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.?

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

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 366,470 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

Read the full judgment

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.

Sd Polyfilms Pvt Ltd, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward - 22(1), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 4034/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Dec 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri B.R.R Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Kapil Goel, AdvFor Respondent: Shri S.S. Rana, CIT-D.R

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 153CSection 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “G” New Delhi BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI B.R.R KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No.4034/DEL/2019 Assessment Year: 2010-11 SD Polyfilms Pvt. Ltd., vs. ITO, Ward-22(1), C-II/388 Janakpuri, New Delhi. Delhi. TAN/PAN: AANCS3743A (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by: Shri Kapil Goel, Adv. Respondent by: Shri S.S. Rana, CIT-D.R. Date of hearing: 19 09 2019 Date of pronouncement: 18 12 2019 O R D E R PER AMIT SHUKLA, JM:- The aforesaid appeal has been filed by the assessee against the impugned order dated 22.02.2019, passed by Commissioner of…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Sidhvandan Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the Revenue’s Appeal stands dismissed

ITA 1177/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Dec 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri R.K. Panda

For Appellant: Sh. Raj Kumar, CA & Sh. SumitFor Respondent: Ms. Pramita M. Biswas, CIT(DR)

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

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “E”, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI R.K. PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No. 1177/DEL/2016 A.Y. : 2012-13 DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 20, VS. M/S SIDHVANDAN 1ST FLOOR, ROOM NO. 104, E-2 ENTERPRISES PVT. LTD., ARA CENTRE, C-1/35, SAFDARJUNG JHANDEWALAN DEVELOPMENT AREA, NEW DELHI – 110 055 NEW DELHI – 110 016 (PAN: AAGCS7782L) (ASSESSEE) (RESPONDENT) Revenue by : Ms. Pramita M. Biswas, CIT(DR) Assessee by : Sh. Raj Kumar, CA & Sh. Sumit Goel, CA ORDER PER H.S. SIDHU : JM The Revenue has filed this Appeal against the impugned Order dated 30.1…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Jaypee Financial Services Ltd., New Delhi

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

ITA 4266/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Dec 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Sh. R. K. Pandaand. Sh. Kuldip Singhassessment Year: 2011-12 Acit Vs. M/S. Jaypee Financial Central Circle- 29 Services Limited New Delhi Fa-45, Shivaji Enclave, New Delhi-110027 Pan No.Aaacj2992B (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 132Section 142Section 153A

…ification resorted to by the assessee to divert their profit in collision with stock brokers. He also relied on the following decisions :- 1. CIT Vs. MAF Academy 361 ITR 258 (Del) 2. CIT Vs. N. R. Portfolio 263 ITR 456 (Del) 3. CIT Vs. Navodaya Castle P. Ltd. 367 ITR 306 4. PCIT Vs. NDR Promoters 140 ITR 379 8. The Ld. Counsel for the assesse on the other hand heavily relied on the order of the CIT(A). He submitted that the AO has heavily relied upon the report of the special auditor which itself is not based on any material against the assessee. Referring to page 90 of the paper book he submitted that the notice…

Shri Nareshbhai V Patel, Mumbai vs. ACIT-33(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4912/MUM/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Nov 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri Rajesh Kumarassessment Year: 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh Joshi, A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Kavita P. Kaushik, D.R

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 68

…sons behind the company who take the decisions, controls and manage them. 5.6 Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Navodaya Castles (P) Ltd 56 taxmann.com 18(SC), has dismissed the appeal of the assessee company against the order of Delhi High Court in the case 367 ITR 306 (Delhi). Hon'ble High Court held that certificate of incorporation, PAN, etc., are relevant for purpose of identification, but have their limitation when there is evidence and material to show that subscriber was a paper company and not a genuine investor. Also held that assessee cannot simply furnish some details and remain quiet when summons is…

Marudhara Marketing Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle- 30, New Delhi

ITA 890/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Oct 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Kuldip Singh

For Appellant: Shri P.C. Yadav, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri J.K. Mishra, CIT DR

Section 132Section 143Section 153ASection 153CSection 68

…recorded by us hereinabove. 54. In view of the above, we are of the view that the Assessee has not discharged the onus satisfactorily and the additions made by the Assessing Officer were justified and sustainable. " 6. CIT Vs Navodaya Castle Pvt Ltd [2014] 367 ITR 306 (Del) where Hon'ble Delhi High Court accepted that since the assessee was unable to produce the directors and the principal officers of the six shareholder companies and also that as per the information and details collected by the Assessing Officer from the concerned bank, the Assessing Officer had observed that there were genuine concerns about…

Rs India Infrapower Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon vs. ITO, Ward- 3(4), Gurgaon

