Commissioner of Income Tax v. Nova Promoters and Finlease (P) Ltd.

342 ITR 169High Court2012#87 most cited

What is Commissioner of Income Tax v. Nova Promoters and Finlease (P) Ltd. authority for?

To make an addition under Section 68 for unexplained cash credits, the Assessing Officer must conduct proper inquiry into the identity, genuineness, and creditworthiness of the creditor, especially concerning share application money. The assessee's initial discharge of burden by providing necessary details shifts the onus back to the AO for further investigation, including the source of source.

658

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,164 Indian tax judgments — from 2012 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Nova Promoters and Finlease · 342 ITR 169 · Section 68 · cash credit · share application money · identity genuineness creditworthiness · onus of proof · Assessing Officer inquiry · source of source · paper company · accommodation entry · Section 131

Also reported as

18 Taxmann.com 217

Sections most often in play

Section 68Section 5(2)Section 147Section 143(3)Section 9Section 148Section 6Section 131

Issues it is cited on

paper companyshare capital and share premiumsource of sourcecreditworthiness of the creditorshare application moneyentry operatorlive linkaddition u/s 68addition under section 68accommodation entrysection 131genuineness of the transaction

Judgments citing Commissioner of Income Tax v. Nova Promoters and Finlease (P) Ltd.

Sanjay Sadashiv Navale, Solapur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Central Circle -2 (2), Pune

Appeals are allowed in above terms

ITA 452/PUN/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune31 May 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara

Section 132Section 148

…bank account, as having come to the notice of the Assessing Officer through AIR, can be reason enough for holding the belief that income has escaped assessment. She has relied upon the decisions in the cases of CIT Vs Nova Promoters & Finlease Pvt Ltd [(2012)342 ITR 169] but then none of the questions before Hon’ble High Court had anything to do with reopening of assessment and this decision cannot, therefore, be taken as an authority on the legal issue which did not even come up for specific adjudication before Their Lordships. As for her reliance on Hon’ble Supreme Court’s judgment in the case of Phool Chand B…

M/S. Paramount Propbuild (P) Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, Appeal of the Assessee in ITA No

ITA 637/DEL/2016[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 May 2022AY 2005-06

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.Assessment Year: 2005-06

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 234ASection 250Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI BENCH: ‘E’ NEW DELHI BEFORE DR. BRR KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S., JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2005-06 Paramount Probuild Pvt. Ltd., Vs. DCIT, Central Circle-18, 208,Sikka Mansion, LSC, New Delhi. Savita Vihar, New Delhi PAN :AADCP5228P (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2005-06 ACIT, Central Circle-27, Vs. Paramount Probuild Pvt.Ltd., New Delhi 208, Sikka Mansion, LSC, PIN: 1100 55 Savita Vihar, New Delhi PAN :AADCP5228P (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Dr. Rakesh Gupta & Sh. Somil Agarwal, Adv. Department by Ms. Shivani Si…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Paramount Probuild Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, Appeal of the Assessee in ITA No

ITA 1391/DEL/2016[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 May 2022AY 2005-06

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.Assessment Year: 2005-06

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 234ASection 250Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI BENCH: ‘E’ NEW DELHI BEFORE DR. BRR KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S., JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2005-06 Paramount Probuild Pvt. Ltd., Vs. DCIT, Central Circle-18, 208,Sikka Mansion, LSC, New Delhi. Savita Vihar, New Delhi PAN :AADCP5228P (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2005-06 ACIT, Central Circle-27, Vs. Paramount Probuild Pvt.Ltd., New Delhi 208, Sikka Mansion, LSC, PIN: 1100 55 Savita Vihar, New Delhi PAN :AADCP5228P (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Dr. Rakesh Gupta & Sh. Somil Agarwal, Adv. Department by Ms. Shivani Si…

Prime Quality Consultants(P) Ltd, Delhi vs. ITO Ward 20(1), New Delhi

ITA 1350/DEL/2021[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Apr 2022AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Kul Bharat[Assessment Year: 2006-07]

Section 143(3)Section 254Section 68

…t of human probabilities and normal course of conduct. Reference can be made to CIT v. Durga Prasad More 11971182 ITR 540 (SC). CIT v. Dau/at Ram Rawatmull, [1973187 ITR 349 CSC) and other cases referred to in CIT v. Nova Promoters & Finlease (P.) Ltd. 120121 342 ITR 169/206 Taxman 207/18 taxmann.com 217 (Delhi). In these cases, it has been observed that what is apparent must be considered real until it is shown that there are reasons to believe that the apparent is not real. Caution must be exercised on self-serving statements made in the documents as they are easy to make and rely upon in case an assessee wants…

