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 367,154 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 68 Section 5(2)Section 147 Section 143(3)Section 9 Section 148 Section 6 Section 131

Issues it is cited on

paper company share capital and share premium source of source creditworthiness of the creditor share application money entry operator live link addition u/s 68 addition under section 68 accommodation entry section 131 genuineness of the transaction

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

ITO, New Delhi vs. Mr. Joginder Pal Singh, New Delhi

Appeal stands dismissed

ITA 1942/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Apr 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

Section 133Section 143Section 68

…d in deleting the addition of Rs. 1,15,00,000/- made u/s 68 by the A.O. by treating the unsecured loans from four persons as unexplained Cash credit, by completely ignoring the findings given by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in cases like CIT v. Nova Promoters 342 ITR 169, CIT v.NR Portfolio (2013) 29 taxmann.com 291(Delhi, CIT v. N.Tarika Properties(ITA No. 2080/2010, dated 28.11.2013) etc. wherein the Hon’ble Delhi High Court has clearly held that the onus is on the assessee to establish identity & Creditworthiness of Creditors and Genuineness of transactions. 4. That the order of the Ld. CIT (A) is erroneous an…

Trident Towers Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

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

ITA 537/DEL/2013[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Apr 2017AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: Sh. V.K. Tulsian, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Umesh Chand Dubey, Sr. DR

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(c)Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “D”, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI L.P. SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No. 537/DEL/2013 A.Y. : 2002-03 M/S TRIDENT TOWERS PVT. LTD., INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 16(4), 1/8, WEST PATEL NAGAR, VS. NEW DELHI NEW DELHI – 110 008 (PAN: AAACT0951C) (APPELLANT) (APPELLANT) (APPELLANT) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) (RESPONDENT) (RESPONDENT) (RESPONDENT) Assessee by : Sh. V.K. Tulsian, CA Department by : Sh. Umesh Chand Dubey, Sr. DR ORDER ORDER ORDER ORDER PER PER H.S. SIDHU PER PER H.S. SIDHU H.S. SIDHU : : : : JM H.S. SIDHU Assessee has filed thi…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Victory Township Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessees are allowed and that of the department are dismissed

ITA 6235/DEL/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Mar 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Smt. Beena Pillai, Jm Ita Nos. 6208 & 6209/Del/2014 : Asstt. Years : 2009-10 & 2010-11 Victory Dwellings Pvt. Ltd., Vs Acit, 208, Gupta Tower, Azadpur Central Circle-09, Commercial Complex, Azadpur, New Delhi New Delhi-110033 (Appellant) (Respondent)

…SSP Aviation Ltd. Vs DCIT 20 Taxman.com 214 (Del.) " CIT Vs Classic Enterprises 358 ITR 465 (All.) " Savesh Kumar Aggarwal Vs U.O.I 353 ITR 26 (All.) " CIT Vs Nipun Builders & Developers (P.) Ltd. 350 ITR 407 (Del.) " CIT Vs Nova Promoters & Finlease P. Ltd. 342 ITR 169 (Del.) " CIT Vs Ultra Modern Exports P. Ltd. 40 Taxmann.com 458 (Del.) " CIT Vs Frostair P. Ltd. 210 Taxman 221 (Del.) " CIT Vs N R Portfolio Pvt. Ltd. 29 Taxmann.com 291 (Del.) " CIT Vs Empire Builtech P. Ltd.366 ITR 110 (Del.) " CIT Vs MAF Academy P. Ltd. 361 ITR 258 (Del.) " CIT Vs Focus Exports (P.) Ltd. 228 Taxman 88 (Del.) It was further su…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Victory Dwellings Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessees are allowed and that of the department are dismissed

ITA 6230/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Mar 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Smt. Beena Pillai, Jm Ita Nos. 6208 & 6209/Del/2014 : Asstt. Years : 2009-10 & 2010-11 Victory Dwellings Pvt. Ltd., Vs Acit, 208, Gupta Tower, Azadpur Central Circle-09, Commercial Complex, Azadpur, New Delhi New Delhi-110033 (Appellant) (Respondent)