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

ITA 3238/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Oct 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishirs India Infrapower Pvt Ltd, Vs. Ito, Gl Business Centre, Dundahera, Ward-3(4), Old Delhi, Gurgaon Road, Gurgaon Gurgaon Pan: Aaecp9526H (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Salil Agarwal;. AdvFor Respondent: Shri Surender Pal, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 68

…INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “F”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER RS India Infrapower Pvt Ltd, Vs. ITO, GL Business Centre, Dundahera, Ward-3(4), Old Delhi, Gurgaon Road, Gurgaon Gurgaon PAN: AAECP9526H (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Salil Agarwal;. Adv Shri Ravi Pratap Mall, Adv Revenue by: Shri Surender Pal, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 17/07/2019 Date of pronouncement 09/10/2019 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)-1, Gurgaon dated 17.11.2017…

Prime Comfort Products P. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle-20(1), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 267/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Oct 2019AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: S/Shri Raj Kumar & Sumit Goel, CAFor Respondent: Shri Surender Pal, Sr.D.R

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 56Section 68

…d further relied upon the following judgments:- a. PCIT vs. NRA Iron & Steel Pvt. Ltd. (SC) dated 05.03.2019 b. PCIT vs. NDR Promoters Pvt Ltd. (2019-TIOL-172-HC-DEL-IT) c. CIT vs. MAF Academy (P) Ltd. (361 ITR 258) d. CIT vs. Navodaya Castle Pvt. Ltd. (2014) 367 ITR 306 (Del) e. Konark Structural Engineering P. Ltd. v. DCIT (2018) 96 taxmann.com 255 (SC) 15 I.T.A. No.267/DEL/2019 f. Pratham Telecom India Pvt. Ltd. vs. DCIT (2018-TIOL-1983- HC-MUM-IT) g. CIT vs. Nipun Builders & Developers (P) Ltd., 30 taxmann.com 292 h. CIT vs. Nova Promoters & Finlease (P) Ltd. (18 taxmann.com 217) i. CIT vs. N R Portfolio Pv…

Singhal Sunrise Steels Pvt. Ltd., Ghaziabad vs. ITO, Ghaziabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3103/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Sept 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. Amit Shukladr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 3103/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Singhal Sunrise Steels Pvt. Ltd., Vs Income Tax Officer, 241, Loha Mandi, Ward-2(3), Ghaziabad Ghaziabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aajcs7938P Assessee By : Sh. M. S. Sekhon, Ca Revenue By : Sh. N. K. Bansal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 21.08.2019 Date Of Pronouncement: 18.09.2019 Order Per Dr. B. R. R. Kumar:

For Appellant: Sh. M. S. Sekhon, CAFor Respondent: Sh. N. K. Bansal, Sr. DR

Section 131Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 68

…s recorded by us hereinabove. 54. In view of the above, we are of the view that the Assessee has not discharged the onus satisfactorily and the additions made by the Assessing Officer were justified and sustainable.” 6. CIT Vs Navodaya Castle Pvt Ltd T20141 367 ITR 306 (Del) (Copy Enclosed) where Hon’ble Delhi High Court accepted that since the assessee was unable to produce the directors and the principal officers of the six shareholder companies and also that as per the information and details collected by the Assessing Officer from the concerned bank, the Assessing Officer had observed that there were genuin…

Inder Mohan Khurana, New Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 6553/DEL/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Sept 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

Section 124(1)(b)Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 68

…ars 1. Sequence of event 2. Dushyant Kumar Jain v. Dv. CIT ^ 381 ITR 428.(Del.) 3. Dr. Mrs. K.B. Kumar v. Income-tax Officer [2011] 12 taxmann.com 318 (Delhi) & 47 SOT 192 4. Smt. Prabhavati S. Shah r. CIT 231 ITR 1 (Bom.) 5. CIT v. Navodaya Castles Pvt. Ltd. 367 ITR 306 (Del.) 6. Sona Electronic Co. v. CIT 152 ITR 507(Del). 7. Abhishek Jain v. Income Tax Officer 405 ITR 1 (Del.) 8. Padamsundara Rao (DECD) and Others v. State of Tamilnadu and Others [2002] 255 ITR 147(S.C) 9. Returns & Jurisdiction 10. Sardar Baldev Sing v. CIT 40 ITR 605(S.C) 11. Section 64 of 1922Act Sr. No. Particulars 1. Assessment Order for…

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

…cation money by the Assessing Officer, was deleted by that Tribunal, however the Hon'ble High Court reversed the decision of the Tribunal and sustained the addition. The Hon'ble High Court has relied on the decision of the CIT Vs Navodaya Castles P Lid (2014) 367 ITR 306 (Delhi). The relevant discussion and finding of the Hon'ble Court in the above case is reproduced as under: "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 Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Navodaya Castles Pvt. Ltd. [2014] 367…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Senorita Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 5388/DEL/2015[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Jul 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri B.R.R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Yogesh Jagia, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Amit Katoch, Sr. DR

