KeshrichandJaisukhlal v. CIT

199 ITR 702High Court1993#1829 most cited

What is KeshrichandJaisukhlal v. CIT authority for?

Notional income, such as notional interest on interest-free loans, cannot be brought to tax without a specific statutory provision in the Income Tax Act. Only real income that has accrued or been received by the assessee is subject to income tax.

62

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2010 to 2024.

Also referred to as

Keshrichand Jaisukhlal v. CIT · Highways Construction Co. Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT · 199 ITR 702 · notional income · notional interest · interest-free loans · real income · taxability · section 36(1)(iii) · section 28(iv) · commercial expediency · Gauhati High Court

Sections most often in play

Section 142(1)Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 36(1)(iii)Section 37

Issues it is cited on

section 28(iv)surrender of incomeright to receivemercantile system of accountingloose paperssection 36(1)(iii)commercial expediencysection 28section 234apenalty u/s 271(1)(c)section 133asection 131

Judgments citing KeshrichandJaisukhlal v. CIT

Shyam Sunder Jindal, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle- 30, New Delhi

In the result the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 6298/DEL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Jun 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Kuldip Singh

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Prakash Dubey, Sr. DR
Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)Section 69

…es within the terms of funds/loan advanced. • CIT vs. Goyal M.G. Gases (P) Ltd.: 303 ITR 159 (Del.) • B & A Plantations and Industries vs. CIT: 242 ITR 22 (Gau.) • KeshrichandJaisukhlal vs. CIT: 248 ITR 47 (Gau.) • Highways Construction Co. Pvt. Ltd vs. CIT: 199 ITR 702 (Gau.) • Jwala Prasad Radha Krishna vs. CIT [1992]: 198 ITR 415 (All) • CIT vs. Punjab Financial Corpn. Ltd.: 295 ITR 510 (P&H HC) • CIT vs. South India Corpn. (Agencies) Ltd.: 293 ITR 237 (Chennai HC) • CIT vs. Sanghi Finance and Investment Ltd.: 190 CTR 207 (MP) ITA 2892 to 2894/D/2017 ITA 3952 to 3956/D/2017 6.4 We have considered rival submi…

Shyam Sunder Jindal, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle- 30, New Delhi

In the result the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 6297/DEL/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Jun 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Kuldip Singh

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Prakash Dubey, Sr. DR
Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)Section 69

…es within the terms of funds/loan advanced. • CIT vs. Goyal M.G. Gases (P) Ltd.: 303 ITR 159 (Del.) • B & A Plantations and Industries vs. CIT: 242 ITR 22 (Gau.) • KeshrichandJaisukhlal vs. CIT: 248 ITR 47 (Gau.) • Highways Construction Co. Pvt. Ltd vs. CIT: 199 ITR 702 (Gau.) • Jwala Prasad Radha Krishna vs. CIT [1992]: 198 ITR 415 (All) • CIT vs. Punjab Financial Corpn. Ltd.: 295 ITR 510 (P&H HC) • CIT vs. South India Corpn. (Agencies) Ltd.: 293 ITR 237 (Chennai HC) • CIT vs. Sanghi Finance and Investment Ltd.: 190 CTR 207 (MP) ITA 2892 to 2894/D/2017 ITA 3952 to 3956/D/2017 6.4 We have considered rival submi…

Shyam Sunder Jindal, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle- 30, New Delhi

In the result the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 6296/DEL/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Jun 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Kuldip Singh

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Prakash Dubey, Sr. DR
Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)Section 69

…es within the terms of funds/loan advanced. • CIT vs. Goyal M.G. Gases (P) Ltd.: 303 ITR 159 (Del.) • B & A Plantations and Industries vs. CIT: 242 ITR 22 (Gau.) • KeshrichandJaisukhlal vs. CIT: 248 ITR 47 (Gau.) • Highways Construction Co. Pvt. Ltd vs. CIT: 199 ITR 702 (Gau.) • Jwala Prasad Radha Krishna vs. CIT [1992]: 198 ITR 415 (All) • CIT vs. Punjab Financial Corpn. Ltd.: 295 ITR 510 (P&H HC) • CIT vs. South India Corpn. (Agencies) Ltd.: 293 ITR 237 (Chennai HC) • CIT vs. Sanghi Finance and Investment Ltd.: 190 CTR 207 (MP) ITA 2892 to 2894/D/2017 ITA 3952 to 3956/D/2017 6.4 We have considered rival submi…