…SSP Aviation Ltd. Vs DCIT 20 Taxman.com 214 (Del.) " CIT Vs Classic Enterprises 358 ITR 465 (All.) " Savesh Kumar Aggarwal Vs U.O.I 353 ITR 26 (All.) " CIT Vs Nipun Builders & Developers (P.) Ltd. 350 ITR 407 (Del.) " CIT Vs Nova Promoters & Finlease P. Ltd. 342 ITR 169 (Del.) " CIT Vs Ultra Modern Exports P. Ltd. 40 Taxmann.com 458 (Del.) " CIT Vs Frostair P. Ltd. 210 Taxman 221 (Del.) " CIT Vs N R Portfolio Pvt. Ltd. 29 Taxmann.com 291 (Del.) " CIT Vs Empire Builtech P. Ltd.366 ITR 110 (Del.) " CIT Vs MAF Academy P. Ltd. 361 ITR 258 (Del.) " CIT Vs Focus Exports (P.) Ltd. 228 Taxman 88 (Del.) It was further su…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Victory Dwellings Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessees are allowed and that of the department are dismissed

ITA 6228/DEL/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Mar 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Smt. Beena Pillai, Jm Ita Nos. 6208 & 6209/Del/2014 : Asstt. Years : 2009-10 & 2010-11 Victory Dwellings Pvt. Ltd., Vs Acit, 208, Gupta Tower, Azadpur Central Circle-09, Commercial Complex, Azadpur, New Delhi New Delhi-110033 (Appellant) (Respondent)

…SSP Aviation Ltd. Vs DCIT 20 Taxman.com 214 (Del.) " CIT Vs Classic Enterprises 358 ITR 465 (All.) " Savesh Kumar Aggarwal Vs U.O.I 353 ITR 26 (All.) " CIT Vs Nipun Builders & Developers (P.) Ltd. 350 ITR 407 (Del.) " CIT Vs Nova Promoters & Finlease P. Ltd. 342 ITR 169 (Del.) " CIT Vs Ultra Modern Exports P. Ltd. 40 Taxmann.com 458 (Del.) " CIT Vs Frostair P. Ltd. 210 Taxman 221 (Del.) " CIT Vs N R Portfolio Pvt. Ltd. 29 Taxmann.com 291 (Del.) " CIT Vs Empire Builtech P. Ltd.366 ITR 110 (Del.) " CIT Vs MAF Academy P. Ltd. 361 ITR 258 (Del.) " CIT Vs Focus Exports (P.) Ltd. 228 Taxman 88 (Del.) It was further su…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Victory Structures Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessees are allowed and that of the department are dismissed

ITA 6225/DEL/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Mar 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Smt. Beena Pillai, Jm Ita Nos. 6208 & 6209/Del/2014 : Asstt. Years : 2009-10 & 2010-11 Victory Dwellings Pvt. Ltd., Vs Acit, 208, Gupta Tower, Azadpur Central Circle-09, Commercial Complex, Azadpur, New Delhi New Delhi-110033 (Appellant) (Respondent)

…SSP Aviation Ltd. Vs DCIT 20 Taxman.com 214 (Del.) " CIT Vs Classic Enterprises 358 ITR 465 (All.) " Savesh Kumar Aggarwal Vs U.O.I 353 ITR 26 (All.) " CIT Vs Nipun Builders & Developers (P.) Ltd. 350 ITR 407 (Del.) " CIT Vs Nova Promoters & Finlease P. Ltd. 342 ITR 169 (Del.) " CIT Vs Ultra Modern Exports P. Ltd. 40 Taxmann.com 458 (Del.) " CIT Vs Frostair P. Ltd. 210 Taxman 221 (Del.) " CIT Vs N R Portfolio Pvt. Ltd. 29 Taxmann.com 291 (Del.) " CIT Vs Empire Builtech P. Ltd.366 ITR 110 (Del.) " CIT Vs MAF Academy P. Ltd. 361 ITR 258 (Del.) " CIT Vs Focus Exports (P.) Ltd. 228 Taxman 88 (Del.) It was further su…

Victory Township Pvt. Ltd., Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessees are allowed and that of the department are dismissed

