How many judgments cite TM) Vishnu Jaiswal v. CIT?

272 judgments on BharatTax cite TM) Vishnu Jaiswal v. CIT (357 ITR 146), spanning 2015 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does TM) Vishnu Jaiswal v. CIT come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 143(3), Section 153A, Section 153D, Section 14A, Section 80IC, Section 69B.

TM) Vishnu Jaiswal v. CIT

357 ITR 146High Court2013#294 most cited

What is TM) Vishnu Jaiswal v. CIT authority for?

If the Assessing Officer has not conducted any investigation and thus has not discharged their burden of proof, any addition made by the AO is unsustainable and must be deleted.

272

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Vishnu Jaiswal v. CIT · Assessing Officer burden of proof · no investigation by AO · addition unsustainable · deletion of addition · section 143(3)

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 153A Section 153D Section 14A Section 80IC Section 69B Section 132(1)Section 56(2)(x)

Issues it is cited on

section 115ad section 153a proceedings section 2(1a)section 2(1)section 66 section 60 section 63 section 2(14)(iii)section 131(1a)live link retracted statement section 80ic

Judgments citing TM) Vishnu Jaiswal v. CIT

Lsl Tools (P) Ltd, Gurugram vs. ACIT, Central Circle-1, Faridabad

In the result, both the appeals are allowed

ITA 5643/DEL/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Oct 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Amisha S. Gupt, CIT DR

Section 127Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 153DSection 234CSection 40A(2)(b)

…assessee since from the beginning i.e. during investigation proceedings and during the course of assessment proceedings that there is unaccounted cash. Reliance is placed upon the following judgments: 361 ITR 10 (Del) CIT v. Gangeshwari Metal (P) Ltd. i) ii) 357 ITR 146 (Del) CIT vs. Fair Finvest Ltd iii) ITA No. 212/2012 dated 11.4.2012 (Del) CIT v. Goel Sons Golden Estate (P) Ltd. iv) 342 ITR 169 (Del) Nova Promoters &Finlease (P) Ltd v) ITA No. 645/2012 dated 13.1.2015 (Del) Funnay Time Finvest Ltd vi) 361 ITR 220 (Del) CIT vs. MisKamdhenu Steel and Alloys Ltd. vii) ITA No. 71/2015 dated 12.8.2015 (Del) CIT v…

Narendra Kachrulal Abad, Jalna vs. Income-Tax Officer, Ward - 1, Jalna

In the result, appeal of the assessee partly allowed

ITA 866/PUN/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Pune06 Oct 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No.866/Pun/2019 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2009-10 Shri Narendra Kachrulal Abad, V The Income Tax Officer, Abad House, Nal Galli, S Ward-1, Jalna. Kadrabad, Jalna – 431203. Maharashtra. Pan: Acspa9531C Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Hari Krishan – Ar Revenue By Shri Arvind Renge –Addl.Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 28/07/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 06/10/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeal)-1, Aurangabadpassed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 For The A.Y.2009-10 Dated 30.03.2019, Emanating From Order U/S.143(3) R.W.S 147Of The Income Tax Act, 1961, Dated 03.11.2017. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Concise Grounds Of Appeal :

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 250

…td (2015) 128 DTR 217 (Del) (HC) o Pr. CIT vs. G. Pharma India Ltd. (2017) 384 ITR 147 (Del) (HC) o CIT vs. Insecticides (India) Ltd. (2013) 357 ITR 300 (Del) (HC) Meenakshi Oversea's Pvt Ltd (2017) 395 ITR 677 CIT (Del) (HC) o CIT vs. Fair Invest Ltd. (2013) 357 ITR 146 (Del) (HC) Sarthank Securities Co. (P.) Ltd. Vs. ITO (2010) 329 ITR 110(Del.) (HC) o Pr. CIT vs. SNG Developers Ltd. (2018) 404 ITR 312 (Del.) (HC) o M/s.Coronation Agro Industries Ltd. Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax Circle-6(2)(1). o Commissioner of Income Tax-13 Vs. Pat Commodity Services Pvt. Ltd. Income Tax Appeal No.1257 of 2016 o Aks…

Brand India Real Estate Private Limited, Jaipur vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 6(1), Jaipur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 514/JPR/2025[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur29 Sept 2025AY 2012-2013

For Appellant: Shri Siddharth Ranka, Adv. &For Respondent: Shri Dharam Singh Meena, JCIT

