IT Vs Ambassador Travels (P) Ltd (208) 173 Taxman 407 (Del). 3. Shri Satchidanand S. Pandit v. ITO (208)

11 SOT 302Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2007#9405 most cited
12

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2021.

Judgments citing IT Vs Ambassador Travels (P) Ltd (208) 173 Taxman 407 (Del). 3. Shri Satchidanand S. Pandit v. ITO (208)

DCIT, CIRCLE- 62(1), NEW DELHI vs. RAMESH KUMAR PABBI, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 6168/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Mar 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Sh. Anil Chaturvedi & Ms. Suchitra Kamble(Through Video Conferencing) Assessment Year : 2013-14 Dcit Vs. Ramesh Kumar Pabbi Circle – 62(1), A-41, Phase-Ii, New Delhi Mayapuri Industrial Area, New Delhi-110017 Pan – Aanpp 5995 Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Sohail Malik, Sr.D.R. Revenue By Shri Lalit Mohan, Adv. Date Of Hearing: 16/03/2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 16/03/2021 Order Per Anil Chaturvedi, Am:

Section 143(3)Section 194JSection 2(22)(e)Section 40

…ompanies are current account transactions which are entered in the ordinary course of business, the same cannot be classified as advance or loan under section 2(22)(e) of the Act. 25. The Mumbai Bench of the Tribunal in the case of NH Securities Ltd. vs. DCIT 11 SOT 302 has held as under. “37. In the light of the discussion made in paragraphs above, it is to be seen that payments made by a company through a running account in discharge of its existing debts or against purchases or for availing services, such payments made in the ordinary course of business carried on by both the parties could not be treated as de…

EXOTICA HOUSING & INFRSTRUCTURE PVT LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ITO WARD - 8(4), NEW DELHI

ITA 5188/DEL/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Jun 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Anil Chaturvedi

For Appellant: Shri Kapil Goel, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Jagdish Singh, Sr. D.R
Section 143(3)Section 2(22)(e)

…er business transaction are outside the purview of the provision of Section 2(22)(e) of the Act.  177 ITR 393 (Bom), CIT vs. Nagindas M. Kapadia  173 Taxman 407 (Del), Ambassador Travels vs.  (2005) 1 SOT 142 (Mum), Seamist Properties Ltd. vs. ITO  (2007) 11 SOT 302 (Mum), M.S. Securities Ltd. vs. DCIT  ITA No. 3036/Del/2005, Delhi Tribunal Bench order dated 9th May 2008 in the case of Creative Dyeing & Printing Pvt. Ltd. vs. ITO which has been affirmed by Delhi High Court reported in 318 ITR 476 (Del). 14.3.4. Under the provisions of section 2(22)(e) of the IT Act, the legislature has uses the expression “…

PYRAMID REALTORS PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

ITA 2057/DEL/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Oct 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: Shri M.P. Rastogi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Singh Gautam
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 2(22)(e)

…393 (Bom), CIT vs. Nagindas M. Kapadia • 173 Taxman 407 (Del), Ambassador Travels vs. • (2005) 1 SOT 142 (Mum), Seamist Properties Ltd. vs. ITO 68 ITA.Nos.2053, 2054, 2055, 2056 & 2057/Del./2017 M/s. Saamag Developers Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi & Others. • (2007) 11 SOT 302 (Mum), M.S. Securities Ltd. vs. DCIT • ITA No. 3036/Del/2005, Delhi Tribunal Bench order dated 9th May 2008 in the case of Creative Dyeing & Printing Pvt. Ltd. vs. ITO which has been affirmed by Delhi High Court reported in 318 ITR 476 (Del). 14.3.4 Under the provisions of section 2(22)(e) of the IT Act, the legislature has uses the expression “b…

SAGA DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

ITA 2056/DEL/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Oct 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: Shri M.P. Rastogi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Singh Gautam
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 2(22)(e)