Shyam Sunder Jindal, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle- 30, New Delhi

In the result the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 6295/DEL/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Jun 2021AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Kuldip Singh

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Prakash Dubey, Sr. DR
Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)Section 69

…es within the terms of funds/loan advanced. • CIT vs. Goyal M.G. Gases (P) Ltd.: 303 ITR 159 (Del.) • B & A Plantations and Industries vs. CIT: 242 ITR 22 (Gau.) • KeshrichandJaisukhlal vs. CIT: 248 ITR 47 (Gau.) • Highways Construction Co. Pvt. Ltd vs. CIT: 199 ITR 702 (Gau.) • Jwala Prasad Radha Krishna vs. CIT [1992]: 198 ITR 415 (All) • CIT vs. Punjab Financial Corpn. Ltd.: 295 ITR 510 (P&H HC) • CIT vs. South India Corpn. (Agencies) Ltd.: 293 ITR 237 (Chennai HC) • CIT vs. Sanghi Finance and Investment Ltd.: 190 CTR 207 (MP) ITA 2892 to 2894/D/2017 ITA 3952 to 3956/D/2017 6.4 We have considered rival submi…

Mortex India, Kolkata vs. ACIT, Cir-44, Kolkata

In the result, this ground of the assessee is allowed

ITA 269/KOL/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Apr 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri Aby T. Varkey)

Section 250Section 43B

…. The difference amount of 3% was treated as notional income of the assessee and taxed by the AO. It is well settled that notional interest cannot be brought to tax. The Hon’ble Gauhati High Court in the case of Highways Construction Company Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT 199 ITR 702(Gau.) held as follows: “Section 143 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Assessment - Additions to income - Assessment years 1978-79 and 1979-80 - Assessee-company had given interest-free loans and advances to certain parties, including its managing director-ITO added notional amount of interest that should have been charged from those parties to total…

Sagar Vincom (P) Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, WD.-3(3), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 433/KOL/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Apr 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Hon’Ble] [Through Virtual Court] I.T.A. No. 433/Kol/2020 Assessment Year: 2014-15 M/S. Sagar Vincom Pvt. Ltd................................………………............................................Appellant C/O. M/S. Salarpuria Jajodia & Co. 7, C.R. Avenue, 3Rd Floor, Kolkata – 700 072. [Pan: Aalcs 5250 N] Vs. Ito, Ward – 3(3), Kolkata …………………………….........................................................Respondent 110, Shantipally, E.M. By-Pass, Kolkata – 700 107. Appearances By: Shri Siddharth Jhajharia, Ar Appearing On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri Jayanta Khanra, Jcit, Sr. Dr Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : April 8Th, 2021 Date Of Pronouncing The Order April 21St, 2021 Order This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Directed Against The Order Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) – 16, Kolkata [Hereinafter The “Cit(A)] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (The ‘Act’), Dated 06.02.2020 For The Assessment Year 2014-15 On The Following Grounds: “I. For That In View Of The Facts & In The Circumstances, The Ld. Cit(A) Was Unjustified In Affirming The Action Of The Ao In Disallowing The Claim Of Deduction Of Rs. 14,00,000/- U/S 35(1)(Ii) & Thus Erred & In View Of The Facts & In The Circumstances Such Sum Is Fully Allowable & It May Be Held Accordingly. Ii. Without Prejudice To Ground No. 1 Above, The Ld. Cit(A) Failed To Follow The Decision Of Jurisdictional Tribunal & In View Of The Facts & In The Circumstances It May Be Held Accordingly. Iii. For That In View Of The Facts & In The Circumstances, The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Affirming The Decision Of The Ao In Disallowing Loss Of Rs.