ITO, New Delhi vs. M/S Magical Infotech (P) Ltd., Delhi

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

ITA 1189/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Apr 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Sh. A.D. Jaindr. B. R. R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing) Ita No.1189/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year: 2012-13 Income Tax Officer, Vs M/S Magical Infotech (P) Ltd. Ward-21(1), [Now Readystream Infotech (P) Ltd.] New Delhi T-336/B, Gali No.8, Near Ojha Dharamshala, Gautampuri, Delhi-110053 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aahcm6581C

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Ms. Sarita Kumari, CIT-DR
Section 68

…ve the way of cheque or cash creditworthiness of was received. Hence, subscriber. the facts of the appellant are entirely different then the case relied upon by AO. M/S N.R. Portfolio Pvt. Ltd. - do - - do - (86 CCH 164) M/s Nova Promoters Ltd. - do - - do - (342 ITR 169) M/s Neelkanth Ispat Pvt. Ltd. - do - - do - (82CCH406) McDowell 8&Co Limited The issue was - do - 154 ITR 148 regarding using of dubious means of tax evasion. It's not related to share capital or unsecured loan. A. Govindaraulu Mudaliar The issue was - do - (1958) 34 ITR 807, 810 (SC) regarding satisfactory proof of source and nature of cash rec…

ACIT, Central Circle-19, New Delhi vs. M/S K.R. Pulp & Papers Ltd, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is

ITA 5064/DEL/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Mar 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri N.K. Choudhry

For Appellant: Ms. Monika Aggarwal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Sunita Singh, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 147Section 80I

…LTD. 111 DTR 0012 (Del) 11. RathiFinlease Ltd 215 CTR 429 MP 12. Kundan Investment Ltd 263 ITR 626 (Cat) 13. Korlay Trading Co. Ltd 232 ITR 820 (Cat) 14. SumatiDayai 214 ITR 801 (SC) 15. Power Drugs Ltd. 245 CTR 623 P & H 16. Nova Promoters &Finiease (P) Ltd 342 ITR 169 (Del.) 17. AZEEM INVESTMENT PVT LTD 252 CTR 0217 Del.) 18. MAJOR METALS LTD 359 ITR 0450 (Bom) 19. INDEPENDENT MEDIA PVT. LTD. 25 taxmann.com 276 (Delhi) 20. NEELKANTHISPAT UDHYOG PVT LTD 81 DTR 0214 21. Frostair P. Ltd 92 DTR 393 (Del). 22. Rajani Hotels Ltd 79 DTR 185 (Mad). 23. ULTRA MODERN EXPORTS PVT. LTD 220 Taxman 165 (Delhi). 5.2. So far…

Kamla Landmarc Enterprises, Mumbai vs. DCIT-(3)(4), Mumbai

The appeal stands dismissed

ITA 1371/MUM/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Mar 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Amarjit Singh, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Rashmikant Modi &For Respondent: Shri Neelam Shukla
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 153A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (VIRTUAL COURT) “H” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA.NOs. 1365, 1366, 1367, 1368, 1369, 1370 & 1371/MUM/2019 (A.Ys: 2008-09, 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15) M/s. Kamla Landmarc Enterprises v. DCIT – Central Circle – 3(4) Ground Floor, Shanti Vimal 19th Floor, Air India Building P.M. Road, Vile Parle (E) Nariman Point Mumbai - 400057 Mumbai – 400 021 PAN: AAIFK9427D (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA.NOs. 712, 713, 714, 715, 716, 717 & 718/MUM/2019 (A.Ys: 2008-09, 2009-10,…

Kamla Landmarc Enterprises, Mumbai vs. DCIT(3)(4), Mumbai

The appeal stands dismissed

ITA 1370/MUM/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Mar 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Amarjit Singh, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Rashmikant Modi &For Respondent: Shri Neelam Shukla
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 153A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (VIRTUAL COURT) “H” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA.NOs. 1365, 1366, 1367, 1368, 1369, 1370 & 1371/MUM/2019 (A.Ys: 2008-09, 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15) M/s. Kamla Landmarc Enterprises v. DCIT – Central Circle – 3(4) Ground Floor, Shanti Vimal 19th Floor, Air India Building P.M. Road, Vile Parle (E) Nariman Point Mumbai - 400057 Mumbai – 400 021 PAN: AAIFK9427D (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA.NOs. 712, 713, 714, 715, 716, 717 & 718/MUM/2019 (A.Ys: 2008-09, 2009-10,…

