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

367 ITR 306High Court2014#417 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.

216

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,421 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 1961Section 68Section 143(3)Section 131Section 14ASection 142(1)Section 133(6)Section 133(6) of the Income-tax Act
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

paper companyshare application moneygenuineness of the transactionsection 133(6)unexplained cash creditsection 68previous yearsection 143(2)companypersontotal incomedocument

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

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

…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 Delhi in the in the case of M/s Navodaya Castle ( P) Ltd. reported as (2014) 367 ITR 306, that certificate of incorporation, PAN, etc., were not sufficient for the purpose of identification of subscriber company, when there was material to show that subscriber was a paper company and not a genuine investor was upheld by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in (2015) 56 taxmann.com 18 (SC) and since the facts are identical in the assessee’s case…

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

…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 Delhi in the in the case of M/s Navodaya Castle ( P) Ltd. reported as (2014) 367 ITR 306, that certificate of incorporation, PAN, etc., were not sufficient for the purpose of identification of subscriber company, when there was material to show that subscriber was a paper company and not a genuine investor was upheld by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in (2015) 56 taxmann.com 18 (SC) and since the facts are identical in the assessee’s case…

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

…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 Delhi in the in the case of M/s Navodaya Castle ( P) Ltd. reported as (2014) 367 ITR 306, that certificate of incorporation, PAN, etc., were not sufficient for the purpose of identification of subscriber company, when there was material to show that subscriber was a paper company and not a genuine investor was upheld by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in (2015) 56 taxmann.com 18 (SC) and since the facts are identical in the assessee’s case…

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

…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 Delhi in the in the case of M/s Navodaya Castle ( P) Ltd. reported as (2014) 367 ITR 306, that certificate of incorporation, PAN, etc., were not sufficient for the purpose of identification of subscriber company, when there was material to show that subscriber was a paper company and not a genuine investor was upheld by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in (2015) 56 taxmann.com 18 (SC) and since the facts are identical in the assessee’s case…

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

…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 Delhi in the in the case of M/s Navodaya Castle ( P) Ltd. reported as (2014) 367 ITR 306, that certificate of incorporation, PAN, etc., were not sufficient for the purpose of identification of subscriber company, when there was material to show that subscriber was a paper company and not a genuine investor was upheld by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in (2015) 56 taxmann.com 18 (SC) and since the facts are identical in the assessee’s case…

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

ITA 1747/CHNY/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 Dec 2021AY 2008-09

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

…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 Delhi in the in the case of M/s Navodaya Castle ( P) Ltd. reported as (2014) 367 ITR 306, that certificate of incorporation, PAN, etc., were not sufficient for the purpose of identification of subscriber company, when there was material to show that subscriber was a paper company and not a genuine investor was upheld by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in (2015) 56 taxmann.com 18 (SC) and since the facts are identical in the assessee’s case…

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

ITA 1746/CHNY/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 Dec 2021AY 2007-08

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

…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 Delhi in the in the case of M/s Navodaya Castle ( P) Ltd. reported as (2014) 367 ITR 306, that certificate of incorporation, PAN, etc., were not sufficient for the purpose of identification of subscriber company, when there was material to show that subscriber was a paper company and not a genuine investor was upheld by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in (2015) 56 taxmann.com 18 (SC) and since the facts are identical in the assessee’s case…

ACIT CC-3(2), Chennai vs. Bmp Steels P Ltd, Thiruvallur

ITA 1745/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

…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 Delhi in the in the case of M/s Navodaya Castle ( P) Ltd. reported as (2014) 367 ITR 306, that certificate of incorporation, PAN, etc., were not sufficient for the purpose of identification of subscriber company, when there was material to show that subscriber was a paper company and not a genuine investor was upheld by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in (2015) 56 taxmann.com 18 (SC) and since the facts are identical in the assessee’s case…

ACIT CC-3(2), Chennai vs. Bmp Steels P Ltd, Thiruvallur

ITA 1744/CHNY/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 Dec 2021AY 2011-12

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

…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 Delhi in the in the case of M/s Navodaya Castle ( P) Ltd. reported as (2014) 367 ITR 306, that certificate of incorporation, PAN, etc., were not sufficient for the purpose of identification of subscriber company, when there was material to show that subscriber was a paper company and not a genuine investor was upheld by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in (2015) 56 taxmann.com 18 (SC) and since the facts are identical in the assessee’s case…