ITA 6215/DEL/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Mar 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Smt. Beena Pillai, Jm Ita Nos. 6208 & 6209/Del/2014 : Asstt. Years : 2009-10 & 2010-11 Victory Dwellings Pvt. Ltd., Vs Acit, 208, Gupta Tower, Azadpur Central Circle-09, Commercial Complex, Azadpur, New Delhi New Delhi-110033 (Appellant) (Respondent)

…SSP Aviation Ltd. Vs DCIT 20 Taxman.com 214 (Del.) " CIT Vs Classic Enterprises 358 ITR 465 (All.) " Savesh Kumar Aggarwal Vs U.O.I 353 ITR 26 (All.) " CIT Vs Nipun Builders & Developers (P.) Ltd. 350 ITR 407 (Del.) " CIT Vs Nova Promoters & Finlease P. Ltd. 342 ITR 169 (Del.) " CIT Vs Ultra Modern Exports P. Ltd. 40 Taxmann.com 458 (Del.) " CIT Vs Frostair P. Ltd. 210 Taxman 221 (Del.) " CIT Vs N R Portfolio Pvt. Ltd. 29 Taxmann.com 291 (Del.) " CIT Vs Empire Builtech P. Ltd.366 ITR 110 (Del.) " CIT Vs MAF Academy P. Ltd. 361 ITR 258 (Del.) " CIT Vs Focus Exports (P.) Ltd. 228 Taxman 88 (Del.) It was further su…

Victory Dwellings Pvt. Ltd., Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessees are allowed and that of the department are dismissed

ITA 6208/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Mar 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Smt. Beena Pillai, Jm Ita Nos. 6208 & 6209/Del/2014 : Asstt. Years : 2009-10 & 2010-11 Victory Dwellings Pvt. Ltd., Vs Acit, 208, Gupta Tower, Azadpur Central Circle-09, Commercial Complex, Azadpur, New Delhi New Delhi-110033 (Appellant) (Respondent)

…SSP Aviation Ltd. Vs DCIT 20 Taxman.com 214 (Del.) " CIT Vs Classic Enterprises 358 ITR 465 (All.) " Savesh Kumar Aggarwal Vs U.O.I 353 ITR 26 (All.) " CIT Vs Nipun Builders & Developers (P.) Ltd. 350 ITR 407 (Del.) " CIT Vs Nova Promoters & Finlease P. Ltd. 342 ITR 169 (Del.) " CIT Vs Ultra Modern Exports P. Ltd. 40 Taxmann.com 458 (Del.) " CIT Vs Frostair P. Ltd. 210 Taxman 221 (Del.) " CIT Vs N R Portfolio Pvt. Ltd. 29 Taxmann.com 291 (Del.) " CIT Vs Empire Builtech P. Ltd.366 ITR 110 (Del.) " CIT Vs MAF Academy P. Ltd. 361 ITR 258 (Del.) " CIT Vs Focus Exports (P.) Ltd. 228 Taxman 88 (Del.) It was further su…

Disha N . Lalwani, Mumbai vs. ITO WD 23(2)(2), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 6398/MUM/2012[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Mar 2017AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri N.K. Pradhanassessment Year: 2003-04 Disha N. Lalwani, Income Tax Officer- J-301, Vardhaman Nagar 23(2)(2), बनाम/ Jn. Of R.P. Rd. & M.G. Rd. C-10-Pratyakshkar Vs. Mulund (W), Bhavan, 02Nd Floor, Mumbai-400080 Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra, Mumbai-400007 ("नधा"रती/Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) P.A. No. Aaapl6056H

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, मुंबई "यायपीठ, डी, मुंबई । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES “D”, MUMBAI "ी जो"ग"दर "संह, "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी एन. के. "धान, लेखा सद"य, के सम" Before Shri Joginder Singh, Judicial Member, and Shri N.K. Pradhan, Accountant Member Assessment Year: 2003-04 Disha N. Lalwani, Income Tax Officer- J-301, Vardhaman Nagar 23(2)(2), बनाम/ JN. Of R.P. Rd. & M.G. Rd. C-10-Pratyakshkar Vs. Mulund (W), Bhavan, 02nd Floor, Mumbai-400080 Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra, Mumbai-400007 ("नधा"रती/Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) P.A. No. AAAPL6056H "नधा"रती क" ओर से / Assessee by Shri M. Subramanian S…

