How many judgments cite Jatia Investment Co. v. CIT?

77 judgments on BharatTax cite Jatia Investment Co. v. CIT (206 ITR 718), spanning 2015 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Jatia Investment Co. v. CIT come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 68, Section 1961, Section 143(2), Section 143(3), Section 250, Section 115BBE.

Jatia Investment Co. v. CIT

206 ITR 718High Court1994#1483 most cited

What is Jatia Investment Co. v. CIT authority for?

An addition under Section 68 for unexplained cash credits cannot be made when there is no actual cash credit or flow of funds, such as in cases of share swaps or notional credits.

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Jatia Investment Co. v. CIT · Section 68 Income-tax Act 1961 · unexplained cash credit · share swap · notional credit · no actual cash flow · share capital addition · share premium · genuineness of transaction · addition u/s 68 deletion

Also reported as

26 ITD 236

Sections most often in play

Section 68 Section 1961 Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250 Section 115BBE Section 133(6)Section 142(1)

Issues it is cited on

share capital and share premium principal officer share application money addition u/s 68 admission of additional evidence unexplained cash credit genuineness of the transaction addition under section 68 entry operator rule 46a income-tax officer section 68

Judgments citing Jatia Investment Co. v. CIT

Magnum Credit & Consultants Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-7(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 326/KOL/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 May 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 131Section 144Section 68

…essee’s appeal to the extent indicated by taking note of the various decisions of the High Court on the very same subject. In this regard, we refer to the decision of the High Court At Madras in V.R. Global Energy (P)Ltd. vs. ITO, Corporate Ward 3(4), Chennai 407 ITR 145 (Madras). It was held that when the assessee allotted share to a company in settlement of their existing liability of assessee to the said company, since no cash was involved in the transaction of said allotment of shares. conversion of this liability in which share capital and share premium could not be treated as unexplained cash credits under…

Acuity Merchants Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-4(3), Kolkata.

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

ITA 1338/KOL/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 May 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawali.T.A. No.1338/Kol/2023 Assessment Year : 2017-18 Acuity Merchants Pvt Ltd.……..…………............…...……………....Appellant Amrita Abasan, Bimalendu Ghosh Sarani, Sonarpur, Kolkata- 700150. [Pan: Aaica4474D] Vs. Ito, Ward-4(3), Kolkata……...............................................…..…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri S. K. Tulsiyan, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri S. Datta, Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : March 07, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : May 20, 2024 आदेश / Order संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य "वारा / Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 25.10.2023 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. The Assessee In This Appeal Has Taken The Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. That On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Cit(A), Nfac, Delhi Erred In Law In Having Upheld The Addition Of Rs 8.61,73,500/- U/S 68 Of The Act Without Properly Appreciating The Admitted Facts On Record That The Assessee Had Received Loans In The Form Of Shares Only From Various Parties/Creditors Duly Reflected In The Demat Account & Not Any Fund Transacted Either Through Bank Or Cash Book & Hence Such Receipt Of Shares As Loan Did Not Amount To Cash Credit As Envisaged U/S 68 Of The Act.

Section 115BSection 250Section 68

…ssee. He in this respect has relied upon the following case laws: i. Coordinate Bench of this Tribunal in the case of M/s Abhijeet Enterprise Ltd. vs. ITO, ITA No.308/Kol/2017; ii. Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of Jatia Investments Co. v. CIT (1994) 206 ITR 718(Cal); iii. Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of V.R. Global Energy (P) Ltd. v. ITO (2018) 96 taxmann.com 647 (Madras) I.T.A. No.1338/Kol/2023 Assessment Year : 2017-18 Acuity Merchants Pvt Ltd 5.1 He has further invited our attention to the pages 133-134 of paperbook, which is the copy of demat account of the assessee showing that the shares…

ITO, Ward-5(1), Kolkata vs. M/S Vishnu Distributors Pvt Ltd, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is devoid of any merit, hence dismissed

ITA 50/KOL/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 May 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumari.T.A. No. 50/Kol/2022 Assessment Year: 2012-2013

Section 131Section 14ASection 68

…ssee’s appeal to the extent indicated by taking note of the various decisions of the High Court on the very same subject. In this regard, we refer to the decision of the High Court At Madras in V.R. Global Energy (P) Ltd. vs. ITO, Corporate Ward 3(4), Chennai 407 ITR 145 (Madras). It was held that when the assessee allotted share to a company in settlement of their existing liability of assessee to 11 Vishnu Distributors Pvt. Limited the said company, since no cash was involved in the transaction of said allotment of shares, conversion of this liability in which share capital and share premium could not be treat…