Kamla Landmarc Enterprises, Mumbai vs. DCIT(3)(4), Mumbai

The appeal stands dismissed

ITA 1369/MUM/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Mar 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Amarjit Singh, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Rashmikant Modi &For Respondent: Shri Neelam Shukla
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 153A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (VIRTUAL COURT) “H” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA.NOs. 1365, 1366, 1367, 1368, 1369, 1370 & 1371/MUM/2019 (A.Ys: 2008-09, 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15) M/s. Kamla Landmarc Enterprises v. DCIT – Central Circle – 3(4) Ground Floor, Shanti Vimal 19th Floor, Air India Building P.M. Road, Vile Parle (E) Nariman Point Mumbai - 400057 Mumbai – 400 021 PAN: AAIFK9427D (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA.NOs. 712, 713, 714, 715, 716, 717 & 718/MUM/2019 (A.Ys: 2008-09, 2009-10,…

Kamla Landmarc Enterprises, Mumbai vs. DCIT-(3)(4), Mumbai

The appeal stands dismissed

ITA 1368/MUM/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Mar 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Amarjit Singh, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Rashmikant Modi &For Respondent: Shri Neelam Shukla
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 153A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (VIRTUAL COURT) “H” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA.NOs. 1365, 1366, 1367, 1368, 1369, 1370 & 1371/MUM/2019 (A.Ys: 2008-09, 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15) M/s. Kamla Landmarc Enterprises v. DCIT – Central Circle – 3(4) Ground Floor, Shanti Vimal 19th Floor, Air India Building P.M. Road, Vile Parle (E) Nariman Point Mumbai - 400057 Mumbai – 400 021 PAN: AAIFK9427D (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA.NOs. 712, 713, 714, 715, 716, 717 & 718/MUM/2019 (A.Ys: 2008-09, 2009-10,…

Kamla Landmarc Enterprises, Mumbai vs. DCIT-(3)(4), Mumbai

The appeal stands dismissed

ITA 1367/MUM/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Mar 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Amarjit Singh, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Rashmikant Modi &For Respondent: Shri Neelam Shukla
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 153A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (VIRTUAL COURT) “H” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA.NOs. 1365, 1366, 1367, 1368, 1369, 1370 & 1371/MUM/2019 (A.Ys: 2008-09, 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15) M/s. Kamla Landmarc Enterprises v. DCIT – Central Circle – 3(4) Ground Floor, Shanti Vimal 19th Floor, Air India Building P.M. Road, Vile Parle (E) Nariman Point Mumbai - 400057 Mumbai – 400 021 PAN: AAIFK9427D (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA.NOs. 712, 713, 714, 715, 716, 717 & 718/MUM/2019 (A.Ys: 2008-09, 2009-10,…

Kamla Landmarc Enterprises, Mumbai vs. DCIT(3)(4), Central Circle, Mumbai

The appeal stands dismissed

ITA 1366/MUM/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Mar 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Amarjit Singh, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Rashmikant Modi &For Respondent: Shri Neelam Shukla
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 153A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (VIRTUAL COURT) “H” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA.NOs. 1365, 1366, 1367, 1368, 1369, 1370 & 1371/MUM/2019 (A.Ys: 2008-09, 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15) M/s. Kamla Landmarc Enterprises v. DCIT – Central Circle – 3(4) Ground Floor, Shanti Vimal 19th Floor, Air India Building P.M. Road, Vile Parle (E) Nariman Point Mumbai - 400057 Mumbai – 400 021 PAN: AAIFK9427D (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA.NOs. 712, 713, 714, 715, 716, 717 & 718/MUM/2019 (A.Ys: 2008-09, 2009-10,…

Kamla Lamdmarc Enterprises, Mumbai vs. DCIT(3)(4), Mumbai

The appeal stands dismissed

ITA 1365/MUM/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Mar 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Amarjit Singh, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Rashmikant Modi &For Respondent: Shri Neelam Shukla
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 153A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (VIRTUAL COURT) “H” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA.NOs. 1365, 1366, 1367, 1368, 1369, 1370 & 1371/MUM/2019 (A.Ys: 2008-09, 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15) M/s. Kamla Landmarc Enterprises v. DCIT – Central Circle – 3(4) Ground Floor, Shanti Vimal 19th Floor, Air India Building P.M. Road, Vile Parle (E) Nariman Point Mumbai - 400057 Mumbai – 400 021 PAN: AAIFK9427D (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA.NOs. 712, 713, 714, 715, 716, 717 & 718/MUM/2019 (A.Ys: 2008-09, 2009-10,…

