Krishan Murari Lal Agarwal v. DCIT

59 SOT 136Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2013#25305 most cited
3

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 348,615 Indian tax judgments — from 2018 to 2022.

Judgments citing Krishan Murari Lal Agarwal v. DCIT

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Futurz Next Services Ltd., New Delhi

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

ITA 3556/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Jan 2022AY 2011-12
For Appellant: Shri Ved Jain, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Satpal Gulati, CIT, DR
Section 132Section 142Section 153A

…Sethi in ITA No. 569/2009 dated 03.02.2010 (Delhi HC); iii) CIT v. Creative Dyeing & Printing Pvt. Ltd. [2009] 318 ITR 476 (Del); 35 iv) CIT v. Arvind Kumar Jain in ITA No. 589 of 2011 dated 30.09.2011 (Delhi HC); v) Krishan Murari Lal Agarwal v. DCIT [2013] 59 SOT 136 (ITAT, Agra Bench) 28.3 He also relied on the CBDT Circular No.19/2017 dated 12.06.2017 whereby it has been clarified that the advances which are in the nature of commercial transactions would not fall within the ambit of the word ‘advance’ u/s 2(22)(e) of the Act. He accordingly submitted that the order of the CIT(A) being in consonance with law…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Gen X Commodities (P) Ltd., New Delhi

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

ITA 3561/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Jul 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri K.N. Chary[Assessment Year: 2011-12] Dcit, M/S Gen X Commodities (P) Central Circle-29, Ltd. Room No.318, 3Rd Floor, Fa-45, Shivaji Enclave, Ara Centre, New Delhi-110027 Jhandewalan Extn. New Delhi Pan-Aaaca2969B Revenue Assessee

Section 132Section 14ASection 153ASection 2(22)(e)

…CIT vs Sunil Sethi in ITA No.569/2009, dated 03.02.2010 (Del.) ii. CIT vs Creative Dyeing & Printing Pvt. Ltd. [2009] 318 ITR 476 (Del.) iii. CIT vs Arvind Kumar Jain in ITA No.589 of 2011, dated 30.09.2011 (Del.) iv. Krishan Murari Lal Agarwal vs DCIT [2013] 59 SOT 136 (Agra Trib.) 16. We have considered the rival arguments made by both the sides, perused the orders of the Assessing Officer and the learned CIT(A) and the paper book filed on behalf of the assessee. We have also considered the various decisions cited before us. We find the AO in the instant case made addition of Rs.91,47,56,196/- u/s 2(22)(e) for…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. Mrs. Seema Devi Bansal, New Delhi

In the result, the Revenue’s appeal stands dismissed

ITA 6462/DEL/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Jul 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Sh. Ved Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. K. Tewari, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 2Section 2(22)(e)

…8 - SUPREME Court) - the payment made were the result of trading transaction between the parties and the amount was not given by way of loan or advance. - Decided against the revenue. • ITAT Agra Bench in the case of Krishan Murari Lai Agarwal v. DCIT [2013] 59 SOT 136 Deemed dividend u/s 2(22)(e) - Disallowance u/s 56 rws 2(22)(e) - Commercial transaction versus loan or advances - Held that:- sub-clause (e) of Section 2(22) lays down that dividend includes any payment by a closely held company of any sum by way of advance or loan to a shareholder who comes in the category described in that sub-clause or to a c…

Krishan Murari Lal Agarwal v. DCIT (59 SOT 136) — Cited in 3 Judgments | BharatTax