Indus Valley Promoters Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income-tax

305 ITR 202High Court2008#5597 most cited
21

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2024.

Issues it is cited on

genuineness of the transactionunexplained cash creditsection 68personcompanysection 143(3)total incomedocument

Judgments citing Indus Valley Promoters Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income-tax

DCIT-14(1)(1), MUMBAI vs. JAYMALA INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dism

ITA 2719/MUM/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 May 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Rahul Chaudhary () Assessment Year: 2012-13

For Appellant: Mr. Ankush Kapoor, CIT-DRFor Respondent: Mr. Ajay Singh
Section 143(3)Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “F” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) AND SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (JUDICIAL MEMBER) Assessment Year: 2012-13 DCIT, 14(1)(1), M/s Jaymala Infrastructure P. Ltd., Room No. 432, 4th floor, B-8/9, Ground Floor, Gurudev Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Apartment, R.C. Marg, Chembur Mumbai-400020. Naka, Chembur Mumbai-400071 PAN NO. AACCJ 3470 G Appellant Respondent : Mr. Ajay Singh Assessee by : Mr. Ankush Kapoor, CIT-DR Revenue by : 24/04/2024 Date of Hearing Date of pronouncement : 13/05/2024 ORDER PER OM PRAKASH KANT, AM This appeal by the Reven…

ITO, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. ACCENTOR INFOTECH PVT. LTD., DELHI

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

ITA 3278/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Jan 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Shri Chandra Mohan Garg

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Kanv Bali, Sr.DR
Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 68

…fully justified in making the addition and Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition. Ld. D.R. also placed reliance on the decision in the case NRA Steel [2019] 218 ITR 161 (SC), the decision of Delhi High Court in the case of Indus Valley Promoters Ltd. 305 ITR 202, Nova Promoters & Finlease (P) Ltd. 342 ITR 169 (Delhi High Court), Precision Finance Pvt. Ltd. 208 ITR 465 (Calcutta High Court) and Swati Bajaj 139 taxmann.com 352 (Calcutta High Court). 7. We have heard the Ld. DR and perused the material on record. The issue in the present ground is with respect to addition u/s. 68 of the Act, on account of…

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

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH, ‘F’: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI R. K. PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER [Assessment Year: 2006-07] Prime Quality ITO-20(1), Consultants (P) Ltd. C.R. Building, 103, B-3, Prerna Vs I.P. Estate, Complex, Subhas Chowk, New Delhi-110002 Laxmi Nagar, Delhi-110092 PAN-AACCP8427H Assessee Revenue Assessee by Sh. V.K. Tulsian, CA Sh. Parikshit Singh, Sr. DR Revenue by Date of Hearing 22.03.2022 Date of Pronouncement 27.04.2022 ORDER PER R.K. PANDA, AM, This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 11.10.2018 of the learne…

RAMESH CHAND INVESTMENT & LEASING PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE- 21(2), NEW DELHI

ITA 6009/DEL/2017[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Dec 2021AY 2004-05

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Shri R.K. Pandaassessment Year: 2004-05 Ramesh Chand Investment & Vs. Acit, Leasing Pvt. Ltd., Circle-21(2), 69/2A, Najafgarh Road Industrial New Delhi. Area, New Delhi. Pan:Aaccr3585Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : None Revenue By : Shri Anilgandhi, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 06.12.2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 07.12.2021 Order Per R.K. Panda, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 1St March,2013 Of The Cit(A)-18, New Delhi, Relating To Assessment Year 2004-05. 2. None Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee At The Time Of Hearing. No Application For Adjournment Of Hearing Has Been Filed. A Perusal Of The Order Sheet Entries Shows That No One Was Appearing On The Previous Occasions. Although Notices Have Been Sent By The Registry Through Rpad, Every Time The Same Was Returned By The Postal Authorities With The Remark ‘No Such Person In The Address.’ The Assessee Has Also Not Taken Any Step To Intimate The Change Of Address, If Any. Under These Circumstances, We Deem It Proper To Decide The Appeal On The Basis Of The Material Available On Record & After Hearing The Ld. Dr.