Surya Manufacturing P.Ltd, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle-24(2), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 6014/DEL/2017[2014-15]Status: HeardITAT Delhi15 Mar 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. Saktijit Deydr. B. R. R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing) Ita No. 6014/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2014-15 M/S Surya Manufacturing Pvt. Ltd. Vs Dcit, 2937/3, Chuna Mandi, 1St Floor, Circle-24(2), Paharganj, New Delhi-110055 New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaccs2412B Assessee By : None Revenue By : Sh. Umesh Takyar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 09.03.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 15.03.2022

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. Umesh Takyar, Sr. DR
Section 131(1)(d)Section 143(2)Section 68

…ustified in adding back the amounts to the Assessee’s income”….. 15. Hence, keeping in view, the facts elucidated above, the judgments of various Courts, especially of the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of Nova Promoters and Finlease Pvt. Ltd. 342 ITR 169, NR Portfolio Pvt. Ltd. in ITA No. 1018/2011 dated 22.11.2013 and the judgment of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case PCIT Vs. NRA Iron & Steel Pvt. Ltd. (supra), we affirm the order of the ld. CIT(A) in confirming the addition made by the AO u/s 68 of the Act. 16. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed. Order Pronounced in the Open C…

DCIT, 4(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Ganpat Singhvi, Mumbai

In the result the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 707/MUM/2019[2007-08]Status: HeardITAT Mumbai10 Mar 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya (Am) & Shri Amarjit Singh (Jm)

…case that the deposits in the above mentioned accounts in HSBC, Geneva do not fall within the ambit of this provision of law.” 6 8. Thereafter, AO referred to case laws from Hon’ble Delhi High Court decision in the case of Nova Promoters and Finlease P.Ltd. 342 ITR 169 and Hon’ble Supreme Court decision in case of Sumati Dayal vs CIT (1995) 214 ITR 801(SC) and CIT vs Durga Prasad More [1971] 82 ITR 540 and concluded as under:- In view of the above, the peak amount as appearing in the Base Note of the assessee's HSBC account in AY 2007-08 being USD 3,00,495 in Jan, 2007 which translates to Rs. 1,32,72,864/- (@…

Anandtex International P.Ltd, Panipat vs. ACIT, Circle, Panipat

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 2476/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Feb 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri K.Narasimha Chary

Section 143(3)Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: ‘A’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI G.S. PANNU, HON’BLE PRESIDENT & SHRI K.NARASIMHA CHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.- 2476/Del/2018 (Assessment Year: 2013-14) Anandtex international P.Ltd, Vs. ACIT, circle, 191-192, sector-25, Panipat. part-II, HUDA, Panipat 132103 Haryana PAN No. AAKCA4313M Appellant Respondent Assessee by None Revenue by Mrs. Kirti Sankratyayan, Sr. DR Date of hearing: 08/02/2022 Pronouncement on: 24/02/2022 ORDER PER K. NARASIMHA CHARY, JM. Aggrieved by the order dated 2/1/2018 passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-Kanal (“Ld…

Asstt. CIT - CC-1(2), Mumbai vs. Mangal Buildhome P. Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed

ITA 567/MUM/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Feb 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Hon'Bledcit – 1(1) V. M/S. Shree Ratna Mangal Jewels Pvt. Ltd., Shop No.302, 3Rd Floor 903, 9Th Floor Chinatamani Arcade, Dhanji Street Pratishtha Bhavan Mumbai - 400003 Old Cgo Building Annexe Maharishi Karve Road Pan: Aapcs6589J Mumbai - 400020 (Appellant) (Respondent) Dcit – 1(1) V. M/S. Mangal Buildhome Pvt. Ltd., 903, 9Th Floor A.1701-1702, Lotus Corporate Park Goregaon (E), Mumbai - 400063 Pratishtha Bhavan Old Cgo Building Annexe Pan: Aagcm5420M Maharishi Karve Road Mumbai - 400020 (Appellant) (Respondent) Dcit – 1(1) V. M/S. Mangal Bullion Pvt. Ltd., 903, 9Th Floor 202, 2Nd Floor Chinatamani Arcade Pratishtha Bhavan Opp. Bombay Bullion Building Old Cgo Building Annexe Dhanji Street, Mumbai - 400003 Maharishi Karve Road Mumbai - 400020 Pan: Aagcm2672M (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Neelkanth KhandelwalFor Respondent: Shri Rakesh Garg
Section 132(1)Section 143(2)Section 153CSection 68