ACIT, Alwar vs. M/S Prime Chem Oil Ltd., Alwar

ITA 9/JPR/2012[1999-00]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur10 Mar 2017AY 1999-00

For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal (C.A.)For Respondent: Shri Prithaviraj Meena(Addl. CIT)

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68Section 69

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES, JAIPUR Jh dqy Hkkjr] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh foØe flag ;kno] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: SHRI KUL BHARAT, JM & SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 09/JP/2012 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year :1999-2000 cuke The ACIT-1, Alwar M/s Prime Chem Oil Ltd. Vs. 123, MIA, Alwar LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AABCP 2384 G vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 10/JP/2012 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year :2000-2001 cuke The ACIT-1, Alwar M/s Prime Chem Oil Ltd. Vs. 123, MIA, Alwar LFkk;h…

M/S. R.P. Singh & Co. Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

ITA 5710/DEL/2012[2000-01]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Mar 2017AY 2000-01

Bench: Sh. H.S. Sidhu & Sh. O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2000-01 Vs. The Acit, Circle-15(1), C.R. M/S. R.P. Singh & Co. Pvt. Ltd., 382, Bhera Enclave Pachim Building, I.P. Estate, New Delhi Vihar, New Delhi Pan : Aaacr5778B (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By S/Sh. J.S. Kochar & U.S. Kochar, Advocates. Respondent By Sh. F.R. Meena, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 05.01.2017 Date Of Pronouncement 10.03.2017 Order Per O.P. Kant, A.M.: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-Xviii, New Delhi, Dated 14.08.2012, For Assessment Year 2000-01 Raising The Following Grounds : 1) The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Erred In Law By Confirming The Addition Of Rs.13,90,000/- Received As Share Application Money, Despite The Fact That Out Of A Total Of 29 Share Applicants. I. 19 Applicants Whose Aggregate Investments Were Rs.10,15,000 Were Produced Before The A.O. & They Confirmed Their Investments. Ii. 2 Applicants With Aggregate Investments Of Rs.90,000 Had Since Died & Their Death Certificates Were Filed. Iii. Request Was Made To The Assessing Officer To Issue Summons U/S 131 To 4 Applicants With Aggregate Investment

Section 131Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 68

…llowing decisions: 1. Indus Valley Promoters Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, (2008) 305 ITR 202 (Delhi) 2. Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. P Mohanakala, 291 ITR 278 (SC) 3. Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Nova Promoters and Finlease Private Limited, (2012) 342 ITR 169 (Delhi). 2.7 Aggrieved with the above finding of the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal raising the grounds as reproduced above. 3. At the time of hearing before us, the Ld. counsel of the assessee argued challenging the addition of Rs.13,90,000/- and no arguments were made specifically in resp…

M/S Kesar Biotech Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

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

ITA 3608/DEL/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Jan 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri H. S. Sidhu

For Appellant: Sh. S. Krishnan, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Anil Sharma, Sr. DR

…onclusively said to be a dummy company floated by the Guptas' in order to accommodate the appellant company in the dubious transaction of arranging share holding from out of its own unaccounted funds. 6.6 In the case of Nova Promoters and Finlease Pvt. Ltd. (342 ITR 169) the Hon'ble Delhi High Court was seized with facts which stood on a better footing that the appellant's case as the affidavits of the entry providers and the Directors of the bogus companies had been filed before the AO to support the stand that the share holding monies had been received from genuine sources. The High Court held that the fact th…

M/S. Mehta Realtors Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1633/DEL/2013[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Dec 2016AY 2004-05

Bench: : Shri I.C. Sudhir & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: Sh. V.P. Gupta, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Rajesh Kumar, Sr. DR

Section 133(6)Section 139Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 3Section 68Section 69C

…considering the submissions of the assessee, remand report of the AO and other attending facts and circumstances of the case, confirmed the order of the AO relying on the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Nova Promoters and Finlease (P) Ltd. 342 ITR 169. Aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. 4. During the course of hearing, the ld. Counsel for the appellant submitted that the reopening of assessment is not legally valid as the reasons recorded by the AO are vague having not been based on any tangible material in possession of the AO. The very foundation of the belief of es…

