Nemi Chand Kothari v. CIT

M/S Kundali Jewel (India) Private Limited, Mumbai vs. ITO - 12(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is hereby partly allowed and the appeal filed by the revenue is hereby dismissed

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No. 3511/Mum/2019 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2012-13) M/S. Kundali Jewels (India) बिधम/ The Income Tax Officer 12 Pvt. Ltd. (3)(1) Vs. Room No.147 A, 1St Floor, 1/1705, Challenger Tower, Thakur Village, Kandivali Aayakar Bhavan, M. K. (E), Mumbai. Marg, Mumbai-400020. आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No. 4337/Mum/2019 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2012-13) The Income Tax Officer 12 बिधम/ M/S. Kundali Jewels (India) (3)(1) Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Room No.147 A, 1St Floor, 1/1705, Challenger Tower, Aayakar Bhavan, M. K. Thakur Village, Kandivali Marg, Mumbai-400020. (E), Mumbai. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Pnek10340B (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Rashmikant C. Modi Ms. Ketki Rajeshirke Revenue By: Shri Gurbinder Singh (Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 04/02/2021 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 23/02/2021 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh (Jm) The Assessee As Well As Revenue Have Filed The Above Mentioned Appeals Against The Order Dated 29.03.2019 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) -21, Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Cit(A)”] Relevant To The A.Y. 2012-13. Ita. No.3511/Mum/2019 4337/Mum/2019 A.Y. 2012-13 2. The Assessee Has Filed The Present Appeal Against The Order Dated 29.03.2019 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) -21, Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Cit(A)”] Relevant To The A.Y.2012- 13. 3. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds: -

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “H” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI M. BALAGANESH, AM AND SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, JM आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No. 3511/Mum/2019 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2012-13) M/s. Kundali Jewels (India) बिधम/ The Income Tax Officer 12 Pvt. Ltd. (3)(1) Vs. Room no.147 A, 1st Floor, 1/1705, Challenger Tower, Thakur Village, Kandivali Aayakar Bhavan, M. K. (E), Mumbai. Marg, Mumbai-400020. आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No. 4337/Mum/2019 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2012-13) The Income Tax Officer 12 बिधम/ M/s. Kundali Jewels (India) (3)(1) Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Room no.147 A, 1st Floor, 1/1705, Challenger Tow…

ACIT 9(2)(2), Mumbai vs. Citygold Farming P.Ltd, Mumbai

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaleacit – 9(2)(2) Citygold Farming P. Ltd., बनाम/ Room No. 665A, 6Th Floor 6Th Floor, Akruti Trade Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, Mk Road Centre, Road No. 7, Marol, Mumbai. Midc, Andheri (East), Mumbai- 400093 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aafca8865R .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent)

…and balance confirmation but Ld. CIT(A) has not called for the remand report or the ld. CIT(A) has not verified these details. The Ld. CIT(A) has, simply relying upon the judgment of Hon’ble Guwahati High Court in the case of Nemi Chand Kothari Vs. CIT (2014) 264 ITR 254, deleted the addition. Therefore, we reverse the finding of Ld. CIT(A) and restore this matter back to the file of AO and the AO is directed to decide the matter afresh, as per law”. 15. The Ld. AR submitted that, in the present case for the A.Y 2010-11, the CIT(A) after receipt of the written submissions and additional evidence from the assessee…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax 15(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Almega Paints Private Limited, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue for assessment year 2013-

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar (Am) & Shri Ram Lal Negi (Jm) Assessment Year: 2013-14 The Dy. Commissioner Of Income M/S Almega Paints Pvt. Ltd., Tax - 15(1)(1), B-24, Minerva Industrial Room No. 470, 4Th Floor, Estate, Off P.K. Road, Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Mulund (W), Maharshi Karve Road, Mumbai - 400080 Mumbai - 400020 Pan: Aahca3698N (Appellant) (Respondent)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES “A”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI RAJESH KUMAR (AM) AND SHRI RAM LAL NEGI (JM) Assessment Year: 2013-14 The Dy. Commissioner of Income M/s Almega Paints Pvt. Ltd., Tax - 15(1)(1), B-24, Minerva Industrial Room No. 470, 4th Floor, Estate, Off P.K. Road, Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Mulund (W), Maharshi Karve Road, Mumbai - 400080 Mumbai - 400020 PAN: AAHCA3698N (Appellant) (Respondent) Revenue by : Shri Michael Jerald (DR) Assessee by : Shri Satish Mody (AR) Date of Hearing: 25/09/2020 Date of Pronouncement: 06/11/2020 O R D E R PER RAM LAL NEGI, JM This appeal has been filed…

