PCIT v. Gaursons Realty Pvt. Ltd.

422 ITR 123Reported decision#24945 most cited
3

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 348,631 Indian tax judgments — from 2022 to 2024.

Sections most often in play

Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 36(1)(iii)Section 37Section 57

Issues it is cited on

business expediencycommercial expediencysection 37personcompanybusinessdocumentinterest

Judgments citing PCIT v. Gaursons Realty Pvt. Ltd.

ITO, Ward-2(4), New Delhi vs. Antheia Constructions P.Ltd, New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 4963/DEL/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Sept 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Hon’Ble & Shri S.Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Wadhwa, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Kanv Bali, Sr. DR
Section 133Section 142(1)Section 143(2)

…d. [20117 11 taxmann.com 356/200 Taxman 39 (Mag.)/331 ITR 502 (Delhi). The finding with respect to commercial expediency in the circumstances does not mil for interference.” d. The Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in the case of PCIT Vs. Gaursons Realty Pvt. Ltd. (422 ITR 123) has held that: "3. There are two different entities to which the amounts were either advanced as interest free loans, or wherein investment was made as share application money by the assessee. The first transaction relates to Gaursons Realtech Pvt Ltd. The assessee had invested Rs. 53.22 Crores towards share application money and had also advanc…

ITO, New Delhi vs. M/S Antheia Constructions Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 2373/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Sept 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Hon’Ble & Shri S.Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Wadhwa, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Kanv Bali, Sr. DR
Section 133Section 142(1)Section 143(2)

…d. [20117 11 taxmann.com 356/200 Taxman 39 (Mag.)/331 ITR 502 (Delhi). The finding with respect to commercial expediency in the circumstances does not mil for interference.” d. The Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in the case of PCIT Vs. Gaursons Realty Pvt. Ltd. (422 ITR 123) has held that: "3. There are two different entities to which the amounts were either advanced as interest free loans, or wherein investment was made as share application money by the assessee. The first transaction relates to Gaursons Realtech Pvt Ltd. The assessee had invested Rs. 53.22 Crores towards share application money and had also advanc…

O3 Capital Global Advisory Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-5(1)(2), Bangalore

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

ITA 931/BANG/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Jun 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.Assessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri G.S. Prashanth, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. Priyadarshini Basaganni, D.R

…ow a prudent businessman would act. The authorities must not look at the matter from their own view point but that of a prudent businessman." Reliance is placed on the decision of Delhi High Court in the case of PCIT vs. Gaursons Realty (P.) Ltd. reported in 422 ITR 123 and also on the decision of Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. Gokaldas Images Pvt. Ltd., reported in 429 ITR 526. It is submitted that the learned assessing officer has stated that the assessee could have done the same work of Morpheus directly to Morpheus Media Fund instead of creating another company and incurring expenses on it.…

PCIT v. Gaursons Realty Pvt. Ltd. (422 ITR 123) — Cited in 3 Judgments | BharatTax