…393 (Bom), CIT vs. Nagindas M. Kapadia • 173 Taxman 407 (Del), Ambassador Travels vs. • (2005) 1 SOT 142 (Mum), Seamist Properties Ltd. vs. ITO 68 ITA.Nos.2053, 2054, 2055, 2056 & 2057/Del./2017 M/s. Saamag Developers Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi & Others. • (2007) 11 SOT 302 (Mum), M.S. Securities Ltd. vs. DCIT • ITA No. 3036/Del/2005, Delhi Tribunal Bench order dated 9th May 2008 in the case of Creative Dyeing & Printing Pvt. Ltd. vs. ITO which has been affirmed by Delhi High Court reported in 318 ITR 476 (Del). 14.3.4 Under the provisions of section 2(22)(e) of the IT Act, the legislature has uses the expression “b…

SAAMAG CONSTRUCTION LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

ITA 2054/DEL/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Oct 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: Shri M.P. Rastogi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Singh Gautam
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 2(22)(e)

…393 (Bom), CIT vs. Nagindas M. Kapadia • 173 Taxman 407 (Del), Ambassador Travels vs. • (2005) 1 SOT 142 (Mum), Seamist Properties Ltd. vs. ITO 68 ITA.Nos.2053, 2054, 2055, 2056 & 2057/Del./2017 M/s. Saamag Developers Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi & Others. • (2007) 11 SOT 302 (Mum), M.S. Securities Ltd. vs. DCIT • ITA No. 3036/Del/2005, Delhi Tribunal Bench order dated 9th May 2008 in the case of Creative Dyeing & Printing Pvt. Ltd. vs. ITO which has been affirmed by Delhi High Court reported in 318 ITR 476 (Del). 14.3.4 Under the provisions of section 2(22)(e) of the IT Act, the legislature has uses the expression “b…

SAAMAG DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

ITA 2053/DEL/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Oct 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: Shri M.P. Rastogi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Singh Gautam
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 2(22)(e)

…393 (Bom), CIT vs. Nagindas M. Kapadia • 173 Taxman 407 (Del), Ambassador Travels vs. • (2005) 1 SOT 142 (Mum), Seamist Properties Ltd. vs. ITO 68 ITA.Nos.2053, 2054, 2055, 2056 & 2057/Del./2017 M/s. Saamag Developers Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi & Others. • (2007) 11 SOT 302 (Mum), M.S. Securities Ltd. vs. DCIT • ITA No. 3036/Del/2005, Delhi Tribunal Bench order dated 9th May 2008 in the case of Creative Dyeing & Printing Pvt. Ltd. vs. ITO which has been affirmed by Delhi High Court reported in 318 ITR 476 (Del). 14.3.4 Under the provisions of section 2(22)(e) of the IT Act, the legislature has uses the expression “b…

VINOD KUMAR MITTAL,BEAWAR vs. ITO, AJMER

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 783/JPR/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur09 Feb 2018AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Shri Mahendra GargieyaFor Respondent: Shri R.A. Verma, Addl. CIT - DR
Section 2(22)Section 2(22)(e)

…s been pointed out in the conclusion of the CIT(A). The same is upheld.— Lakhmichand Muchhal vs. CIT (1961) 43 ITR 315 (MP) and CIT vs. Saurashtra Cement & Chemical Industries Ltd. (1975) 101 ITR 502 (Guj) relied on.” (5) Sri Satchindananad S. Pandit v/s ITO 19 SOT 213(Mum Trib) (6) In the case of ACIT v/s Shri Narayan J. Pagrani in ITA No. 7480/Mum/2011 vide order dated 13.08.2014 (DPB 48-51) wherein, it was held that 9 Shri Vinod Kumar Mittal vs ITO, Ward- 2(3), Ajmer “-------the accumulated profits of company for the purposes of 2(22)(e)by taking the accumulated profits of earlier years as well as current y…

THE ACIT, CIRCLE-2,, BHAVNAGAR vs. SHRI YOGENDRA RATILAL SHETH,, BHAVNAGAR

In the result, appeal filed by the department in ITA

ITA 1791/AHD/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad27 Oct 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Mahavir Prasad

For Appellant: Shri K. Madhusudan, Sr.D.RFor Respondent: Shri Tushar P. Hemani, A.R
Section 142(1)Section 2(22)Section 2(22)(e)