Section 131(1)Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 151(2)Section 68

…at where investor of share application money had nominal income and cheques had been received just before issue of cheques for share application money, creditworthiness was not proved and addition u/s 68 was sustained. 4. CIT Vs Navodaya Castle Pvt Ltd T20141 367 ITR 306 (Del) (Copy Enclosed) where Hon’ble Delhi High Court accepted that since the assessee was unable to produce the directors and the principal officers of the six shareholder companies and also that as per the information and details collected by the Assessing Officer from the concerned bank, the Assessing Officer had observed that there were genuin…

Sheetal Infoservices Pvt. Ltd, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward-23(2), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4604/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Jul 2019AY 2015-16

Bench: Sh. H. S. Sidhudr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 4604/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year : 2015-16 Sheetal Infoservices Pvt. Ltd., Vs Income Tax Officer, L-7A(Lgf), South Extension, Ward-23(2), Part-2, New Delhi-110049 New Delhi-110002 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aamcs0742A Assessee By : Sh. Raj Kumar Gupta, Ca Revenue By : Sh. S. S. Rana, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 04.07.2019 Date Of Pronouncement: 22.07.2019

For Appellant: Sh. Raj Kumar Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Sh. S. S. Rana, CIT DR

Section 131Section 143(3)Section 147Section 150(1)Section 68

…gs recorded by us hereinabove. 54. In view of the above, we are of the view that the Assessee has not discharged the onus satisfactorily and the additions made by the Assessing Officer were justified and sustainable.” 6. CIT Vs Navodaya Castle Pvt. Ltd T20141 367 ITR 306 (Del) (Copy Enclosed) where Hon’ble Delhi High Court accepted that since the assessee was unable to produce the directors and the principal officers of the six shareholder companies and also that as per the information and details collected by the Assessing Officer from the concerned bank, the Assessing Officer had observed that there were genuin…

Smg Estates (P) Ltd., Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle- 24(1), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1537/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Jul 2019AY 2015-16

Bench: Sh. H. S. Sidhudr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 1537/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year : 2015-16 M/S Smg Estates (P) Ltd., Vs Acit, E-42, Greater Kailash, Part-Ii, Circle-24(1), South Delhi, Delhi-110048 New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaics2351R Assessee By : Sh. Raj Kumar Gupta, Ca Revenue By : Ms. Ashima Neb, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 03.07.2019 Date Of Pronouncement: 12.07.2019 Order Per Dr. B. R. R. Kumar:

For Appellant: Sh. Raj Kumar Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Ashima Neb, Sr. DR

Section 115BSection 133(6)Section 68

M/S. Tara Mercantile Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the Appeal filed by the Assessee stands allowed

ITA 1572/DEL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Jul 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri B.R.R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Gautam Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. S.S. Rana, CIT(DR)

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 56(2)(viib)Section 68

…He further submitted that with regard to addition made u/s. 68 following decisions may be considered viz. PCIT vs. NRA Iron & Steel (P) Ltd. (2019) 103 taxmann.com 48 (SC); CIT vs. MAF Academy (P) Ltd. (361 ITR 258); CIT vs. Navodaya Caste Pvt. Ltd. (2014) 367 ITR 306 (Delhi); Navodaya Castle Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT (2015) 56 taxmann.com 18 (SC); Pratham Telecom India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. DCIT 2018 TIOL 1983 HC-Mum-IT. He further submitted that with regard to section 56(2)(viib) following cases may be considered viz. Sunrise Academy of Medical Specialities Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ITO (2018) 96 taxmann.com 43 (Kerala); Sunrise Ac…

ITO, New Delhi vs. M/S Optima Webtech Pvt. Ltd, New Delhi

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

ITA 5457/DEL/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Jun 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2007-08 Income Tax Officer, Vs. M/S. Optima Webtech Pvt. Ward-13(4), New Delhi Ltd., 3775/3, Kanahiya Nagar, Tri Nagar, New Delhi Pan :Aaaco7509F (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri P.C. Gupta, Sr.Dr Respondent By None

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

…e to the assessee and thus, we heard the appeal ex parte, qua the assessee. 4 4. The Ld. Departmental Representative relied on the order of the Assessing Officer and supported the said order by following decisions: 1. CIT vs. Navodaya Castle Pvt. Ltd. [2014] 367 ITR 306 (Del.) 2. Navodaya Castle Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT [2015-TIOL-314-SC-IT] 3. Konark Structural Engineering (P.) Ltd. Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax [2018] 96 taxmann.com 255 (SC) 4. Konark Structural Engineering (P.) Ltd. Vs. DCIT, [2018] 90 taxmann.com 56 (Bombay) 5. DRB Exports (P.) Ltd. Vs. CIT [2018] 93 taxmann.com 490 (Calcutta) 6. CIT Vs. Ni…

