Khoday Distilleries Ltd. v. CIT & Anr.

176 Taxmann 142Supreme Court of India2009#15515 most cited
6

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2023 to 2026.

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 56(2)(viia)Section 119Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 250(6)Section 56(2)(vii)(c)Section 56(2)(viib)

Issues it is cited on

section 56(2)(vii)(c)section 56(2)(viia)section 47section 56(2)(vii)section 56(2)fair market valuesection 56section 50section 119limited scrutinysection 142unexplained investment

Judgments citing Khoday Distilleries Ltd. v. CIT & Anr.

GAURAV VINIMAY PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 8(1),, KOLKATA

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

ITA 2306/KOL/2025[205-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Feb 2026

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 50DSection 56(2)Section 56(2)(viia)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA ‘B’ BENCH, KOLKATA Before SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI RAKESH MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.: 2306/KOL/2025 Assessment Year: 2015-16 Gaurav Vinimay Pvt. Ltd. D.C.I.T., Circle-8(1), Kolkata Vs. (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN: AACCG4269Q Appearances: Assessee represented by : Sanjay Bhattacharaya, FCA. Department represented by : P.N. Barnwal, CIT, DR. Date of concluding the hearing : 11-December-2025 Date of pronouncing the order : 10-February-2026 ORDER PER RAKESH MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: This appeal filed by the assessee is against the order of the Co…

FRAGMENT NIVESH P.LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-13, NEW DELHI

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

ITA 572/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Sept 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri M Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumarassessment Year: 2015-16 M/S. Enormous Nivesh Pvt. Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Ltd., 1, Zamrudpur Community Income Tax, Central Circle Centre, Kailash Colony, 13, Ara Centre, New Delhi – 1100 48 Jhandewalan Extension, Pan No. Aabcd1454F Delhi -1100 55 (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2015-16 M/S. Fragment Nivesh P. Ltd., Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of 1, Zamrudpur Community Income Tax, Central Circle Centre, Kailash Colony, 13, Ara Centre, New Delhi – 1100 48 Jhandewalan Extension, Pan No. Aaecs5314G Delhi -1100 55 (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Manoj Kataruka, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Kumar Avikal Manu, CIT - DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250(6)Section 56(2)

…Agro Portfolio Vs. PCIT. Ld. AO failed to reduce mortgage loan of ICICI Bank. Rule 11UA was not applicable. The apex Court in the case of Khoday Distilleries Ltd. vs. CIT & Anr. (2008) 220 CTR (SC) 228: (2008) 15 DTR (SC) 126: (2008) 307 ITR 312 (SC): (2008) 176 Taxmann 142 (SC), after referring to the decision in the case of Shri Gopal Jalan & Co. vs. Calcutta Stock Exchange Association Ltd. 1964 (3) SCC 698, noted the question arose as to the amendment of the word "allotment" held that the word "allotment" means appropriation out of previously unappropriated capital of a company, of a certain number of shares…

ENORMOUS NIVESH P.LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-13, NEW DELHI

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

ITA 570/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Sept 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri M Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumarassessment Year: 2015-16 M/S. Enormous Nivesh Pvt. Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Ltd., 1, Zamrudpur Community Income Tax, Central Circle Centre, Kailash Colony, 13, Ara Centre, New Delhi – 1100 48 Jhandewalan Extension, Pan No. Aabcd1454F Delhi -1100 55 (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2015-16 M/S. Fragment Nivesh P. Ltd., Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of 1, Zamrudpur Community Income Tax, Central Circle Centre, Kailash Colony, 13, Ara Centre, New Delhi – 1100 48 Jhandewalan Extension, Pan No. Aaecs5314G Delhi -1100 55 (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Manoj Kataruka, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Kumar Avikal Manu, CIT - DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250(6)Section 56(2)

…Agro Portfolio Vs. PCIT. Ld. AO failed to reduce mortgage loan of ICICI Bank. Rule 11UA was not applicable. The apex Court in the case of Khoday Distilleries Ltd. vs. CIT & Anr. (2008) 220 CTR (SC) 228: (2008) 15 DTR (SC) 126: (2008) 307 ITR 312 (SC): (2008) 176 Taxmann 142 (SC), after referring to the decision in the case of Shri Gopal Jalan & Co. vs. Calcutta Stock Exchange Association Ltd. 1964 (3) SCC 698, noted the question arose as to the amendment of the word "allotment" held that the word "allotment" means appropriation out of previously unappropriated capital of a company, of a certain number of shares…

THERMODYNE DYNAMICS PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD -17(3), HYDERABAD

ITA 500/HYD/2024[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad03 Jul 2025AY 2013-2014

Bench: Us :

For Appellant: Shri Pawan KumarFor Respondent: Shri B. Balakrishna -CIT-
Section 11USection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 234BSection 56

…sfer under Sec.56(2)(vii)(c) and accordingly, such provision would not be applicable on the issuance of shared by the Company in the hands of the allottee. 19. The Apex Court in the case of Khoday Distilleries Ltd. vs. CIT reported in [2008] 307 ITR 312 (SC) (176 Taxmann 142)], after referring to the decision in the case of Shri Gopal Jalan & Co. vs. Calcutta Stock Exchange Association Ltd., reported in 1964 (3) SCC 698, noted the question arose as to the amendment of the word "allotment" held that the word "allotment" means appropriation out 33 Thermodyne Dynamics Private Limited Vs. ITO of previously unapprop…

SILLS KARINGATTIL JOSE,NEDUMKANDOM vs. ITO WARD 2, THODUPUZHA

Appeal is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 132/COCH/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin19 Nov 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singhsils Karingattil Jose Income Tax Officer Np 3/406, Karingattil Ward - 2, House, Munnar Road Thodupuzha Vs. Nedumkandom P.O. [Pan: Afopj8789C] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri P. M. Veeramani, CAFor Respondent: Smt. V. Swarnalatha, Sr. D.R
Section 2(47)Section 2(47)(V)Section 250Section 50CSection 53ASection 56(2)(vii)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH, COCHIN Before Shri Satbeer Singh Godara, Judicial Member & Shri Amarjit Singh, Accountant Member Sils Karingattil Jose Income Tax Officer NP 3/406, Karingattil Ward - 2, House, Munnar Road Thodupuzha vs. Nedumkandom P.O. [PAN: AFOPJ8789C] (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by: Shri P. M. Veeramani, CA Respondent by: Smt. V. Swarnalatha, Sr. D.R. Date of Hearing: 22.08.2024 Date of Pronouncement: 19.11.2024 O R D E R Per Satbeer Singh Godara, Judicial Member: This assessee’s appeal for A.Y. 2016-17 arises against the CIT(A)/National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delh…

KANTI COMMERCIAL (P) LTD.,,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-13, NEW DELHI

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

ITA 574/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Sept 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: SHRI PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA (Accountant Member), SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. (Judicial Member)

Section 119Section 143(3)Section 56(2)(viia)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘C’: NEW DELHI BEFORE, SHRI PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S., JUDICIAL MEMBER M/s Kanti Commercial ACIT Pvt. Ltd. Central Circle-13 1, Zamrudpur Vs. New Delhi Community Centre Kailash Colony New Delhi-110 048 PAN-AACCK 1191P (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by None Respondent by Mr. Waseem Arshad, CIT-DR Date of Hearing 04/09/2023 Date of Pronouncement 14/09/2023 ORDER PER YOGESH KUMAR U.S., JM: This appeal by Assessee is filed against the order of Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-XXVI, New Delhi [“Ld. CIT(A…