Pr. CIT v. Apeak Infotech

88 Taxmann.com 695High Court2017#2424 most cited

What is Pr. CIT v. Apeak Infotech authority for?

The proviso added to Section 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, which deals with unexplained cash credits, does not have retrospective effect and cannot be invoked for assessment years prior to its introduction.

48

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,005 Indian tax judgments — from 2018 to 2024.

Also referred to as

Pr. CIT v. Apeak Infotech · Section 68 · proviso to Section 68 · unexplained cash credits · retrospective effect · assessment year 2012-13 · share premium · share application money

Issues it is cited on

section 106section 23(4)section 23(1)annual letting valuesection 24(a)annual valuesource of sourceshare capital and share premiumcreditworthiness of the creditordeemed dividendsection 2(22)(e)share application money

Judgments citing Pr. CIT v. Apeak Infotech

ITO, Ward-10(4), Kolkata vs. M/S Positive Properties Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, appeal of revenue is dismissed

ITA 2274/KOL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata09 Jan 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am]

Section 68

…t in the case referred to supra is not applicable to the facts of the instant case and is factually distinghuishable. 3.3.1. We find that the reliance placed by the ld. AR in the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in Pr. CIT vs. Apeak Infotech reported in 88 Taxmann.com 695 dt 08.06.2017 wherein the question raised before the Hon’ble Bombay High Court are as under: “A. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal was correct to uphold the decision on Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) that the share premium received by the assessee-company cannot be taxed under Section 68 of t…

ITO, Ward-10(4), Kolkata vs. M/S Dreamz Met Construction Projects Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2047/KOL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata07 Dec 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri A T Varkey, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am] I.T.A No. 2047/Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2012-13 Ito, Ward-10(4), Kolkata -Vs- M/S Dreamz Met Construction Projects Pvt. Ltd. [Pan: Aagcm 2068 R ] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Saurabh Kumar, Addl. CIT Sr. DRFor Respondent: Shri D.S. Damle, FCA
Section 131Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 68

…the instant case and is factually distinghuishable.. 7 8 M/s Dreamz Met Construction Projects Pvt. Ltd. A.Yr. 2012-13 6.1. We find that the reliance placed by the ld. AR in the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in Pr. CIT vs. Apeak Infotech reported in 88 Taxmann.com 695 dt 08.06.2017 wherein the question raised before the Hon’ble Bombay High Court are as under: “A. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal was correct to uphold the decision on Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) that the share premium received by the assessee-company cannot be taxed under Section 68 of t…

ITO, Ward-10(4), Kolkata vs. M/S Tanish Dealers Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1636/KOL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata07 Dec 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri A T Varkey, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am] I.T.A No. 1636/Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2012-13 Ito, Ward-10(4), Kolkata -Vs- M/S Tanish Dealers Pvt. Ltd. [Pan: Aadct 1242 K ] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Saurabh Kumar, Addl. CIT Sr. DRFor Respondent: Shri D.S. Damle, FCA
Section 131Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 68

…rt in the case referred to supra is not applicable to the facts of the instant case and is factually distinghuishable.. 6.1. We find that the reliance placed by the ld. AR in the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in Pr. CIT vs. Apeak Infotech reported in 88 Taxmann.com 695 dt 08.06.2017 wherein the question raised before the Hon’ble Bombay High Court are as under: “A. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal was correct to uphold the decision on Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) that the share premium received by the assessee-company cannot be taxed under Section 68 of t…

ITO, Ward-10(4), Kolkata vs. Ms Savera Towers Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2275/KOL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata05 Dec 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri A T Varkey, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am] I.T.A No. 2275/Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2012-13 Ito, Ward-10(4), Kolkata -Vs- M/S Savera Towers Pvt. Ltd. [Pan: Aaocs 9744 C ] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Saurabh Kumar, Addl. CIT Sr. DRFor Respondent: Shri Manish Tiwari, AR
Section 131Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 68

…rt in the case referred to supra is not applicable to the facts of the instant case and is factually distinghuishable.. 6.1. We find that the reliance placed by the ld. AR in the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in Pr. CIT vs. Apeak Infotech reported in 88 Taxmann.com 695 dt 08.06.2017 wherein the question raised before the Hon’ble Bombay High Court are as under: “A. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal was correct to uphold the decision on Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) that the share premium received by the assessee-company cannot be taxed under Section 68 of t…