Section 250Section 35(1)(ii)

…6 are against the addition made on account of deemed interest income. We find that notional income cannot be brought tax under the scheme of the Income Tax Act as held by the Hon’ble Gauhati High Court in the case of Highways Construction Co. Pvt. Ltd. vs CIT 199 ITR 702. 4 I.T.A. No. 433/Kol/2020 Assessment Year: 2014-15 7. Respectfully following the proposition of law laid down in those cases, we delete this addition of notional income and allow this ground of the assessee. 8. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed. Order Pronounced in the Open Court on 21st April, 2021. (J. SUDHAKAR REDDY)…

Mortex India, Kolkata vs. ACIT, Cir-44, Kolkata

In the result, this ground of the assessee is allowed

ITA 270/KOL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Apr 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri Aby T. Varkey)

Section 250Section 43B

…. The difference amount of 3% was treated as notional income of the assessee and taxed by the AO. It is well settled that notional interest cannot be brought to tax. The Hon’ble Gauhati High Court in the case of Highways Construction Company Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT 199 ITR 702(Gau.) held as follows: “Section 143 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Assessment - Additions to income - Assessment years 1978-79 and 1979-80 - Assessee-company had given interest-free loans and advances to certain parties, including its managing director-ITO added notional amount of interest that should have been charged from those parties to total…

M/S. Vbhc Value Homes Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Ward- 7(1)(2), Bangalore

In the result, appeal of the assessee for Assessment Year 2016-17 is partly allowed in the terms indicated above

ITA 37/BANG/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore12 Jun 2020AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri A. K. Garodia & Smt. Beena Pillaiappeal No. & Appellant Respondent Assessment Year M/S. Vbhc Value Homes Pvt. Ltd., Income Tax Officer, 2015-16 74-75 Millers Road, Vasanthnagar, Ward – 7(1)(3), Bengaluru – 560 052. Bengaluru. Pan : Aaccv 7868 G The Assistant Commissioner 2016-17 -Do- Of Income Tax, Ward – 7(1)(2), Bengaluru. S.P. No. & Appellant Respondent Assessment Year 29/Bang/2020 M/S. Vbhc Value Homes Income Tax Officer, 2015-16 Pvt. Ltd., Ward – 7(1)(3), (In Ita No.2541/Bang/2019) Pan : Aaccv 7868 G Bengaluru. 59/Bang/2020 -Do- The Assistant Commissioner 2016-17 Of Income Tax, (In Ita No. 37/Bang/2020) Ward – 7(1)(2), Bengaluru. Assessee/S.P. By : Shri. S. Ramasubramanian, Ca Revenue By : Ms. Neera Malhotra, Cit(Dr)(Itat), Bengaluru Date Of Hearing : 10/06/2020 Date Of Pronouncement : 12/06/2020 O R D E R Per A. K. Garodia

For Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 14ASection 56(2)

…ding ground No.2, he submitted that the notional addition made by the AO and confirmed by the learned CIT(A) is not justified. He placed reliance on the judgment of Hon’ble Gauhati High Court rendered in the case of Highway Construction Co. Pvt. Ltd., Vs. CIT 199 ITR 702, copy available on pages 57 – 61 of the assessee’s Paper Book. As against this, learned DR of the Revenue filed written submissions regarding ground No.2 in Assessment Year 2015- 16. It was the submission of learned DR of the Revenue that additional evidence filed by the assessee should not be admitted and in this regard, she placed reliance on t…

M/S. Vbhc Value Homes Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward - 7(1)(3), Bangalore

In the result, appeal of the assessee for Assessment Year 2016-17 is partly allowed in the terms indicated above

ITA 2541/BANG/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore12 Jun 2020AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri A. K. Garodia & Smt. Beena Pillaiappeal No. & Appellant Respondent Assessment Year M/S. Vbhc Value Homes Pvt. Ltd., Income Tax Officer, 2015-16 74-75 Millers Road, Vasanthnagar, Ward – 7(1)(3), Bengaluru – 560 052. Bengaluru. Pan : Aaccv 7868 G The Assistant Commissioner 2016-17 -Do- Of Income Tax, Ward – 7(1)(2), Bengaluru. S.P. No. & Appellant Respondent Assessment Year 29/Bang/2020 M/S. Vbhc Value Homes Income Tax Officer, 2015-16 Pvt. Ltd., Ward – 7(1)(3), (In Ita No.2541/Bang/2019) Pan : Aaccv 7868 G Bengaluru. 59/Bang/2020 -Do- The Assistant Commissioner 2016-17 Of Income Tax, (In Ita No. 37/Bang/2020) Ward – 7(1)(2), Bengaluru. Assessee/S.P. By : Shri. S. Ramasubramanian, Ca Revenue By : Ms. Neera Malhotra, Cit(Dr)(Itat), Bengaluru Date Of Hearing : 10/06/2020 Date Of Pronouncement : 12/06/2020 O R D E R Per A. K. Garodia

For Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 14ASection 56(2)

…ding ground No.2, he submitted that the notional addition made by the AO and confirmed by the learned CIT(A) is not justified. He placed reliance on the judgment of Hon’ble Gauhati High Court rendered in the case of Highway Construction Co. Pvt. Ltd., Vs. CIT 199 ITR 702, copy available on pages 57 – 61 of the assessee’s Paper Book. As against this, learned DR of the Revenue filed written submissions regarding ground No.2 in Assessment Year 2015- 16. It was the submission of learned DR of the Revenue that additional evidence filed by the assessee should not be admitted and in this regard, she placed reliance on t…

Harvansh Chawla, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle-5, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 300/DEL/2020[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Jun 2020AY 2017-18

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowladr. B. R. R. Kumar(E-Court Module) Ita No. 300/Del/2020 : Asstt. Year : 2017-18 Harvansh Chawla, Vs Acit, C-17, Nizamuddin East, Circle-5, New Delhi-110014 New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Addpc7559G Assessee By : Sh. Rohit Tiwari, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. Anupam Kant Garg, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 27.05.2020 Date Of Pronouncement: 03.06.2020

For Appellant: Sh. Rohit Tiwari, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Anupam Kant Garg, CIT DR
Section 132Section 153BSection 153cSection 234ASection 271A

…f notional interest to be taxed on the security deposit received by the assessee as per the provisions of Income Tax Act. Relying on the judgment in the case of Godhra Electrical Co. Ltd. Vs CIT 225 ITR 746 (SC) and Highways Constructions Co. Pvt. Ltd. Vs CIT 199 ITR 702 (Gau), he argued that in the absence of any real income or accrual of income, notional interest cannot be brought to tax being a hypothetical income. It was argued that the amount has been continued to be shown as outstanding liability in the assessment year 2017-18 and so as from 2008-09. As per the security deposit clause, the deposit has been…

ACIT, CC- 26, New Delhi vs. Krishan Kumar Modi, New Delhi

In the result, the assessee's appeal is allowed

ITA 3956/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Jul 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawal & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year: 2006-07 Assessment Year: 2006-07 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Krishan Kumar Modi, Acit, A-1, Maharani Bagh, Central Circle – 2, New Delhi. New Delhi. Vs (Pan: Aanpm0159M)

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri J.K. Mishra, C.I.T. DR
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 139(1)Section 69A

…es within the terms of funds/loan advanced. • CIT vs. Goyal M.G. Gases (P) Ltd.: 303 ITR 159 (Del.) • B & A Plantations and Industries vs. CIT: 242 ITR 22 (Gau.) • KeshrichandJaisukhlal vs. CIT: 248 ITR 47 (Gau.) • Highways Construction Co. Pvt. Ltd vs. CIT: 199 ITR 702 (Gau.) • Jwala Prasad Radha Krishna vs. CIT [1992]: 198 ITR 415 (All) • CIT vs. Punjab Financial Corpn. Ltd.: 295 ITR 510 (P&H HC) • CIT vs. South India Corpn. (Agencies) Ltd.: 293 ITR 237 (Chennai HC) • CIT vs. Sanghi Finance and Investment Ltd.: 190 CTR 207 (MP) ITA 2892 to 2894/D/2017 ITA 3952 to 3956/D/2017 6.4 We have considered rival subm…