…ase this transaction are in the nature of current accommodation adjustment account and therefore the same are neither loan nor advance as contemplated u/s.2(22)(e) of the "Act". 3. Reliance is place on following authorities:- • NH SECURITIES LTD v. DCIT(2007) 11 SOT 302(BOM) • ACIT v. Global Agencies (P) Ltd. (2005) 87 TTJ 1086 (DEL) • CIT v. NAGINDAS M. KAPADIA (1989) 177 ITR 393 (BOM) • CIT v. CREATIVE DYEING & PRINTING (P) LTD. 318 ITR476 DEL Copies of the authorities are filed herewith for your kind reference.” 2.3 Against the above reply, the assessee vide notice u/s.142(1) of the Act dated 13/12/2010 was a…

RAVINDRA R. FOTEDAR,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT 10(2), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 6778/MUM/2013[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Sept 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri P K Bansal & Shri Amarjit Singhassessment Year : 2010 – 2011 Ravindra R Fotedar Acit 10(2) 7 Bharat Tirth Society, Mumbai Vs. Sion Trombay Road, Chembur, Mumbai 400 071 Pan Aacpf1616R (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Anuj KisnadwalaFor Respondent: Shri Purushottam Kumar
Section 2(22)(e)

…re, the question of deduction of tax at source also would not arise. This view is supported by the following direct decisions : CIT vs. Creative Dyeing & Pringint (P) ltd. 318 ITR 476 (Del) CIT vs. Raj Kumar 318 ITR 462 (Del) NH Securities Ltd v. DCIT (2007) 11 SOT 302 (BOM) ACIT v. Global Agencies(P) ltd. (2005) 87 TTJ 1086(Delhi) CIT v. Nagindas M. Kapadia (1989) 177 ITR 393 (BOM) Even otherwise, if the transactions are not in the nature of current accommodation adjustment account, the same are in the nature of deposits as it apparent from the nomenclature of the ledger account. If the transactions are in the…

ACIT CEN CIR 29, MUMBAI vs. VIJAYDEEP HOTELS P.LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 3291/MUM/2011[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jun 2016AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं /I.Ta Nos. 3291,3293,3384 & 3385/Mum/11 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2004-05 To 2007-08 The Acit, M/S. Vijaydeep Hotels Pvt. बनाम/ Cent. Cir-29, Ltd., Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, Hotel Bawa International, Mumbai-400 020 Nehru Road Ext, Near Domestic Airport, Vile Parle, Mumbai-400 049 आयकर अपील सं /I.Ta Nos. 3241 & 3243/Mum/11 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2006-07 & 2007-08 M/S. Vijaydeep Hotels Pvt. The Acit, बनाम/ Ltd., Cent. Cir-29, Vs. Hotel Bawa International, Aayakar Bhavan, Nehru Road Ext, Mumbai-400 020 Near Domestic Airport, Vile Parle, Mumbai-400 049 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aaacv 1582D आयकर अपील सं /I.Ta Nos. 951 To 953/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2005-06 To 2007-08 Shri Karanveer Singh G. The Acit, बनाम/ Bawa, Cent. Cir-29, Vs. 22, Sahib Guru Angad Aayakar Bhavan, Niwas, Mumbai-400 020 Vitthal Nagar Co. Op. Soc. N.S. Road No. 22, Jvpd Scheme, Juhu, Vile Parle (E), Mumbai-400 049 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aejpb 8856F

For Appellant: Shri Rajiv KhandelwalFor Respondent: Shri G.M. Dass
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 37(1)

…sions in support of the above contentions. 1. DCIT Vs Lakra Bros (207) 162 Taxman 170 (Chd.(Mag.) 2. CIT Vs Ambassador Travels (P) Ltd (208) 173 Taxman 407 (Del). 3. Shri Satchidanand S. Pandit Vs ITO (208) 19 SOT 213 (Mum) 4. NH Securities Ltd Vs DCIT (207) 11 SOT 302 (Mum) 39.1. He further submits that the concept of deeming certain payments or loans or advances to substantial shareholders as income was introduced with the object of curbing tax evasion. Upto 31.5.1997 dividend was taxed in the hands of the recipient of the 24 Vijaydeep Hotels dividend. However many closely held companies never declared any d…