…red in light of surrounding circumstances, normal course of human conduct and preponderance of probability. 4. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the La CIT (A) erred in mot appreciating the decision in Nova Promoters and Finlease 342 ITR 169 (2012) wherein the Hon'ble Delhi High Court held that mere filing of PAN, ITRs, account confirmations and bank statements of the creditors is not sufficient enough to discharge the onus cast upon the assessee u/s 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 when there are sufficient evidences of accommodation entry. 5. Whether on the facts and circumstances o…

Asstt. CIT, CC-1(1), Mumbai vs. Shree Ratna Mangal Jewels P. Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed

ITA 566/MUM/2021[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Feb 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Hon'Bledcit – 1(1) V. M/S. Shree Ratna Mangal Jewels Pvt. Ltd., Shop No.302, 3Rd Floor 903, 9Th Floor Chinatamani Arcade, Dhanji Street Pratishtha Bhavan Mumbai - 400003 Old Cgo Building Annexe Maharishi Karve Road Pan: Aapcs6589J Mumbai - 400020 (Appellant) (Respondent) Dcit – 1(1) V. M/S. Mangal Buildhome Pvt. Ltd., 903, 9Th Floor A.1701-1702, Lotus Corporate Park Goregaon (E), Mumbai - 400063 Pratishtha Bhavan Old Cgo Building Annexe Pan: Aagcm5420M Maharishi Karve Road Mumbai - 400020 (Appellant) (Respondent) Dcit – 1(1) V. M/S. Mangal Bullion Pvt. Ltd., 903, 9Th Floor 202, 2Nd Floor Chinatamani Arcade Pratishtha Bhavan Opp. Bombay Bullion Building Old Cgo Building Annexe Dhanji Street, Mumbai - 400003 Maharishi Karve Road Mumbai - 400020 Pan: Aagcm2672M (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Neelkanth KhandelwalFor Respondent: Shri Rakesh Garg
Section 132(1)Section 143(2)Section 153CSection 68

…red in light of surrounding circumstances, normal course of human conduct and preponderance of probability. 4. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the La CIT (A) erred in mot appreciating the decision in Nova Promoters and Finlease 342 ITR 169 (2012) wherein the Hon'ble Delhi High Court held that mere filing of PAN, ITRs, account confirmations and bank statements of the creditors is not sufficient enough to discharge the onus cast upon the assessee u/s 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 when there are sufficient evidences of accommodation entry. 5. Whether on the facts and circumstances o…

Kalyan Jewels Pvt. Ltd, Ahmedabad vs. ITO, Ward-2(1)(2), Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 463/AHD/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad18 Feb 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: S/Shri Waseem Ahmed & T.R. Senthil Kumarassessment Year : 2009-10 Kalyan Jewells P.Ltd. Ito, Ward-2(1)(2) 49, Super Mall Vs Ahmedabad. Nr.Lal Bungalow, Ahmedabad 380 015 Pan : Aacck 4717 B

For Appellant: Shri P.F. Jain, CAFor Respondent: Shri Urjit Shah, Sr.DR
Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 179(1)Section 234

…k account, as having come to the notice of 10 the Assessing Officer through AIR, can be reason enough for holding the belief that income has escaped assessment. She has relied upon the decisions in the cases of CIT Vs Nova Promoters & Finlease Pvt Ltd [(2012)342 ITR 169] but then none of the questions before Hon'ble High Court had anything to do with reopening of assessment and this decision can not, therefore, be taken as an authority on the legal issue which did not even come up for specific adjudication before Their Lordships. As for her reliance on Hon'ble Supreme Court's judgment in the case of Phool Chand…

Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions) Delhi vs. Hamdard National Foundation (India)

ITA/144/2021HC Delhi16 Feb 2022

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN CHAWLA

Section 11Section 13(2)(b)Section 13(3)

…support, he places reliance on the following judgments: i. Commissioner of Income Tax v. F.C.S. International Marketing P. Ltd., 2005 SCC OnLine P&H 1317 ii. Commissioner of Income Tax v. Nova Promoters & Finlease (P) Ltd., 2012 SCC OnLine Del 969:(2012) 342 ITR 169 (Del); and iii. Commissioner of Income Tax v. Gangeshwari Metal Pvt. Ltd., 2013 SCC OnLine Del 270. 16. Lastly, the learned senior counsel for the respondent submits that the revenue has been accepting the Lease Agreement for the Asaf Ali Road property right since 1981 and has not invoked the provisions of Section 13(2)(b) read with Secti…