ACIT, CC- 26, New Delhi vs. Krishan Kumar Modi, New Delhi

In the result, the assessee's appeal is allowed

ITA 3955/DEL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Jul 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawal & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year: 2006-07 Assessment Year: 2006-07 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Krishan Kumar Modi, Acit, A-1, Maharani Bagh, Central Circle – 2, New Delhi. New Delhi. Vs (Pan: Aanpm0159M)

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri J.K. Mishra, C.I.T. DR
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 139(1)Section 69A

…es within the terms of funds/loan advanced. • CIT vs. Goyal M.G. Gases (P) Ltd.: 303 ITR 159 (Del.) • B & A Plantations and Industries vs. CIT: 242 ITR 22 (Gau.) • KeshrichandJaisukhlal vs. CIT: 248 ITR 47 (Gau.) • Highways Construction Co. Pvt. Ltd vs. CIT: 199 ITR 702 (Gau.) • Jwala Prasad Radha Krishna vs. CIT [1992]: 198 ITR 415 (All) • CIT vs. Punjab Financial Corpn. Ltd.: 295 ITR 510 (P&H HC) • CIT vs. South India Corpn. (Agencies) Ltd.: 293 ITR 237 (Chennai HC) • CIT vs. Sanghi Finance and Investment Ltd.: 190 CTR 207 (MP) ITA 2892 to 2894/D/2017 ITA 3952 to 3956/D/2017 6.4 We have considered rival subm…

ACIT, CC- 26, New Delhi vs. Krishan Kumar Modi, New Delhi

In the result, the assessee's appeal is allowed

ITA 3954/DEL/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Jul 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawal & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year: 2006-07 Assessment Year: 2006-07 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Krishan Kumar Modi, Acit, A-1, Maharani Bagh, Central Circle – 2, New Delhi. New Delhi. Vs (Pan: Aanpm0159M)

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri J.K. Mishra, C.I.T. DR
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 139(1)Section 69A

…es within the terms of funds/loan advanced. • CIT vs. Goyal M.G. Gases (P) Ltd.: 303 ITR 159 (Del.) • B & A Plantations and Industries vs. CIT: 242 ITR 22 (Gau.) • KeshrichandJaisukhlal vs. CIT: 248 ITR 47 (Gau.) • Highways Construction Co. Pvt. Ltd vs. CIT: 199 ITR 702 (Gau.) • Jwala Prasad Radha Krishna vs. CIT [1992]: 198 ITR 415 (All) • CIT vs. Punjab Financial Corpn. Ltd.: 295 ITR 510 (P&H HC) • CIT vs. South India Corpn. (Agencies) Ltd.: 293 ITR 237 (Chennai HC) • CIT vs. Sanghi Finance and Investment Ltd.: 190 CTR 207 (MP) ITA 2892 to 2894/D/2017 ITA 3952 to 3956/D/2017 6.4 We have considered rival subm…

ACIT, CC- 26, New Delhi vs. Krishan Kumar Modi, New Delhi

In the result, the assessee's appeal is allowed

ITA 3953/DEL/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Jul 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawal & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year: 2006-07 Assessment Year: 2006-07 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Krishan Kumar Modi, Acit, A-1, Maharani Bagh, Central Circle – 2, New Delhi. New Delhi. Vs (Pan: Aanpm0159M)

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri J.K. Mishra, C.I.T. DR
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 139(1)Section 69A

…es within the terms of funds/loan advanced. • CIT vs. Goyal M.G. Gases (P) Ltd.: 303 ITR 159 (Del.) • B & A Plantations and Industries vs. CIT: 242 ITR 22 (Gau.) • KeshrichandJaisukhlal vs. CIT: 248 ITR 47 (Gau.) • Highways Construction Co. Pvt. Ltd vs. CIT: 199 ITR 702 (Gau.) • Jwala Prasad Radha Krishna vs. CIT [1992]: 198 ITR 415 (All) • CIT vs. Punjab Financial Corpn. Ltd.: 295 ITR 510 (P&H HC) • CIT vs. South India Corpn. (Agencies) Ltd.: 293 ITR 237 (Chennai HC) • CIT vs. Sanghi Finance and Investment Ltd.: 190 CTR 207 (MP) ITA 2892 to 2894/D/2017 ITA 3952 to 3956/D/2017 6.4 We have considered rival subm…