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

…CIT(A) and restore that of the Assessing Officer. In the result ground no. (i) of Revenue is allowed.” 5.2.7 Reliance is also placed on the decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Navodaya Castles Pvt. Ltd. dated 25/08/2014 in [(2014) 367 ITR 306 (Delhi)], in which SLP filed by the assessee was dismissed[(2015) 230 Taxman 268 (SC)],where it has been held that: "14. Certificate of incorporation, PAN etc. are relevant for purchase of identification, but have their limitation when there is evidence and material to show that the subscriber was a paper company and not a genuine investor. It is…

Shri Rathi Steel (Dakshin) Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle-16, New Delhi

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

ITA 7973/DEL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 May 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Shri Ved Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Goyal, CIT, DR

Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 153A

…s Pvt. Ltd. (2019-TIOL-172-HC-DEL-IT) iii) Prem Castings (P) Ltd. vs. CIT (2017) 88 taxmann.com 189 (All); iv) Prem Castings (P) Ltd. vs. CIT 2018-TIOL-274-SC-IT; v) CIT vs. MAF Academy (P) Ltd., 361 ITR 258 (Del); vi) CIT vs. Navodaya Castle Pvt. Ltd. (2014) 367 ITR 306 (Del); vii) Konark Structural Engineering (P) Ltd. vs. DCIT (2018) 96 taxmann.com 255 (SC); viii) Konark Structural Engineering (P) Ltd. vs. DCIT (2018) 90 taxmann.com 56 (Bom);] ix) Pratham Telecom India Pvt. Ltd. vs. DCIT (2018-TIOL-1983-HC-MUM- IT); x) JJ Development Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT (2018-TIOL-395-SC-IT); xi) DRB Exports (P) Ltd. vs. CIT (20…

Shri Rathi Steel Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle-16, New Delhi

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

ITA 7971/DEL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 May 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Shri Ved Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Goyal, CIT, DR

Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 153A

ITO 12(3)(3), Mumbai vs. Lucas Meyer Industries, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is allowed, for statistical

ITA 3645/MUM/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 May 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain () & Shri G Manjunatha () Ito-12(3)(3), Mumbai Vs M/S Lucas Meyer Industries Pvt Ltd 205/D, Veena Nagar, Chincholi Road Malad W), Mumbai 400 064 Pan : Aaacl6818N Appellant Respondednt

Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

…1 ITA 3645/Mum/2017 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “A”, MUMBAI Before Shri Sandeep Gosain (JUDICIAL MEMBER) AND Shri G Manjunatha (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) ITO-12(3)(3), Mumbai vs M/s Lucas Meyer Industries Pvt Ltd 205/D, Veena Nagar, Chincholi Road Malad W), MumbaI 400 064 PAN : AAACL6818N APPELLANT RESPONDEDNT Appellant by Shri Rajneesh Yadav Respondent by Shri Bhupendra Shah Date of hearing 03-05-2019 Date of pronouncement 24-05-2019 O R D E R Per G Manjunatha, AM : This appeal filed by the revenue is directed against order of the CIT(A)- 20, Mumbai dated 28-02-2017 and it pertains to AY 2…

Urnish Jewellers, Mumbai vs. ACIT Circle-19(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal is partly allowed

ITA 1583/MUM/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 May 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

For Appellant: Shri Dilip V. LakhaniFor Respondent: Shri Chaudhary Arun Kumar Singh

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 234BSection 35(1)(ii)

…h Jewellers i) PCIT v/s NRA Iron & Steel Pvt. Ltd., Civil Appeal no.of 2019 (Arising out of SLP (Civil) no.29855 of 2018), dated 05.03.2019; ii) PCIT v/s NDR Promoters Pvt. Ltd., ITA no.49/2018, dated 17.01.2019; iii) CIT v/s Navodaya Castle Pvt. Ltd., [2014] 367 ITR 306 (Del.); iv) Navodaya Castle Pvt. Ltd. v/s CIT, 2015–TIOL–314–SC–IT); v) CIT v/s MAF Academy Pvt. Ltd., 361 ITR 258; vi) Rick Lunsford Trade & Investment Ltd. v/s CIT, [2016] 385 ITR 399 (Cal.); vii) Rick Lunsford Trade & Investment Ltd. v/s CIT, [2016–TIOL– 207–SC–IT–SC]; viii) CIT v/s Nipun Builders & Developers Pvt. Ltd., 30 taxmann. com 292; i…