Kalsha Builders P.Ltd, Navi Mumbai vs. ACIT 6(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the Assessee are allowed

ITA 1808/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Dec 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm

Section 143(3)Section 68

…for assuming that share application money received from share applicant is assessee's own money and also in this case revenue has not produced any evidence to establish the same. 47. Decision of Delhi High Court in case of Nova Promoters & Finlease (P) Ltd., 342 ITR 169 was also relied on by CIT(A). We found that the ratio of this case cannot be applied in the present case of assessee since, in the case of assessee neither any statement was given by third party to the Investigation Wing in which they have mentioned specifically that assessee was involved in the arrangement nor AO has proved specific involvement…

Kalsha Builders P. Ltd, Navi Mumbai vs. ACIT 6(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the Assessee are allowed

ITA 7643/MUM/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Dec 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm

Section 143(3)Section 68

…for assuming that share application money received from share applicant is assessee's own money and also in this case revenue has not produced any evidence to establish the same. 47. Decision of Delhi High Court in case of Nova Promoters & Finlease (P) Ltd., 342 ITR 169 was also relied on by CIT(A). We found that the ratio of this case cannot be applied in the present case of assessee since, in the case of assessee neither any statement was given by third party to the Investigation Wing in which they have mentioned specifically that assessee was involved in the arrangement nor AO has proved specific involvement…

Integrated Database & Research Centre Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 1679/DEL/2015[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Dec 2016AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri S.V. Mehrotraassessment Year : 2004-05 Integrated Database & Research Ito, Ward 11(4), Centre Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi Vs. F – 13, 2Nd Floor, Vijay Chowk, Laxmi Nagar, New Delhi Pan : Aaaci 2994 Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri Subodh Gupta, Ca Respondent By : Shri S. K. Jain, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 24-10-2016 : 01-12-2016 Date Of Pronouncement O R D E R Per S.V. Mehrotra, A.M :

For Appellant: Shri Subodh Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Shri S. K. Jain, Sr. DR

Section 131Section 143(3)Section 148

…und in the list of such companies and the amount of receipt of such cash credit along with date and name of share applicants also duly tallied. (h) The assessee’s case was held to be covered by the decision in the case of Nova Finlease and Promoters (P) Ltd., 342 ITR 169 (Delhi-HC) as by carrying out enquiry at the addresses furnished by the assessee and on finding no such cash creditors at such addresses, the Assessing Officer had discharged the onus, which stands shifted to the assessee. 4. Ld. counsel for the assessee referred to page 127 – 128 of Paper Book and pointed out that share premium was received fr…

Swastik Realtors, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT 15(3), Mumbai

ITA 800/MUM/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Oct 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.800/Mum/2012 & 6314/Mum/2012 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2007-08 & 2008-09) Swastik Realtors The Assistant बनाम/ 312, Swastik Disha Commissioner Of Income V. Corporate Park , Kohinoor Tax – 15(3), Textile Printing Compound Matru Mandir I T Office Opp. Shreyas Cinema, Lbs Nana Chowk Marg, Ghatkopar(W) Grant Road Mumbai-400 086 Mumbai. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Abafs2576A (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent)

For Respondent: Shri Sanjeev Kashyap

Section 133ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण “E” "यायपीठ मुंबई म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “E” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI C.N. PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAMIT KOCHAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.800/Mum/2012 & 6314/Mum/2012 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2007-08 & 2008-09) Swastik Realtors The Assistant बनाम/ 312, Swastik Disha Commissioner of Income v. Corporate Park , Kohinoor Tax – 15(3), Textile Printing Compound Matru Mandir I T Office Opp. Shreyas Cinema, LBS Nana Chowk Marg, Ghatkopar(W) Grant Road Mumbai-400 086 Mumbai. "थायी लेखा सं./PAN : ABAFS2576A (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent…