ACIT, Central Circle-15, New Delhi vs. Luxman Builders Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the CO filed by the assessee is allowed and the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 817/DEL/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Dec 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Kul Bharatassessment Year: 2010-11 Acit, Vs Lumax Builders Pvt. Ltd., Central Circle-15, 25, Bazar Lane, New Delhi. Bengali Market, New Delhi. Pan: Aaacl2184R Co No.93/Del/2018 (Ita No.817/Del/2018) Assessment Year: 2010-11 Lumax Builders Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Acit, 25, Bazar Lane, Central Circle-15, Bengali Market, New Delhi New Delhi. Pan: Aaacl2184R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Gautam Jain, Advocate & Shri Lalit Mohan, Advocate Revenue By : Ms Paramita M. Biswas, Cit, Dr Date Of Hearing : 16.09.2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 14.12.2021 Order Per R.K. Panda, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Dated 3Rd November, 2017 Of The Cit(A)-26, New Delhi, Relating To Assessment Year 2010- 11. Co No.93/Del/2018 2. The Assessee Has Filed The Co Against The Appeal Filed By The Revenue. For The Sake Of Convenience, These Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Common Order.

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain, Advocate &For Respondent: Ms Paramita M. Biswas, CIT, DR
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 153A

…dients required as per the provisions of section 68 of the IT Act. Referring to the following decisions, he submitted that the addition made by the AO was fully justified:- (i) CIT vs MAF Academy Pvt. Ltd., 361 ITR 258; (ii) CIT vs. Navodaya Castles Pvt. Ltd. 367 ITR 306; (iii) Konark Structural Engineering (P) Ltd. vs. DCIT, 90 taxmann.com 56 (Bom); 18 CO No.93/Del/2018 (iv) Prem Castings (P) Ltd. vs. DCIT, 88 taxmann.com 189; (v) CIT Vs. Nipun Builders & Developers Pvt. Ltd. 350 ITR 407; (vi) CIT vs Nova Promoters & Finlease (P) Ltd.,342 ITR 169; (vii) CIT vs. Ultra Modern Exports (P) Ltd., 40 taxmann.com 458…

Mahendra H. Shah, Mumbai vs. ITO - Ward- 4 (1)(3), Mumbai

ITA 6892/MUM/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Sept 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon’Bleshri Mahendra H. Shah V. Income Tax Officer – 4(1)(3) 6Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan C/O. The Presscopper Industries M.K. Road, Mumbai - 400020 175, Kika Street Mumbai – 400004 Pan: Aafps0929R (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Vimal PunmiyaFor Respondent: Smita Verma
Section 132(4)Section 133(4)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 68

…EAL NO OF 2019 (Arising out of SLP (Civil No.29855 of 2018) SUPREME COURT recent decision dated 05th March 2019 5. Pr.CIT -6, New Delhi vs NDR Prompters Pvt Ltd ITA 49/2018 of Hon'ble Delhi High Court dated 17.01 .2019 6. CIT Vs Navodaya Castle Pvt Ltd (2014) 367 ITR 306 (Del) 7. Navodava Castle Pvt Ltd Vs CIT (2015-TIOL-314-SC-IT) 8. CIT Vs MAP Academy (P.) Ltd (361 ITR 258) 9. Rick Lunsford Trade & Investment Ltd Vs CIT (2016] 385 ITR 399 (Cal) 10. Rick Lunsford Trade & Investment Ltd Vs CIT (2016- TIOL-207-SC-IT (Supreme Court) 11. CIT Vs Nipun Builders & Developers (P.) Ltd (30 taxmann.com 292, 214 Taxman 42…

ITO 6 (1)(2), Mumbai vs. M/S Aniata Dyes & Intermediates Pvt Ltd, Mumbai

ITA 6976/MUM/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Aug 2021AY 2008-09
Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 148Section 68

…THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” Bench, Mumbai Shri Shamim Yahya (AM) & Shri Pavankumar Gadale (JM) I.T.A. No. 6976/Mum/2019 (Assessment Year 2008-09) Vs. M/s. Anita Dyes & ITO-6(1)(2) Room No. 508 Intermediates Pvt. Ltd. Aayakar Bhavan A-404, Bhavani Complex 5th Floor B.S. Road, Dadar-West M.K. Road Mumbai-400 028. Mumbai-400 020. PAN : AAACA4506A (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Dr. P. Daniel Department by Shri Brijendra Kumar Date of Hearing 08.07.2021 Date of Pronouncement 30.08.2021 O R D E R Per Shamim Yahya (AM) :- This appeal by the Revenue is directed against the order of learned CIT(A) da…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Bbn Transportation Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