ACIT, CC- 26, New Delhi vs. Krishan Kumar Modi, New Delhi

In the result, the assessee's appeal is allowed

ITA 3952/DEL/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Jul 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawal & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year: 2006-07 Assessment Year: 2006-07 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Krishan Kumar Modi, Acit, A-1, Maharani Bagh, Central Circle – 2, New Delhi. New Delhi. Vs (Pan: Aanpm0159M)

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri J.K. Mishra, C.I.T. DR
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 139(1)Section 69A

…es within the terms of funds/loan advanced. • CIT vs. Goyal M.G. Gases (P) Ltd.: 303 ITR 159 (Del.) • B & A Plantations and Industries vs. CIT: 242 ITR 22 (Gau.) • KeshrichandJaisukhlal vs. CIT: 248 ITR 47 (Gau.) • Highways Construction Co. Pvt. Ltd vs. CIT: 199 ITR 702 (Gau.) • Jwala Prasad Radha Krishna vs. CIT [1992]: 198 ITR 415 (All) • CIT vs. Punjab Financial Corpn. Ltd.: 295 ITR 510 (P&H HC) • CIT vs. South India Corpn. (Agencies) Ltd.: 293 ITR 237 (Chennai HC) • CIT vs. Sanghi Finance and Investment Ltd.: 190 CTR 207 (MP) ITA 2892 to 2894/D/2017 ITA 3952 to 3956/D/2017 6.4 We have considered rival subm…

ACIT, CC- 26, New Delhi vs. Krishan Kumar Modi, New Delhi

In the result, the assessee's appeal is allowed

ITA 3951/DEL/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Jul 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawal & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year: 2006-07 Assessment Year: 2006-07 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Krishan Kumar Modi, Acit, A-1, Maharani Bagh, Central Circle – 2, New Delhi. New Delhi. Vs (Pan: Aanpm0159M)

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri J.K. Mishra, C.I.T. DR
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 139(1)Section 69A

…es within the terms of funds/loan advanced. • CIT vs. Goyal M.G. Gases (P) Ltd.: 303 ITR 159 (Del.) • B & A Plantations and Industries vs. CIT: 242 ITR 22 (Gau.) • KeshrichandJaisukhlal vs. CIT: 248 ITR 47 (Gau.) • Highways Construction Co. Pvt. Ltd vs. CIT: 199 ITR 702 (Gau.) • Jwala Prasad Radha Krishna vs. CIT [1992]: 198 ITR 415 (All) • CIT vs. Punjab Financial Corpn. Ltd.: 295 ITR 510 (P&H HC) • CIT vs. South India Corpn. (Agencies) Ltd.: 293 ITR 237 (Chennai HC) • CIT vs. Sanghi Finance and Investment Ltd.: 190 CTR 207 (MP) ITA 2892 to 2894/D/2017 ITA 3952 to 3956/D/2017 6.4 We have considered rival subm…

Sh. Krishan Kumar Modi, New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, the assessee's appeal is allowed

ITA 2894/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Jul 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawal & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year: 2006-07 Assessment Year: 2006-07 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Krishan Kumar Modi, Acit, A-1, Maharani Bagh, Central Circle – 2, New Delhi. New Delhi. Vs (Pan: Aanpm0159M)

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri J.K. Mishra, C.I.T. DR
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 139(1)Section 69A

…es within the terms of funds/loan advanced. • CIT vs. Goyal M.G. Gases (P) Ltd.: 303 ITR 159 (Del.) • B & A Plantations and Industries vs. CIT: 242 ITR 22 (Gau.) • KeshrichandJaisukhlal vs. CIT: 248 ITR 47 (Gau.) • Highways Construction Co. Pvt. Ltd vs. CIT: 199 ITR 702 (Gau.) • Jwala Prasad Radha Krishna vs. CIT [1992]: 198 ITR 415 (All) • CIT vs. Punjab Financial Corpn. Ltd.: 295 ITR 510 (P&H HC) • CIT vs. South India Corpn. (Agencies) Ltd.: 293 ITR 237 (Chennai HC) • CIT vs. Sanghi Finance and Investment Ltd.: 190 CTR 207 (MP) ITA 2892 to 2894/D/2017 ITA 3952 to 3956/D/2017 6.4 We have considered rival subm…