Kailash Chand Yadav, 100, Kalu Baba Ki Dhani, Sheoshinghpur, Akoda, Phulera-303338 vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1(2), Jaipur

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

ITA 82/JPR/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur11 Sept 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri S.L. Poddar(Adv.)&For Respondent: Smt. Monisha Choudhary(Addl.CIT)

Section 142(1)Section 148Section 69A

…raised before the lower authorities. (ii) CIT Vs. Raoraja Hanut Singh 117 Taxman 613/252 ITR 0528: (Raj) The position is that the Tribunal can admit the additional evidence if it requires it to enable it to pass orders (iii) Electra (Jaipur) Pvt Ltd. vs. IAC 26 ITD 236 If evidence produced by assessee is genuine, reliable and proves assessee's case than assessee should not be denied opportunity of it being produced even if he first time produces same before appellate authority. (iv) Smt. Prabhavati S. Shah Vs. CIT 231 ITR 1 (Bom.) 29 Kailash Chand Yadav vs. ITO Production of additional evidence-assessee taking…

Silchar Food Processing(P)Ltd, Golahat Nimtala Masjid, Purba Bardhaman vs. CIT(A), Burdwan

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 281/KOL/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 Aug 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar&Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 131Section 144Section 68

…invoked in respect of share capital/share premium which were received in the earlier years and not during the year. In defense of arguments the Ld. A.R relied on the decision of Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of Jatia Investment Co. vs. CIT in [1994] 206 ITR 718 (Cal). The Ld. A.R therefore prayed that the order of Ld. CIT(A) may be reversed and AO may be directed to make the addition. 6. The Ld. D.R on the other hand relied heavily on the authorities below by submitting that in absence of documents before the authorities below how the correct position could not be deciphered and appreciated. The Ld. D.…

ITO, Ward-8(1), Kolkata vs. M/S Merrit Fintrade Pvt Ltd, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 80/KOL/2021[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Jul 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 133(6)Section 68

…the allotment and issue of shares and therefore addition as made by AO u/s 68 in respect of this share capital / share premium being unexplained is bad in law and was rightly deleted by the Ld. CIT(A) by relying on the decision of Jatia Investment vs. CIT in 206 ITR 718 (Cal). The Ld. A.R also referred to the comments of the AO in the remand report wherein the AO did not dispute the fact that money has not been received during the year. The AO has only stated that Rs. 9,09,50,000/- was in the credited in the books of accounts of the assessee. The Ld. A.R therefore submitted that the necessary evidences comprisin…

ACIT (Central), Ujjain vs. M/S Globus Housing Pvt. Ltd., Bhopal

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 615/IND/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Indore25 Jul 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniacit (Central) M/S. Globus Housing Pvt. Ltd. 176, Zone-Ii, First Floor, M.P. Ujjain Vs. Nagar, Bhopal (Appellant / Revenue) (Respondent/ Assessee) Pan: Aaecg 0623 J Revenue By Shri P.K. Mishra, Cit-Dr Respondent By Shri Hitesh Chimnani & Yash Kukreja, Ars Date Of Hearing 20.07.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 25.07.2023

Section 68

…s appeal on merit and in the interest of justice. Reliance is placed on following case laws: Shahrukh Khan vs DCIT 13 SOT 61 (Mum) ITO vs Dwarka Prasad 63 ITD I(TM)(Patna) Rachhpal Singh vs ITO 94 ITD 79 (Asr) Electra Jaipur (P) Ltd. us Inspecting Asstt. CIT 26 ITD 236(Del) CIT vs K Ravindranathan Nair 265 ITR 217(Ker) Prabhavati S. Shah vs CIT 231 ITR (Bom) Manish Buildwell (Delhi High Court; order dated 20.11.2011 8.10 It is observed that all these amounts pertain to advances received from the customers in respect of flat/ house booked. These were not in the nature of unsecured loans. All these advances have…

A.C.I.T., Circle-2(1), Kolkata vs. M/S. Semall Impex Private Limited, Kolkata

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

ITA 225/KOL/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Mar 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 2Section 36Section 68

…f account of the assesse during the year and therefore the provisions of section 68 of the Act are not applicable. The case of the assessee finds support from the decision of Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of M/s V.R. Global Energy Pvt. Ltd. vs. ITO in 407 ITR 145 (Mad) wherein it has been held that if no cash is involved , section 68 of the Act treating as the share capital/share premium as unexplained cash credit is wrong as the transaction of allotment of shares by way of book adjustment and provisions of section 68 of the Act are not attracted. We also note that subsequent SLP was also dismissed by the…