Swastik Realtors, Mumbai vs. A.C.I.T.15(3), Mumbai

ITA 6314/MUM/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Oct 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.800/Mum/2012 & 6314/Mum/2012 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2007-08 & 2008-09) Swastik Realtors The Assistant बनाम/ 312, Swastik Disha Commissioner Of Income V. Corporate Park , Kohinoor Tax – 15(3), Textile Printing Compound Matru Mandir I T Office Opp. Shreyas Cinema, Lbs Nana Chowk Marg, Ghatkopar(W) Grant Road Mumbai-400 086 Mumbai. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Abafs2576A (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent)

For Respondent: Shri Sanjeev Kashyap

Section 133ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण “E” "यायपीठ मुंबई म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “E” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI C.N. PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAMIT KOCHAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.800/Mum/2012 & 6314/Mum/2012 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2007-08 & 2008-09) Swastik Realtors The Assistant बनाम/ 312, Swastik Disha Commissioner of Income v. Corporate Park , Kohinoor Tax – 15(3), Textile Printing Compound Matru Mandir I T Office Opp. Shreyas Cinema, LBS Nana Chowk Marg, Ghatkopar(W) Grant Road Mumbai-400 086 Mumbai. "थायी लेखा सं./PAN : ABAFS2576A (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent…

ITO, New Delhi vs. M/S Rose Advertising P. Ltd., Delhi

In the result this appeal of the Revenue stands dismissed

ITA 2827/DEL/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Sept 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Shri Kuldip Singhay: 2008-09 Rose Advertising (P) Ltd. Vs. Ito, Ward 15(4) Cd 12, Vishaka Enclave New Delhi Pitampura New Delhi 110 088 Pan: Aaacr 1077 M Ay: 2008-09 Ito Ward 15(4) Vs. Rose Advertising P.Ltd. New Delhi Cd 12, Pitampura Vishakha Enclave Delhi 110 034 A.Y: 2009-10 Rose Advertising (P) Ltd. Vs. Ito, Ward 15(4) New Delhi New Delhi & Ay: 2009-10 Ito, Ward 15(4), N.Del. Vs. Rose Advtg. P.Ltd., N.Del.

For Appellant: Sh. Ved Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. F.R.Meena, Sr.D.R

…A.O. 10.2. On these facts we examine the legal position. a) In the case of CIT vs. Gangeshwari Metal P.Ltd. in ITA no.597/2012 judgement dt. 21.1.2013, the Hon'ble High Court after considering the decisions in the case of Nova Promoters and Finlease Pvt.Ltd. 342 ITR 169 and judgment in the case of CIT vs. Lovely Exports 319 ITR (Sat.5)(S.C.) held as follows. "As can be seen from the above extract, two types of cases have been indicated. One in which the Assessing Officer carries out the exercise which is required in law and the other in which the Assessing Officer (sits back with folded hands' till the assessee…

Rose Advertising Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

In the result this appeal of the Revenue stands dismissed

ITA 2293/DEL/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Sept 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Shri Kuldip Singhay: 2008-09 Rose Advertising (P) Ltd. Vs. Ito, Ward 15(4) Cd 12, Vishaka Enclave New Delhi Pitampura New Delhi 110 088 Pan: Aaacr 1077 M Ay: 2008-09 Ito Ward 15(4) Vs. Rose Advertising P.Ltd. New Delhi Cd 12, Pitampura Vishakha Enclave Delhi 110 034 A.Y: 2009-10 Rose Advertising (P) Ltd. Vs. Ito, Ward 15(4) New Delhi New Delhi & Ay: 2009-10 Ito, Ward 15(4), N.Del. Vs. Rose Advtg. P.Ltd., N.Del.

For Appellant: Sh. Ved Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. F.R.Meena, Sr.D.R

…A.O. 10.2. On these facts we examine the legal position. a) In the case of CIT vs. Gangeshwari Metal P.Ltd. in ITA no.597/2012 judgement dt. 21.1.2013, the Hon'ble High Court after considering the decisions in the case of Nova Promoters and Finlease Pvt.Ltd. 342 ITR 169 and judgment in the case of CIT vs. Lovely Exports 319 ITR (Sat.5)(S.C.) held as follows. "As can be seen from the above extract, two types of cases have been indicated. One in which the Assessing Officer carries out the exercise which is required in law and the other in which the Assessing Officer (sits back with folded hands' till the assessee…