Appeals are dismissed in favour of the

ITA 6176/DEL/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Jul 2021AY 2008-09
Section 147Section 148Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘C’: NEW DELHI (Through Video Conferencing) BEFORE, SHRI SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A No.6174/Del/2013 (ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10) Asst.CIT M/s Sur Buildcon Central Circle-13, Pvt. Ltd. New Delhi. Vs. 315, 3rd Floor E-Block International Trade Tower, Nehru Place New Delhi. PAN-AALCF 7467F (Appellant) (Respondent) C.O. No.258/Del/2015 Arising out of ITA No.6174/Del/2013 (ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10) M/s Sur Buildcon Pvt. Dy. CIT Ltd. Central Circle-13, 315, 3rd Floor Vs. New Delhi. E-Block Internati…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Sur Buildcon Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

Appeals are dismissed in favour of the

ITA 6174/DEL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Jul 2021AY 2009-10
Section 147Section 148Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘C’: NEW DELHI (Through Video Conferencing) BEFORE, SHRI SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A No.6174/Del/2013 (ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10) Asst.CIT M/s Sur Buildcon Central Circle-13, Pvt. Ltd. New Delhi. Vs. 315, 3rd Floor E-Block International Trade Tower, Nehru Place New Delhi. PAN-AALCF 7467F (Appellant) (Respondent) C.O. No.258/Del/2015 Arising out of ITA No.6174/Del/2013 (ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10) M/s Sur Buildcon Pvt. Dy. CIT Ltd. Central Circle-13, 315, 3rd Floor Vs. New Delhi. E-Block Internati…

ACIT, CC- 15, New Delhi vs. M/S. Brahmaputra Realtors (P) Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is

ITA 3911/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jun 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri K.N. Chary[Assessment Year: 2012-13]

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)

…62 Taxman 74(SC) ii. Prem Castings (P.) Ltd. vs CIT [2017] 88 taxmann.com 189 (Allahabad) iii. Konark Structural Engineering (P.) Ltd. vs DCIT [2018] 96 taxmann.com 255(SC) iv. CIT vs MAF Academy (P) Ltd. 361 ITR 258 v. CIT vs Navodaya Castle Pvt. Ltd. [2014] 367 ITR 306 (Del.) 12. The learned counsel for the assessee on the other hand strongly supported the order of the learned CIT(A). He submitted that the assessee has filed all the requisite details before the AO on 30th March 2015 i.e. before completion of assessment. The notice issued u/s 133(6) were also complied with since the Authorized Representativ…

ACIT Central Circle 3(2), Chennai vs. Cmg Steels Pvt. Ltd., Chennai

ITA 1985/CHNY/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Jun 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 1985/Chny/2017 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12 The Asst. Commissioner Of M/S. Cmg Steels Pvt. Ltd., Income Tax, V. No.8, Elanthanur, Central Circle – 3(2), Ponneri High Road, Chennai – 34. Chennai – 600 103. Pan: Aadcc 7579C (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) & Co No.: 155/Chny/2017 (In Ita No.1985/Chny/2017) िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12 M/S. Cmg Steels Pvt. Ltd., The Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, V. No.8, Elanthanur, Central Circle – 3(2), Ponneri High Road, Chennai – 34. Chennai – 600 103. Pan: Aadcc 7579C (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) राज" की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri S. Bharath, Cit "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri T. Banusekar, Advocate सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 25.03.2021 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 09.06.2021

For Appellant: Shri T. Banusekar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri S. Bharath, CIT
Section 153CSection 68

…r work and documentation but genuineness and credit worthiness are deeper and obtrusive aspects. 2.5 The ld.CIT(A) ought to have appreciated that the decision of Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in the in the case of M/s Navodaya Castle (P) Ltd. reported as (2014) 367 ITR 306, that certificate of incorporation, PAN etc., were not sufficient for the purpose of identification of subscriber company, when there was material to show that subscriber was a paper company and not a genuine investor was upheld by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in (2015) 56 taxmann.com 18 (SC) and since the facts are identical in the assessee's case,…

Joint CIT (OSD) CC 7(4), Mumbai vs. M/S Shalimar Housing & Finance Ltd., Mumbai

ITA 4079/MUM/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Jun 2021AY 2013-14
Section 133(6)Section 68

…THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “G” Bench, Mumbai Shri Shamim Yahya (AM) & Shri Pavankumar Gadale (JM) I.T.A. No. 4079/Mum/2019 (Assessment Year 2013-14) Vs. M/s. Shalimar Housing & JCIT(OSD)-CC-7(4) Room No. 659 Finance Ltd. Aayakar Bhavan 505, Shalimar Morya Park M.K. Road Andheri West Mumbai-400 020. Mumbai-400 053. PAN : AAACS6732N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Shri Vijay Mehta Department by Shri Rajesh Kumar Date of Hearing 16.03.2021 Date of Pronouncement 01.06.2021 O R D E R Per Shamim Yahya (AM) :- This appeal by the Revenue is directed against the order of learned CIT(A) dated 22.3.2019 an…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Supreme Placement Services (P) Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 5259/DEL/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Mar 2021AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri B.R.R Kumar