DCIT, Cir. -11(1), Kolkata vs. M/S Iris Health Services Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue and the cross-objection of the assessee are hereby dismissed

ITA 233/KOL/2021[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata02 Jan 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawali.T.A. No.233/Kol/2021 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Dcit, Circle-11(1), Kolkata...………….........…..................….…… Appellant Vs. M/S Iris Health Services Ltd...…..……...…........…...…...…..…..... Respondent 82/1, Raja Subodh Ch. Mullick Road, Kolkata-700047. [Pan: Aabci8499M] Co No.18/Kol/2021 (Arising Out Of Ita 233/Kol/2021) Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/S Iris Health Services Ltd...…..……...…........…...…...…..…..... Cross-Objector 82/1, Raja Subodh Ch. Mullick Road, Kolkata-700047. [Pan: Aabci8499M] Vs. Dcit, Circle-11(1), Kolkata...………….........…..................….…… Respondent Appearances By: Shri Sunil Surana, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri D.K. Sonawal, Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : November 24, 2022 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : January 02, 2023 आदेश / Order संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य "वारा / Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Revenue & Cross-Objection By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 24.09.2020 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-4, Kolkata [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’).

Section 131Section 250Section 68

…x reported in (1992) 60 CCH 0516(Cal.) The appellant has also relied upon following judicial pronouncements in support of its above contention:- (a) V.R. Global Energy (P) Ltd. vs. Income Tax Officer, (2018) 305 CTR (Mad) 228: (2018) 170 DTR (Mad) 412 (2018) 407 ITR 145 (Mad); (b) Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1), P-7, Kolkata vs. M/s Dazzle Projects Pvt. Ltd., ITA No.757/Kol/2018, ITAT Kolkata Bench-C, Kolkata; (c) M/s. Abhijeet Enterprise Ltd. vs. Income-tax Officer, Wd-2(2), Kolkata, 1.T.A. No. 308/Kol/2017, ITAT Kolkata-C Bench, Kolkata; (d) H.H. Sri Rama Verma vs. Commissioner Of Income Tax, (1991) 187 ITR 30…

I.T.O., Ward-1(2), Kolkata vs. M/S Lifewood Infotech Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

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

ITA 784/KOL/2019[2012-13]Status: HeardITAT Kolkata04 Nov 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumar

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

…is running into 11 pages. But in these 11 pages, he has reproduced the parts of the judgment of the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of Jatia 4 Assessment Year: 2012-2013 M/s. Lifewood Infotech Pvt. Limited Investment Company –vs.- CIT reported in 206 ITR 718 and the order of ITAT in ITA No. 1141/KOL/2017 from pages no. 4 to 11. Apart from this reproduction of these two orders his own devotion to the issue is only in two paragraphs. In Paragraphs no. 2 to 6, he has briefly mentioned the facts about filing of return, issuance of notice under section 143(2) and 142(1), grounds of appeal raised by the…

Shri Shri Sudhir Kumar Jha, Bhilai(Cg) vs. The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax 1(1), Bhilai, Bhilai(Cg)

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 90/BIL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur17 Oct 2022AY 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri R.B.Doshi, CAFor Respondent: Shri G.N.Singh, Sr. DR

Section 69

…arisen for consideration of the High Court. The High Court misdirected itself and committed error in disturbing the concurrent findings of facts. [Para 24] Thus, the appeals of the revenue deserved to be allowed. ii) V. R. Global Energy P. Ltd. Vs ITO (2018) 407 ITR 145 (Mad.), SLP dismissed in (2019) 106 CCH 190 (SC), PN 14 to 20 of PB, relevant finding on PN 18 para no. 19 & 20. SLP dismissal on PN 20, held as under :- The cash credits towards share capital were admittedly only by way of book adjustment and not actual receipts which could not be substantiated as receipts towards share subscription money. [Para…

DCIT, Circle- 18(1), New Delhi vs. Ncr Business Park Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

Appeal stands allowed in favour of the Assessee

ITA 6646/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Jun 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Anubhav Sharmadcit, Vs. Ncr Business Park Pvt. Ltd, Circle-18(1), 3, Shivji Marg, Westend Greens New Delhi Rangpuri, Delhi Pan: Aacck7819E (Appellant) (Respondent) Ncr Business Park Pvt. Ltd, Vs. Dcit, 3, Shivji Marg, Westend Circle-18(1), Greens Rangpuri, Delhi New Delhi Pan: Aacck7819E (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Kapil Goel, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Garima Sharma, Sr. DR