ITO 14 (3)(4), Mumbai vs. M/S Supergold Properties Pvt Ltd.[Successor of M/S Advaya Tex Trading Pvt Ltd], Mumbai

…presumed that the creditor had advanced the amounts from his undisclosed sources, still it would become the income of the said creditor and not that of the debtor (the assessee) iii. Hon'ble Gauhati High Court in the case of Nemi Chand Kothari V/s. CIT {2003} 264 ITR 254 (Gau.):The assessee cannot be called upon to prove the source-of-source. iv. Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT V/s. Arunanda Textiles P. Ltd. (2011) 333 ITR 116 (Kar.): Where the assessee has submitted confirmations & affidavits from the creditors, the onus is not on the assessee to prove the creditworthiness of the creditors. v. Ho…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax 15(2)(1), Mumbai vs. M/S.N.Jp Trading Company, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue stands dismissed with no order as to cost

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Amarjit Singhassessment Year: 2008-09 Acit 15(2)(1), M/S. N.J.P Trading Room No.357, Company, 3Rd Floor, B-12, 2N Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Navin Manjau, M.K. Road, S.L. Road, Mumbai - 400020 Mulund (West), Mumbai – 400 080 Pan: Aaccn2258A (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee By : Shri Mari Jain, A.R. Revenue By : Ms. Kavita P. Kaushik, D.R. Date Of Hearing : 24.09.2020 Date Of Pronouncement : 07.10.2020 O R D E R Per Rajesh Kumar: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Revenue Against The Order Dated 12.06.2017 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) [Hereinafter Referred To As The Cit(A)] Relevant To Assessment Year 2008-09. 2. The Only Effective Issue Raised By The Revenue In The Various Grounds Of Appeal Is Against The Deletion Of Addition Of Rs.1,80,00,000/- By Ld. Cit(A) As Made By The Ao Under Section 68 Of The Act.

…ase of Vijay 6 M/s. N.J.P Trading Company Granites P.Ltd, in the case of Novodaya Castle P. Ltd reported in 56.taxmann.com 18(SC)/(2015) 230 taxman.268 SC) decision of Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court and in the case of Nemi Chand Kothari reported in (2003) 264 ITR 254 (Gau), the decision in CIT Vs. Divine Leasing & Finance Ltd reported in 299 ITR 268 (Del) and decision of Hon'ble S.C in the case of CIT Vs. Lovely Exports P. Ltd reported in 216 CTR 195(SC). It is an admitted and undisputed fact that the assessee has not proved on record any transaction in terms of cash money being deposited by assessee or any c…

I.T.O. - 25(2)(5), Mumbai vs. Smt. Leena Haresh Harde, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Hon'Ble & Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Bleincome Tax Officer – 25(2)(5) V. Smt Leena Haresh Harde Room No. 506, C-10, 5Th Floor 502, 5Th Floor, Padmawati Palace Pratyakshakar Bhavan Nanda Patkar Road Bandra Kurla Complex Vile Parle (E), Mumbai – 400 057 Bandra (E), Mumbai - 400 051 Pan: Aaxph1737Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Rushabh Mehta Department By : Shri Michael Jerald

…s not applicable to the present case to prove the source of source of funds obtained. Reliance was placed on the following decisions: - (a) S. Hastimal v. CIT [49 ITR 273(Mad HC)] (b) Tolaram Daga v. CIT [59 ITR 632 (Gauhati HC)] (c) Nemichand Kothari v. CIT [264 ITR 254 (Gauhati HC)] (d) Murlidhar Lahorimal v. CIT [280 ITR 512 (Guj HC)] 10 Smt Leena Haresh Harde 12. Ld. Counsel for the assessee further submits that no cogent material or evidence has been brought on record to indicate that the assessee's own unaccounted money has been received back under the garb of unsecured loans. Ld. Counsel for the assessee…

ITO 14(3)(4), Mumbai vs. Nextgen Constructions P.Tld (Changed to M/S Aetius Construction P. Ltd Which Is Further Amalgamated With M/S Supergold Properties Pvt. Ltd), Mumbai

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

…esumed that the creditor had advanced the amounts from his undisclosed sources, still it would become the income of the said creditor and not that of the debtor (the assessee). iii. Hon'ble Gauhati High Court in the case of Nermi Chand Kothari V/s. GIT (2003) 264 ITR 254 (Gau.): The assessee cannot be called upon to prove the source-of- source. iv. Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT V/s. Arunanda Textiles P. Ltd. (2011)333 ITR 116 (Kar.): Where the assessee has submitted confirmations & affidavits from the creditors, the onus is not on the assessee to prove the creditworthiness of the creditors. v. H…