Sh. Krishan Kumar Modi, New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, the assessee's appeal is allowed

ITA 2893/DEL/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Jul 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawal & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year: 2006-07 Assessment Year: 2006-07 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Krishan Kumar Modi, Acit, A-1, Maharani Bagh, Central Circle – 2, New Delhi. New Delhi. Vs (Pan: Aanpm0159M)

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri J.K. Mishra, C.I.T. DR
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 139(1)Section 69A

…es within the terms of funds/loan advanced. • CIT vs. Goyal M.G. Gases (P) Ltd.: 303 ITR 159 (Del.) • B & A Plantations and Industries vs. CIT: 242 ITR 22 (Gau.) • KeshrichandJaisukhlal vs. CIT: 248 ITR 47 (Gau.) • Highways Construction Co. Pvt. Ltd vs. CIT: 199 ITR 702 (Gau.) • Jwala Prasad Radha Krishna vs. CIT [1992]: 198 ITR 415 (All) • CIT vs. Punjab Financial Corpn. Ltd.: 295 ITR 510 (P&H HC) • CIT vs. South India Corpn. (Agencies) Ltd.: 293 ITR 237 (Chennai HC) • CIT vs. Sanghi Finance and Investment Ltd.: 190 CTR 207 (MP) ITA 2892 to 2894/D/2017 ITA 3952 to 3956/D/2017 6.4 We have considered rival subm…

Sh. Krishan Kumar Modi, New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, the assessee's appeal is allowed

ITA 2892/DEL/2017[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Jul 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawal & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year: 2006-07 Assessment Year: 2006-07 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Krishan Kumar Modi, Acit, A-1, Maharani Bagh, Central Circle – 2, New Delhi. New Delhi. Vs (Pan: Aanpm0159M)

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri J.K. Mishra, C.I.T. DR
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 139(1)Section 69A

…es within the terms of funds/loan advanced. • CIT vs. Goyal M.G. Gases (P) Ltd.: 303 ITR 159 (Del.) • B & A Plantations and Industries vs. CIT: 242 ITR 22 (Gau.) • KeshrichandJaisukhlal vs. CIT: 248 ITR 47 (Gau.) • Highways Construction Co. Pvt. Ltd vs. CIT: 199 ITR 702 (Gau.) • Jwala Prasad Radha Krishna vs. CIT [1992]: 198 ITR 415 (All) • CIT vs. Punjab Financial Corpn. Ltd.: 295 ITR 510 (P&H HC) • CIT vs. South India Corpn. (Agencies) Ltd.: 293 ITR 237 (Chennai HC) • CIT vs. Sanghi Finance and Investment Ltd.: 190 CTR 207 (MP) ITA 2892 to 2894/D/2017 ITA 3952 to 3956/D/2017 6.4 We have considered rival subm…

Red Fort Shahjahan Properties Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle-21(1), New Delhi

The appeal is allowed with above direction

ITA 7239/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Jun 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishired Fort Shahjahan Properties Vs. Dcit, Pvt. Ltd, Circle-21(1), N-226, Lgf, Greater Kailash-1, New Delhi New Delhi Pan: Aadcr6247E (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri K. M. Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Shri H. K. Choudhary, CIT DR
Section 143Section 144Section 144CSection 92C(3)Section 92D

…d (Gujarat) 217 Taxman 105 d. Maruti securities Ltd vs Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax (Hyderabad) ITA number 1651/HYD/2017. e. Seth Madan Lal Modi vs CIT (Delhi) 261 ITR 49 f. CIT vs Modipon Ltd 171 ITR 658 g. Highway Construction Co Private Limited vs CIT 199 ITR 702 17. The learned authorised representative also submitted that the board resolution dated 29/09/2018 has also written off the principal amount of loan amounting to Rs. 21,40,00,000 is given to red Fort Akbar private limited in view of the fact that the chances of the recovery of even the principal amount of loan is negligible. In this regard vari…