Section 14Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 2(13)Section 68

…. Admittedly during the relevant year no cash was actually infused in the fund flow of company. There was mere dressing of accounts. As for the purpose of invoking Section 68 of the Act, Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of VR Global Energy Pvt. Ltd. ITO, 407 ITR 145 (Madras) has held that where the assessee allotted shares to a company in settlement of pre-existing liability of assessee to the said company by way of adjustment and since no cash was involved in transaction of said allotment of shares, conversion of these liabilities into share capital and share premium could not be treated as unexplained cash…

Ncr Business Park Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle- 18(1), New Delhi

Appeal stands allowed in favour of the Assessee

ITA 6595/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Jun 2022AY 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Kapil Goel, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Garima Sharma, Sr. DR

Section 14Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 2(13)Section 68

Suncap Commodities Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-1(3)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 4953/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Jun 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Sri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Sri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Jm Suncap Commodities Private The Dy. Commissioner Of Limited Income-Tax, Circle-1(3)(1), 302, 3Rd Floor, Kumar Plaza, 540, 5Th Floor, Aayakar Kalina Kurla Road, Near Vs. Bhavan, Mk Road, Kalina Masid, Santacruz Mumbai-400 020 (East), Mumbai-400 029 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaccn2950K

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sri Shekhar L. Gajbhiye, CIT DR

Section 63Section 68

…appellant has contended that it has credited Manali/ Stephen by way of journal/ book adjustment entry and no flow of cash was there to the appellant. During appellate proceedings, the appellant has relied upon some case laws, i.e. Jatia Investment Co. v. CIT 206 ITR 718 (Cal), ACIT v. Kerala Transport Company 50 ITD 189 (Ker.), ACIT v. Mahendra Kumar Agarwal 142 TTJ 35 (Jaipur). I have gone through these judgments and find the facts of appellant's case to be distinguishable, as discussed below: a) In the case of Jatia Investment Co. (supra), the cash book showed that there was merely a circulation of cash endin…

Bansal Rice Traders, Sangrur vs. ITO-Ward, Sangrur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 90/CHANDI/2020[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh31 Jan 2022AY 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Ranjit Kaur, Sr. DR

Section 144Section 148

…am (Dead) through LRs Vs. CIT 357 ITR 133 (SC) • CIT Vs. Mukta Metal Works 336 ITR 555 (P&H) • UOP LLC Vs. ADIT, ITAT, Delhi “F” Bench 108 ITD 186 • CIT Vs. Gani Bhai Wahab Bhai 232 ITR 900 (MP) • Electra (Jaipur)(P) Ltd. Vs. Inspecting Assistant Commissioner 26 ITD 236 (Del) • CIT vs. Parimal Kanti Chanda 291 ITR 77 (Gauhati) • Hingora Industries Ltd. Vs. ITO in ITA No. 2109/Ahd/2008 (Ahd Trib)) • DCIT Vs. Mukesh Kumar Aggarwal in ITA No. 374/Agra/2010 (Agra Trib) • DCIT vS. Rohini Builders 256 ITR 360 (Guj) 5.2 The Ld. CIT asked the comment of the A.O. on the above submissions of the assessee. In response the…

ITO, Ward- 27(4), New Dlehi vs. Zexus Air Services Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue as well as the CO filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 2608/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Apr 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year: 2014-15 Ito, Vs Zexus Air Services Pvt. Ltd., Ward-27(4), 148-149, Centrum Plaza, New Delhi. Sector-53, Dlf Phase-V, Gurgaon. Pan: Aaacz6541L Co No.121/Del/2018 (Ita No.2608/Del/2018) Assessment Year: 2014-15 Zexus Air Services Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Ito, 148-149, Centrum Plaza, Ward-27(4), Sector-53, Dlf Phase-V, New Delhi. Gurgaon. Pan: Aaacz6541L (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Gaurav Bansal, Ca Revenue By : Smt. Sushma Singh, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 31.03.2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 23.04.2021 Order Per R.K. Panda, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Dated 12Th January, 2018 Of The Cit(A)-9, New Delhi, Relating To Assessment Year 2014-15. Co No.121/Del/2018 The Assessee Has Filed The Co Against The Appeal Filed By The Revenue. For The Sake Of Convenience, These Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Common Order.