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri AnilGandhi, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 144Section 147Section 148

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH : F : NEW DELHI (Through Virtual Hearing) BEFORE SMT. DIVA SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI R.K. PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2004-05 Ramesh Chand Investment & Vs. ACIT, Leasing Pvt. Ltd., Circle-21(2), 69/2A, Najafgarh Road Industrial New Delhi. Area, New Delhi. PAN:AACCR3585Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : None Revenue by : Shri AnilGandhi, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 06.12.2021 Date of Pronouncement : 07.12.2021 ORDER PER R.K. PANDA, AM: This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 1st March,2013 of the CIT(A)-18, New…

RMP HOLDING (P) LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, WARD- 20(3), NEW DELHI

ITA 79/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Aug 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahuasstt. Year: 2007-08

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Shri Surender Pal. Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 271(1)(c)Section 68

…INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “F”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI L.P. SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Asstt. Year: 2007-08 ITO, Ward-20(3) RMP Holding (P) Ltd. New Delhi. 138C, Block B, Group -4, Dilshad Garden, New Delhi – 110 095 Vs. PAN AAACR5533N (Appellant) (Respondent) Asstt. Year 2010-11 RMP Holding (P) Ltd. ITO, Ward 20(3) 138C, Block B, Group-4, Vs. New Delhi. Dilshad Garden, New Delhi -110 095 PAN AAACR5533N (Appellant) (Respondent) Asstt. Year 2006-07 M/s. R.N. Khemka Enterprises ITO, (P) Ltd, G-137, Gali No.6, Ward-15(1) Shiv Mandir Road, New Delhi. Vs. Swaroop Naga…

R.N. KHEMKA ENTERPRISES (P) LTD.,DELHI vs. ITO, WARD- 20(3), NEW DELHI

ITA 78/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Aug 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahuasstt. Year: 2007-08

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Shri Surender Pal. Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 271(1)(c)Section 68

…INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “F”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI L.P. SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Asstt. Year: 2007-08 ITO, Ward-20(3) RMP Holding (P) Ltd. New Delhi. 138C, Block B, Group -4, Dilshad Garden, New Delhi – 110 095 Vs. PAN AAACR5533N (Appellant) (Respondent) Asstt. Year 2010-11 RMP Holding (P) Ltd. ITO, Ward 20(3) 138C, Block B, Group-4, Vs. New Delhi. Dilshad Garden, New Delhi -110 095 PAN AAACR5533N (Appellant) (Respondent) Asstt. Year 2006-07 M/s. R.N. Khemka Enterprises ITO, (P) Ltd, G-137, Gali No.6, Ward-15(1) Shiv Mandir Road, New Delhi. Vs. Swaroop Naga…

ITO, WARD- 20(3), NEW DELHI vs. RMP HOLDING (P) LTD., NEW DELHI

ITA 6017/DEL/2018[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Aug 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahuasstt. Year: 2007-08

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Shri Surender Pal. Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 271(1)(c)Section 68

…INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “F”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI L.P. SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Asstt. Year: 2007-08 ITO, Ward-20(3) RMP Holding (P) Ltd. New Delhi. 138C, Block B, Group -4, Dilshad Garden, New Delhi – 110 095 Vs. PAN AAACR5533N (Appellant) (Respondent) Asstt. Year 2010-11 RMP Holding (P) Ltd. ITO, Ward 20(3) 138C, Block B, Group-4, Vs. New Delhi. Dilshad Garden, New Delhi -110 095 PAN AAACR5533N (Appellant) (Respondent) Asstt. Year 2006-07 M/s. R.N. Khemka Enterprises ITO, (P) Ltd, G-137, Gali No.6, Ward-15(1) Shiv Mandir Road, New Delhi. Vs. Swaroop Naga…

R.N. KHEMKA ENTERPRISES (P) LTD.,DELHI vs. ITO, WARD- 20(3), NEW DELHI

ITA 584/DEL/2018[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Aug 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahuasstt. Year: 2007-08

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Shri Surender Pal. Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 271(1)(c)Section 68

…INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “F”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI L.P. SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Asstt. Year: 2007-08 ITO, Ward-20(3) RMP Holding (P) Ltd. New Delhi. 138C, Block B, Group -4, Dilshad Garden, New Delhi – 110 095 Vs. PAN AAACR5533N (Appellant) (Respondent) Asstt. Year 2010-11 RMP Holding (P) Ltd. ITO, Ward 20(3) 138C, Block B, Group-4, Vs. New Delhi. Dilshad Garden, New Delhi -110 095 PAN AAACR5533N (Appellant) (Respondent) Asstt. Year 2006-07 M/s. R.N. Khemka Enterprises ITO, (P) Ltd, G-137, Gali No.6, Ward-15(1) Shiv Mandir Road, New Delhi. Vs. Swaroop Naga…

R.N. KHEMKA ENTERPRISES (P) LTD.,DELHI vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

ITA 3299/DEL/2017[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Aug 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahuasstt. Year: 2007-08

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Shri Surender Pal. Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 271(1)(c)Section 68

…INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “F”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI L.P. SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Asstt. Year: 2007-08 ITO, Ward-20(3) RMP Holding (P) Ltd. New Delhi. 138C, Block B, Group -4, Dilshad Garden, New Delhi – 110 095 Vs. PAN AAACR5533N (Appellant) (Respondent) Asstt. Year 2010-11 RMP Holding (P) Ltd. ITO, Ward 20(3) 138C, Block B, Group-4, Vs. New Delhi. Dilshad Garden, New Delhi -110 095 PAN AAACR5533N (Appellant) (Respondent) Asstt. Year 2006-07 M/s. R.N. Khemka Enterprises ITO, (P) Ltd, G-137, Gali No.6, Ward-15(1) Shiv Mandir Road, New Delhi. Vs. Swaroop Naga…

R.N. KHEMKA ENTERPRISES (P) LTD.,DELHI vs. ITO, WARD- 20(3), NEW DELHI

ITA 1029/DEL/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Aug 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahuasstt. Year: 2007-08

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Shri Surender Pal. Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 271(1)(c)Section 68

…INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “F”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI L.P. SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Asstt. Year: 2007-08 ITO, Ward-20(3) RMP Holding (P) Ltd. New Delhi. 138C, Block B, Group -4, Dilshad Garden, New Delhi – 110 095 Vs. PAN AAACR5533N (Appellant) (Respondent) Asstt. Year 2010-11 RMP Holding (P) Ltd. ITO, Ward 20(3) 138C, Block B, Group-4, Vs. New Delhi. Dilshad Garden, New Delhi -110 095 PAN AAACR5533N (Appellant) (Respondent) Asstt. Year 2006-07 M/s. R.N. Khemka Enterprises ITO, (P) Ltd, G-137, Gali No.6, Ward-15(1) Shiv Mandir Road, New Delhi. Vs. Swaroop Naga…

R.N. KHEMKA ENTERPRISES (P) LTD.,DELHI vs. ITO, WARD- 20(3), NEW DELHI

ITA 585/DEL/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Aug 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahuasstt. Year: 2007-08

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Shri Surender Pal. Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 271(1)(c)Section 68

…INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “F”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI L.P. SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Asstt. Year: 2007-08 ITO, Ward-20(3) RMP Holding (P) Ltd. New Delhi. 138C, Block B, Group -4, Dilshad Garden, New Delhi – 110 095 Vs. PAN AAACR5533N (Appellant) (Respondent) Asstt. Year 2010-11 RMP Holding (P) Ltd. ITO, Ward 20(3) 138C, Block B, Group-4, Vs. New Delhi. Dilshad Garden, New Delhi -110 095 PAN AAACR5533N (Appellant) (Respondent) Asstt. Year 2006-07 M/s. R.N. Khemka Enterprises ITO, (P) Ltd, G-137, Gali No.6, Ward-15(1) Shiv Mandir Road, New Delhi. Vs. Swaroop Naga…

M/S BASSI STEELS LTD.,MOHALI vs. DCIT, MOHALI

ITA 96/CHANDI/2016[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh27 Mar 2018AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri. Sanjay Garg, Judicial, Member & Dr. B.R.R. Kumarassessment Year: 2005-06