VIJAYDEEP HOTELS P. LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CEN CIR 29, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 3241/MUM/2011[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jun 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं /I.Ta Nos. 3291,3293,3384 & 3385/Mum/11 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2004-05 To 2007-08 The Acit, M/S. Vijaydeep Hotels Pvt. बनाम/ Cent. Cir-29, Ltd., Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, Hotel Bawa International, Mumbai-400 020 Nehru Road Ext, Near Domestic Airport, Vile Parle, Mumbai-400 049 आयकर अपील सं /I.Ta Nos. 3241 & 3243/Mum/11 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2006-07 & 2007-08 M/S. Vijaydeep Hotels Pvt. The Acit, बनाम/ Ltd., Cent. Cir-29, Vs. Hotel Bawa International, Aayakar Bhavan, Nehru Road Ext, Mumbai-400 020 Near Domestic Airport, Vile Parle, Mumbai-400 049 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aaacv 1582D आयकर अपील सं /I.Ta Nos. 951 To 953/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2005-06 To 2007-08 Shri Karanveer Singh G. The Acit, बनाम/ Bawa, Cent. Cir-29, Vs. 22, Sahib Guru Angad Aayakar Bhavan, Niwas, Mumbai-400 020 Vitthal Nagar Co. Op. Soc. N.S. Road No. 22, Jvpd Scheme, Juhu, Vile Parle (E), Mumbai-400 049 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aejpb 8856F

For Appellant: Shri Rajiv KhandelwalFor Respondent: Shri G.M. Dass
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 37(1)

…sions in support of the above contentions. 1. DCIT Vs Lakra Bros (207) 162 Taxman 170 (Chd.(Mag.) 2. CIT Vs Ambassador Travels (P) Ltd (208) 173 Taxman 407 (Del). 3. Shri Satchidanand S. Pandit Vs ITO (208) 19 SOT 213 (Mum) 4. NH Securities Ltd Vs DCIT (207) 11 SOT 302 (Mum) 39.1. He further submits that the concept of deeming certain payments or loans or advances to substantial shareholders as income was introduced with the object of curbing tax evasion. Upto 31.5.1997 dividend was taxed in the hands of the recipient of the 24 Vijaydeep Hotels dividend. However many closely held companies never declared any d…

TAURIAN ENGINEERING P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. JCIT (OSD) 4(3), MUMBAI

ITA 3129/MUM/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Mar 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No 3129/Mum/2013 (ननधधायण वषा / Assessment Year: 2009-10) Taurian Engineering Pvt.Ltd, Jt.Commissioner Of Income Tax 302-A, Poonam Chamberes, (Osd)-4(3), फनधभ/ 3Rd Floor, Dr.Annie Besant Road, Room No.649, 6Th Floor, Worli, Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Mumbai-400018 M.K.Road, Mumbai-400020 स्थधमी रेखध सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan : Aabcm8782H (अऩीरधथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) : अऩीरधथी की ओय से / Appellant By : Shri J P Bairagra प्रत्मथी की ओय से/Respondent By : Shri R A Dhyani सुनवधई की तधयीख /Date Of Hearing : 02.02.2016 घोषणध की तधयीख /Date Of : 08.03.2016 Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Rajesh Kumar, A. M: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 4.2.2013 Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-8, Mumbai Hereinafter Called As The Cit(A)) For Assessment Year 2009-10. 2. The Only Issue Raised In The Grounds Of Appeal By The Assessee Is Against The Upholding Of The Provisions Of Section 2(22)(E) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 & Against The Confirmation Of Addition Of Rs.1,09,75,000/- Under Section 2(22)(E) Of The Act.

For Appellant: Shri J P BairagraFor Respondent: Shri R A Dhyani
Section 143(2)Section 2(22)(e)

…reliance on the following decisions : a) CIT V/s Nagindas M Kapadia (1989) 177 ITR 393 (Bom); b) Bombay Oil Industries Ltd V/s DCIT (2009) 28 SOT 383(Mum); c) CIT V/s Ambassador Travells (P) Ltd ((2009) 318 ITR 376) (Del); d) NH Securities Ltd V/s DCIT (2007) 11 SOT 302 (Mumba); e) CIT V/s Raj Kumar (2009) 318 ITR 462(Del); f) CIT V/s P K Badiani (1970) 76 ITR 369) (Bom); g) Anilkumar Agarwal V/s ITO (2011)138 TTJ 175) Mum); and h) Kedarnath Jute Mfg. Co.Ltd V/s CIT (1971) 82 ITR 363(SC) 5. Per contra the ld DR relied heavily on the orders of authorities below and submitted that the deeming provisions of section…