ITO, Ward-10(4), Kolkata vs. M/S Happy Bagans Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 2273/KOL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Oct 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri A T Varkey, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am] I.T.A No. 2270/Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2012-13 Ito, Ward-10(4), Kolkata -Vs- M/S Trend Infra Developers Pvt. Ltd. [Pan: Aadct 6373 M ] (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A No. 2273/Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2012-13 Ito, Ward-10(4), Kolkata -Vs- M/S Happy Bagans Pvt. Ltd. [Pan: Aacch 3712 K ] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Altaf Hussain, Addl. CIT Sr. DRFor Respondent: Shri Manish Tiwari, FCA
Section 131Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 68

…in the case referred to supra is not applicable to the facts of the instant case and is factually distinghuishable.. 3.3.1. We find that the reliance placed by the ld. AR in the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in Pr. CIT vs. Apeak Infotech reported in 88 Taxmann.com 695 dt 08.06.2017 wherein the question raised before the Hon’ble Bombay High Court are as under: “A. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal was correct to uphold the decision on Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) that the share premium received by the assessee-company cannot be taxed under Section 68 of t…

ITO, Ward-10(4), Kolkata vs. M/S Trend Infra Developers Pvt.Ltd, Kolkata

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 2270/KOL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Oct 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri A T Varkey, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am] I.T.A No. 2270/Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2012-13 Ito, Ward-10(4), Kolkata -Vs- M/S Trend Infra Developers Pvt. Ltd. [Pan: Aadct 6373 M ] (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A No. 2273/Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2012-13 Ito, Ward-10(4), Kolkata -Vs- M/S Happy Bagans Pvt. Ltd. [Pan: Aacch 3712 K ] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Altaf Hussain, Addl. CIT Sr. DRFor Respondent: Shri Manish Tiwari, FCA
Section 131Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 68

…in the case referred to supra is not applicable to the facts of the instant case and is factually distinghuishable.. 3.3.1. We find that the reliance placed by the ld. AR in the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in Pr. CIT vs. Apeak Infotech reported in 88 Taxmann.com 695 dt 08.06.2017 wherein the question raised before the Hon’ble Bombay High Court are as under: “A. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal was correct to uphold the decision on Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) that the share premium received by the assessee-company cannot be taxed under Section 68 of t…

Taxeworld.Com Pvt. Ltd., Navi Mumbai vs. ITO - 10(3)(4), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5981/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Sept 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Pawan Singhm/S Taxeworld.Com. P. Ltd. Ito-10(3)(4) B-3/1/1:3, Sector-2, Vashi, Mumbai. Navi Mumbai-400703. Vs. Pan: Aadct4792N Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Haresh P. Shah (AR)For Respondent: Shri V. Justin (DR)
Section 253Section 254(1)Section 56Section 56(2)(viib)Section 68

…valuation report of the share is also placed on record vide page no.45 of Paper Book. In support of his submission, the ld. AR of the assessee relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in Principal Commissioner of Income-Tax Versus Apeak Infotech 397 ITR 148 (Bom.) on the ratio that the amount received on issue of share capital as premium are on capital account and cannot be considered to be income. ITA No. 5981 Mum 2016-M/s Taxeworld.Com. P. Ltd. 4. On the other hand, the ld. DR for the Revenue supported the order of lower authorities. The ld. DR further submits that there is a difference in pr…

Pratik Syntex P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO 13(1)(4), Mumbai

In the result , appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 6690/MUM/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 May 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri C.N Prasad & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No.6690/Mum/2016 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2012-13) बिाम/ M/S. Pratik Syntex Private Ito 13(1)(4), Mumbai Ltd.,A-51, Rustomji Adarsh Heritage, Adarsh Vihar V. Complex, Opp. Marve Road, Malad (W), Mumbai 400064 स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ Pan : Aaecp3487H (अपीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) ..

For Appellant: Shri Haresh P. ShahFor Respondent: Shri Rajat Mittal (DR)
Section 143(3)

…आयकर अपीऱीय अधिकरण “C” न्यायपीठ म ुंबई में। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI C.N PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAMIT KOCHAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No.6690/Mum/2016 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2012-13) बिाम/ M/s. Pratik Syntex Private ITO 13(1)(4), Mumbai Ltd.,A-51, Rustomji Adarsh Heritage, Adarsh Vihar v. Complex, Opp. Marve Road, Malad (W), Mumbai 400064 स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ PAN : AAECP3487H (अपीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. Assessee by: Shri Haresh P. Shah Revenue by : Shri Rajat Mittal (DR) सुनवाई की तारीख /Date of Hearing : 01.05.2018…