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri N.K. Bansal, Sr. D.R
Section 132Section 143(2)

…n the case of ITO vs., Synergy Finlease Pvt. Ltd., in ITA.No.4778/Del./2013. 3. Prem Castings (P.) Ltd., vs., CIT [2017] 88 taxmann.com 189 [Alld.] [HC]. 4. CIT vs., MAF Academy (P.) Ltd., 361 ITR 258 [Del.] [HC]. 5. CIT vs., Navodaya Castle Pvt. Ltd., [2014] 367 ITR 306 [Del.] [HC]. 14 ITA.No.5259/Del./2013 M/s. Supreme Placement Services (P) Ltd., New Delhi. 6. Konark Structural Engineering (P.) Ltd., vs., DCIT [2018] 96 taxmann.com 255 [SC]. 7. Pratham Telecom India Pvt. Ltd., vs., DCIT [2018-TIOL- 1983-HC-MUM-IT]. 8. JJ Development Pvt. Ltd., vs., CIT [2018-TIOL-395-SC- IT]. 9. DRB Exports (P.) Ltd., vs., CI…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Technico Industries Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

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

ITA 5204/DEL/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Mar 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kambleassessment Year: 2011-12 Dcit, Vs Technico Industries Pvt. Ltd., Circle-25(1), 103, Pratap Bhawan, Cr Building, Ip Estate, Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg, New Delhi. Near Indian Express Building, New Delhi. Pan: Aaact4445P (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Aditya Kumar, Ca & Shri Ashwani Kumar, Ca Revenue By : Mrs Aashna Paul, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 17.12.2020 Date Of Pronouncement : 09.03.2020 Order Per R.K. Panda, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against Order Dated 31St March, 2015 Of The Cit(A)-9, New Delhi Relating To Assessment Year 2011-12. 2. Facts Of The Case, In Brief, Are That The Assessee Is A Company Engaged In The Business Of Manufacturing Of Sheet Metal Components & Tools & Dies. It Filed Its Return Of Income On 29Th September, 2011 Declaring ‘Nil’ Income. The Said Return Was Revised On 14Th September, 2012 Declaring A Loss Of Rs.3,61,68,075/-. During The Course Of Assessment Proceedings, The Ao, On Perusal Of The Balance Sheet Filed By The Assessee, Noted That The Assessee Company Has Issued 14,72,000 Equity Shares At A Premium Of Rs.115. From The Various Details Furnished By The Assessee, The Ao Noted That The Assessee Has Issued Shares To The Following Persons/Parties:-

For Appellant: Shri Aditya Kumar, CA &For Respondent: Mrs Aashna Paul, CIT-DR
Section 133(6)

…ynergy Finlease Pvt. Ltd (ITA No.4778/Del/2013) 4. Prem Castings (P.) Ltd. Vs CIT [2017] 88 taxmann.com 189 (Allahabad) 4A.Prem Castings (P.) Ltd. Vs C1T 2018-TIQL-274-SC-IT 5. CIT Vs MAF Academy (P.) Ltd (361 ITR 258) 6. CIT Vs Navodava Castle Pvt Ltd [2014] 367 ITR 306 (Del) 7. Konark Structural Engineering (P.) Ltd. Vs DCIT [2018] 96 taxmann.com 255 (SC) 7A.Konark Structural Engineering (P.) Ltd. Vs DCIT [2018] 90 taxmann.com 56 (Bombay) 8. Pratham Telecom India Pvt Ltd Vs DCIT (2018-T1OL-1983-HC-MUM-IT) 9. J J Development Pvt Ltd Vs CIT (2018-TIQL-395-SC-IT) 10 DRB Exports (P.) Ltd. Vs CIT [2018] 93 taxmann.c…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Prakausali Investment India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed, for statistical purpose

ITA 3126/DEL/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Jan 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N. K. Billaiyaa N D Ms. Suchitra Kamblei.T.A. No. 3126/Del/2017 (A.Y 2010-11) (Through Video Conferencing)

Section 250Section 68

…Del/2017. 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 ITR-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? 3. Whether on facts and in circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) is legally justified in deleting addition of Rs. 1,56,10,00,000/- u/s 68 of the Act without recording evidence and reasons for reaching a conclusion that the assessee had actually discharged its onus with regard to creditworthiness of 110…