For Appellant: Shri Gaurav Bansal, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Sushma Singh, CIT-DR

Section 68

…fore, the ld. CIT(A) was fully justified in deleting the addition. The ld. Counsel for the assessee relied on the following decisions:- i) V.R. Global Energy Pvt. Ltd. vs. ITO, 407 ITR 145 (Madras); 14 CO No.121/Del/2018 ii) Jatia Investment Company vs. CIT, 206 ITR 718; ACIT vs. Shri Suren Goel, ITA No.1767/Del/2011, order dated 1st iii) December, 2011; iv) ITO vs. Anand Enterprises Ltd., ITA No.1614/Kol/2016; v) ACIT vs. Mahendra Kumar Agarwal, 23 taxmann.com 285; vi) Abhijeet Enterprises Ltd. vs. ITO, ITA No.308/Kol/2017; vii) ITO vs. Bhagawat Marcom Pvt. Ltd., 109 taxman.com 350; viii) H.H. Sri Rama Verma v…

M/S.Frohar Trading Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer 6(3)1, Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of the assessees are allowed

ITA 543/MUM/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Apr 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Amarjit Singhassessment Year: 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Vishnu Aggarwal, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Leena Srivastav, D.R

Section 143(1)Section 68

…10. ITO vs. Sunglow Dealcom Pvt. Ltd. ITA 2178/Kol/2016 (Kolkata Trbi) 11. DCIT vs. P.N. Memorial Neuro Centre & Research Ltd. ITA 1383/Kol/2015 (Kolkata Trbi) 12. ITO vs. DSR Impex Pvt. Ltd. ITA 2087/Kol/2017 (Kolkata Trbi) 13. Jatia Investment vs. CIT Ltd. 206 ITR 718 (Cal-HC) 14. ITO vs. V.R. Global Energy (P) Ltd. 113 taxmann.com 31 (SC) 15. V.R. Global Energy (P) Ltd. vs. ITO 96 taxmann.com 647 (Madras HC) 16. ACIT vs. Paras Healthcare P. Ltd. ITA 2207/Del/2012 (Delhi Trib) 6. The Ld. D.R., on the other hand, relied heavily on the order of authorities below. 7. We have heard the rival submissions of both…

ITO, New Delhi vs. M/S. Elative Building Solutions Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 2498/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Mar 2021AY 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Sudesh Garg, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Jagdish Singh, Sr. DR

…to various decisions, he submitted that under identical circumstances, the addition made u/s 68 of the Act was deleted by the Tribunal since there was no actual cash transactions. He also relied on the following decisions:- 12 i) Jatia Investment Co. Vs. CIT 206 ITR 718(Cal); ii) ITO vs. M/s Vital Communication Ltd., ITA No.2448/Del/2007, order dated 15.06.2016; iii) V. R. Global Energy Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ITO, 407 ITR 145 (Mad); H.H. Sri Rama Verma vs. CIT, reported in 57 Taxman 149 (SC). iv) v) CIT vs. Sohan Lal Singhania, (1999) 235 ITR 616 (All); vi) Blooming Tradelink Pvt. Ltd. vs. ITO, ITA No.2691/Kol/2018, orde…

ITO, Ward - 1(4), Kolkata vs. M/S. Josan Deposits & Advances Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2096/KOL/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 Dec 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri P. M. Jagtap, Vice- & Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

Section 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 263Section 68

…ourt in the case of Amonbolu Rajaiyah in 102 ITR 423; The Allahabad High Court in the case of Saru Smelting and Refining Co. 116 ITR 766; CIT vs. Gopal Krishna Singhania 193 ITR 274; Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of Jatia Investments co. reported in 206 ITR 718 and a host of other judgments already discussed earlier. All the judgments support the proposition that the word sum means money introduced in cash or by cheque. Moreover by purchasing the shares of allottee companies and issuing its own shares against such purchase, the assessee is not enriched by any fresh introduction of any cash or sum to be…

I.T.O., Ward-1(3), Kolkata vs. M/S Trilokpati Exim Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 477/KOL/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 Sept 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.477/Kol/2019 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2012-13)

For Appellant: Shri Ram Bilash Meena, CITFor Respondent: ShriVinod Kr. Jain, FCA

Section 143(3)Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A”, BENCH KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI A. T. VARKEY, JM &DR. A.L.SAINI, AM आयकरअपीलसं./ITA No.477/Kol/2019 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2012-13) ITO, Ward-1(3), Kolkata Vs. M/s Trilokpati Exim Pvt. Ltd. 14C, M. D. Road, 4th Floor, Kolkata-700007. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: AAECT 1933 G (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri Ram Bilash Meena, CIT Respondent by :ShriVinod Kr. Jain, FCA सुनवाईक"तार"ख/ Date of Hearing : 27/07/2020 घोषणाक"तार"ख/Date of Pronouncement : 16/09/2020 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. A.L. Saini, AM: The captioned appeal filed by the Revenue,…