [Pan:Aacch7234G] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,………………………….……Respondent Ward-5(4), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata-700069 Appearances By: N O N E, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri B.K. Singh, Addl. Cit, Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing : June 19, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : August 20, 2024 O R D E R

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 68

…urce of such credit found in the books, or (d) the 13 Heaven Vyapaar Pvt. Limited explanation offered by the assessee is not, in the opinion of the Assessing Officer, satisfactory. The Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT v. Novadaya Castles (P.) Ltd. 367 ITR 306 has considered a large number of decisions including the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Durga Prasad [1971] 82 ITR 540 (SC). According to the Hon'ble Delhi High Court, basically there are two sets of judgments. In one set of cases, the assessee produced necessary documents/evidence to show and establish identity of the s…

ADVENT VINIMAY PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD-9(1), KOLKATA

ITA 221/KOL/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata14 May 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A. Nos. 220 & 221/Kol/2023 Assessment Years: 2012-2013 & 2014-2015 Advent Vinimay Private Limited,………..….Appellant 207, Maharishi Devendra Road, Burrabazar, Kolkata-700007 [Pan:Aaica3094K] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,…….…………………….…Respondent Ward-9(1), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata-700069 Appearances By: N O N E, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri Abhijit Kundu, Cit, D.R. & Shri P.P. Barman, Addl. Cit, Sr. D.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue

Section 131Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)

…nation about the nature and source of' such credit found in the books, or (d) the explanation offered by the assessee is not, in the opinion of the Assessing Officer, satisfactory. The Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT v. Novadaya Castles (P.) Ltd. .367 ITR 306 has considered a large number of decisions including the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Durga Prasad [1971] 82 ITR 540 (SC). According to the Hon’ble Delhi High Court basically there are two sets of judgments. In one set of case, the assessee produced necessary documents/evidence to show and establish identity of the sha…

ADVENT VINIMAY PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD-9(1), KOLKATA

ITA 220/KOL/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata14 May 2024AY 2012-13

Section 131Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)

KSJ INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CHENNAI

ITA 1110/CHNY/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai06 Mar 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Ble & Shri Manomohan Das, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 1110/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11 M/S. Ksj Infrastructure The Deputy Commissioner Of Pvt. Ltd., V. Income Tax, 2Nd Floor, Grant Lane, Room Central Circle -1(1), No. 218, Kolkata – 700 012. Chennai – 600 0034. [Pan:Aadcc-5913-E] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri. B. Rama Krishnan, Fca & Shri. Shrenik Chordia, Ca ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri. R. Clement Ramesh Kumar, Cit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 10.01.2024 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 06.03.2024 आदेश /O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri. B. Rama Krishnan, FCA and Shri. Shrenik Chordia, CAFor Respondent: Shri. R. Clement Ramesh Kumar, CIT

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153B(1)Section 153CSection 234BSection 68

…of bogus share capital in the form of accommodation entries has been subject matter :-15-: ITA. No: 1110/Chny/2023 of several decisions of this Court and we would like to refer to decision in Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Navodaya Castles Pvt. Ltd. (2014] 367 ITR 306, wherein the earlier judgments were classified into two separate categories observing as under: "11, We have heard the Senior Standing counsel for the Revenue, who has relied upon decisions of the Delhi High Court in Commissioner of income Tax Vs. Nova Promoters and Finlease (P) Ltd. 2012) 342 ITR 169 (Delhi), Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. N.R.…

BABA IRON INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD. ,KOLKATA vs. ITO,WARD-9(1), KOLKATA., KOLKATA

ITA 925/KOL/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata19 Feb 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Sri Rajpal Yadav & Dr. Manish Borad

Section 143(3)Section 144Section 144BSection 249Section 253Section 254Section 263Section 3Section 5