For Appellant: Sh. Ashok GoelFor Respondent: Smt. C. Chandrakanta
Section 148Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CHANDIGARH BENCHES ‘A’ CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI. SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL, MEMBER AND DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2005-06 M/s Bassi Steel Ltd. Vs. The Dy. CIT Vill- Gholu Majra Circle-6(1) Mohali Mohali C-81, Industrial Area Phase-VI, Mohali PAN No. AABCB2610D (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Sh. Ashok Goel Department By : Smt. C. Chandrakanta Date of hearing : 23/01/2018 Date of Pronouncement : 27/03/2018 ORDER PER DR. B.R.R.KUMAR, AM The present appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order of the Ld. CIT(A)-2, Chandigarh dt. 14/12…

M/S. ROHIT BAL vs. ACIT,

In the result appeal of assessee is dismissed

ITA 3136/DEL/2009[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Jun 2017AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishiassessment Year : 2005-06

For Appellant: Shri Surendra KumarFor Respondent: Ms. F.R. Meena, Sr.DR
Section 68

…tors and genuineness of the transaction in the matter. Ld. CIT(A) relied upon decision of Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. P. Mohanakala 291 ITR 278 (Supreme Court) and the decision of Delhi High Court in the case of Indus Valley Promoters Ltd. vs. CIT 305 ITR 202. Ld. CIT(A) in the absence of any evidence of record confirmed the addition and dismissed this ground of appeal . 6. After considering rival submission, we do not find any merit in this ground of appeal of assessee . It is not in dispute that assessee had received amount of Rs. 11,38,300/- through cheque which was in his individual name and cre…

M/S. GANESH KUMAR & SONS HUF,DELHI vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals filed by the respective assessees are allowed

ITA 1708/DEL/2012[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Apr 2017AY 2001-02

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

For Appellant: Shri C.S. Anand, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Amrit Lal, Sr. DR
Section 131Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 148Section 68

…n made by the A.O and sustained by the ld. CIT(A) is justified under the facts and circumstances of the case: i. Kale Khan Mohammad Hanif Vs. CIT [1963] 50 ITR 1 [SC] ii CIT Vs. Mohanakala [2007] 291 ITR 278 [SC] iii. Indus Valley Promoters Ltd Vs. CIT [2008] 305 ITR 202 [Del] iv. Bhartesh Jain Vs. DCIT [Del] 483 CTR Vol 201 dated 7.4.2006 v. CIT Vs. Biju Patnaik 160 ITR 674 15. So far as the arguments of the ld. AR that the A.O has not disposed of the objections raised on reopening of the assessment is concerned, the ld. AR referring to the decision of the Hon'ble High Court in the case of Smt. Kamlesh Sharma V…

ITO, NEW DELHI vs. M/S GRAVITY SYSTEMS PVT. LTD., DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed while the cross objection of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 5626/DEL/2012[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Mar 2017AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri. P. K. Bansal & Shri K.N. Charry Assessment Year:2004-05

For Appellant: Shri P. C. Yadav, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Amrit Lal, D.R
Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 68

…sion of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Goel Sons Golden Estate Pvt. Ltd. (supra):- 1. Kale Khan Mohammand Hanif vs. CIT (1963) 50 ITR 1 (SC). 2. CIT vs. P. Mohanakala (2007) 291 ITR 278 (SC). 3. Indus Valley Promoters Ltd., vs CIT (2008) 305 ITR 202 (Delhi). 4. Bhartesh Jain vs DCIT (Del) 483 CTR 201 dated 07.04.2006. 5. CIT vs Biju Patnaik 160 ITR 674 23. In view of these facts, we do not find any illegality or infirmity in the order of the ld. CIT(A) in deleting the addition of Rs.68.50 lakhs under section 68 of the Act as in our opinion this is not a fit case which warranted our interfere…

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

…the share application money and to prove the genuineness of the transactions. In support of the finding, the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) also relied on the following 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 ab…

SH. MANJU AGARWAL,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2324/DEL/2014[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Sept 2016AY 2004-05