…lanation about the nature and source of such credit found in the books, or (d) the explanation offered by the assessee is not, in the opinion of the Assessing Officer, satisfactory. The Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT v. Novadaya Castles (P.) Ltd. 367 ITR 306 has considered a large number of decisions Page 9 of 13 I.T.A. No.: 925/KOL/2023 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Baba Iron Industries Pvt. Ltd. including the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Durga Prasad [1971] 82 ITR 540 (SC). According to the Hon'ble Delhi High Court basically there are two sets of judgments. In one set of ca…

BARCELONA MERCANTILE COMPANY PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. WARD 12(1)(3), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2346/MUM/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Oct 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay N. KapadiaaFor Respondent: Shri Ashok Kumar Ambastha

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 250Section 68

…Ltd. ITA no.2346/Mum./2023 liquidating the investment in unquote shares. The said fact has already been noted by us in preceding para 3.8 of the order. 5.6 The Ld.CIT-DR cited the decision of Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in CIT V/s Navodaya Castles Pvt. Ltd. (367 ITR 306 25/08/2014). However, we find the same to be factually distinguishable since in that case, the assessment order specifically records that there were huge regular cash deposits and thereafter pay order / cheques were issued to the respondent assessee. The same is not the case here since Ld. Assessing Officer records a fact that loans were sourced…

NCML INDUSTRIES LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CC- 5, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 7820/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Sept 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri C.M. Gargdr. B. R. R. Kumarassessment Year: 2013-14 Ncml Industries Ltd., Vs Acit, 1818, Naya Bazar, Central Circle-5, New Delhi – 110 006. New Delhi. Pan: Aaacn4248A (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : None Revenue By : Shri H. K. Choudhary, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 05.07.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 18.09.2023

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri H. K. Choudhary, CIT-DR

Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 40A(3)Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “G”, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI C.M. GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER Dr. B. R. R. KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2013-14 NCML Industries Ltd., Vs ACIT, 1818, Naya Bazar, Central Circle-5, New Delhi – 110 006. New Delhi. PAN: AAACN4248A (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : None Revenue by : Shri H. K. Choudhary, CIT-DR Date of Hearing : 05.07.2023 Date of Pronouncement : 18.09.2023 ORDER PER Dr. B. R. R. KUMAR, AM: The present appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order of ld. CIT(A)-XXV, New Delhi dated 19.09.2018. 2. Following grounds have been filed b…

ITO, WARD- 16(1), NEW DELHI vs. MAHADEV DAIRY PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is partly allowed

ITA 4380/DEL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Jul 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Sh. N. K. Billaiya & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year: 2017-18 Ito Mahadev Dairy Pvt. Ltd. Ward- 16 (1) Vs C-16, 101 First Floor, New Delhi Gurunanak Pura, Laxmi Nagar, Delhi -110092 Pan No.Aahcm1300K (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 133(6)Section 250(4)Section 36(1)Section 68

…gnoring the ratio decidendi as laid down by Hon’ble Delhi High Court on the issue in the cases of CIT vs. N.R. portfolio (P) Ltd. (2014) 2 1TR-OL-68, CIT vs. Nipun Builders and Developers (P) Ltd. (2013) 350 ITR 407 and CIT vs. Navodaya castles Pvt Ltd (2014) 367 ITR 306 on application of section 68 of the Act? 4. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) is legally justified in deleting the disallowance of interest expenses of Rs. 6,18,650/-u/s 36(1) (iii) of the Act by ignoring the fact that the assessee had failed to prove the direct nexus between business income and huge interest exp…

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, PATNA vs. SONAMOTI AGROTECH PVT LTD, PATNA

ITA 110/PAT/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Patna23 Feb 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumar

Section 132Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 68

…only letter written by the ld. Assessing Officer is date 06.01.2016 requesting the explanation of the assessee by 25.01.2016 and he passed the assessment order in the month of March, 2016. The Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT – vs.- Navodha Cashle [367 ITR 306] has considered a large number of decisions including the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT –vs.- Durga Prasad More reported in 82 ITR page 540. According to the Hon’ble Delhi High Court, basically there are two sets of judgments. In one set of case, the assessee produced necessary documents/evidence to show and establish t…

Showing 1–20 of 195 · Page 1 of 10

...