Bench: Sh. H.S. Sidhu & Sh. O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2004-05 Ms. Manju Agarwal, 14B/23, Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward- 1St Floor, Dev Nagar, Karol 33(1), New Delhi Bagh, New Delhi Pan : Adrpa7112P (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Sh. Deepak Ostwal, Ca Respondent By Sh. Surender Pal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 20.07.2016 Date Of Pronouncement 28.09.2016 Order Per O.P. Kant, A.M.: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against Order Dated 02/01/2014 Of Learned Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)-Xxviii, New Delhi For Assessment Year 2004-05 Raising Following Grounds: I. On Facts & In Circumstances Of The Case, Cit (A) Has Erred Both On Facts & In Law, In Upholding Illegal Action Of Re-Assessment & Assumption Of Jurisdiction By The Respondent Without Issue/Service Of Notice U/S 148 & Without Recording The Reasons For Reopening The Assessment. Therefore, Impugned Assessment Order Is Liable To Be Quashed As Unsustainable, Both On Facts & In Law.

Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 68

…estment in his confirmation stated that the said amount was refund of advance. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals) relying on the judgment of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Indus Valley Promoters Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (2008) 305 ITR 202, judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. P. Mohanakala 291 ITR 278 and judgment of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. M/s. Nova Promoters and Finlease Private Limited (2012) 342 ITR 169 held that the assessee failed to discharge the burden of proof to explain the cred…

RAM NANDAN MISHRA,DELHI vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

In the result assessee’s appeal is allowed in part

ITA 135/DEL/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Aug 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Shri Kuldip Singhay: 2010-11 Shri Ram Nandan Mishra Vs. Ito, Ward 39(3) C/O Sh.Kapil Goel, Adv. New Delhi A 1/25, Sector 15, Rohini Delhi 110 085 Pan: Anmpm 8959 P

For Appellant: Sh. Kapil Goel, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. F.R.Meena, Sr.D.R
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 271A

…First Appellate Authority was right in coming to a conclusion that the assessee has failed to discharge the primary onus to prove the source of cash deposits by relying on the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Indus Valley Promoters vs. CIT 305 ITR 202 and other case laws. Thus we uphold this finding. 4. On the alternative plea of the assessee that, only the peak credit in this account has to be added, we are of the considered opinion that this plea is justified. The assessee has rightly relied on the decision of the ITAT Delhi F Bench in ITA 2906/Del/13 for the A.Y. 2009-10 order dt. 27.3.2015…

M/S. RAJ HANS TOWRS PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 5240/DEL/2012[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Jul 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Sh. O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2009-10 M/S. Raj Hans Towers Pvt. Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Ltd., M-33, 2Nd Floor, Income Tax, Circle -15(1), Greater Kailash-I, New Delhi New Delhi Gir/Pan :Aaacr0019H (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Sh. R.S. Singhvi, Ca Respondent By Sh. V.P. Mishra, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 06.06.2016 Date Of Pronouncement 20.07.2016 Order

Section 143(3)Section 68

…tatement has been provided for clarification and cross examination.” 3.4 The learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) relying on the judgment of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Indus Valley Promoters Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (2008) 305 ITR 202, judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. P. Mohanakala, 291 ITR 278 and the judgment of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Nova Promoters and Finlease Private Limited, (2012) 342 ITR 169, confirmed the additions with following observations: “The appellant has thus…

TILAK RAJ ANAND,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

The appeal is dismissed

ITA 4593/DEL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Jun 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri K.N.Charyshri Tilak Raj Anand, Vs. Dcit, 2Nd Floor, Hotel Continenta, Circle-8(1), Regal Building, Behind Regal New Delhi Cinema, New Delhi Pan: Adrpa4243P (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Smt Naina Soin Kapil, Sr. DR
Section 133Section 143Section 68

…id evidence the same can be used against the assessee by holding that it was a receipt of an income nature. In the case in hand the authorities concurrently found the explanation offered by the assessee unacceptable. 5. Indus Valley Promoters Ltd v CIT (2008) 305 ITR 202 (Delhi) it is stated that: worthiness of the depositors must be established to the satisfaction of the AO. Where there is an unexplained cash credit, it is open to the AO to hold that it is income of the assessee and no further burden lies on the AO to show that income in question comes from any particular source. The Hon'ble Delhi High Court in…

Showing 1–20 of 21 · Page 1 of 2