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 250

…128 DTR 217 (Delhi)(HC) c) Pr. CIT v G. Pharma India Ltd.[2017] 384 ITR 147 (Delhi) (H C) d) CIT vs. Insecticides (India) Ltd. (2013) 357 ITR 300 (Del.)(HC) e) CIT v/s Meenakshi Oversea's Pvt Ltd (2017) 395 ITR 677(Del) (HC) f) CIT vs. Fair Invest Ltd. (2013) 357 ITR 146 (Del.)(HC) 1.2 The information received from other authority cannot be considered as material for reopening:- 1. In view of submission made hereinabove, there was no failure on the part of the assessee to disclose any material, which was now in possession of ld. AO while initiating the re-assessment proceedings. Hence such re-opening of a complet…

Narayan Suppliers Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward - 6(3), Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1077/KOL/2024[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata08 Sept 2025AY 2011-2012

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

For Appellant: Shri Avijit Ghoshal, ARFor Respondent: Shri Raja Sengputa, CIT-DR

Section 10(38)

…decision dated 16th March, 2016 in Writ Petition (Civil) No. 9659 of2015). 12. CIT v. Kamdhenu Steel & Alloys Ltd. (2012) 248 CTR 33 (Del)(HC). 13. CIT v. Multiplex Trading & Industrial Co Ltd (2015) 128 DTR 217 (Del) (HC). 14. CIT vs. Fair Invest Ltd. (2013) 357 ITR 146 (Del.) (HC). 15. Pr. CIT vs. SNG Developers Ltd. [2018] 404 ITR 312 (Del.) (HC). 16. PCIT vs. Shodiman Investments Pvt. Ltd, (2018) 93 taxmann.com 153/167 DTR 290 (Bom.)(HC). 17. In the case of ACIT v. Dhariya Construction Co (2010) 328 ITR 515 (SC) wherein it was held that the opinion of DVO per se is not an information for the purpose of reopen…

Smt. Prema Mukesh Jhalani, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 3(2), Thane

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 4753/MUM/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Jun 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Hon‟Ble Shri Vikram Singh Yadav & Shri Sandeep Gosainsmt. Prema Mukesh Jhalani Vs. Ito, Ward 3(2) 1 A/34, Drugs Society, Opp. Room No. 4, 6Th Floor, Jk Gram, Samatha Nagar B-Wagle Estate, Midc, Pokhran Road No. 1 Thane (W) Thane (W). Pan/Gir No. Aaupj0472D (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Nishit Gandhi Revenue By Shri Chetan M. Kacha, (Sr. Dr) Date Of Hearing 23.04.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 16.06.2025 आदेश / Order Per Sandeep Gosain, Jm: The Present Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Challenging The Impugned Order 22.08.2024 Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 („The Act‟), By The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (Nfac) For The Assessment Year 2011-12. 2. All The Grounds Raised By The Assessee Are Interrelated & Interconnected & Relates To Challenging The Order Of Ld. Cit(A) In Upholding The Order Of Ao In Reopening The 2 Smt. Prema Mukesh Jhalani, Mumbai

Section 250Section 56Section 56(2)(vii)

…t all made any further enquiry as regards the submissions made by the appellant that the transfer took place during AY 2010-11. In such a situation, the submission made by the appellant-should have been accepted [Ref. CIT v/s Gangeshwari Metal P. Ltd - (2014) 361 ITR 10 (Delhi), PCIT v/s Jatin Investments P. Ltd – ITA No.43 of 2016 Delhi High Court, PCIT v/s Laxman Industrial Resources Ltd- ITA 169 of 2017 Delhi High Court, CIT v/s ARL Infratech Ltd - (2017) 394 ITR 383 (Rajasthan), CIT v/s Jalan Hardcoke - (2018) 95 Taxmann.com 330 (Rajasthan). 7. The Ld. A.O. is not empowered to make addition merely on mere pre…

Alok Kumar Jain, Pearl Pleasure vs. ACIT Cir-6, Jaipur, New Cerntral Revenue Building, Bhagwan Dass Road, Rajasthan

ITA 1191/JPR/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur24 Mar 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Him.

For Appellant: Sh. Prakul Khurana, Adv. &For Respondent: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT-Sr. DR

Section 10(38)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 68Section 69A

…d during hearing on 16.01.2025 vii. CIT vs N R Portfolio Pvt. Ltd. [2013] 29 The said decision has been overruled in taxmann.com 291 various courts in later decisions. Furthermore, the said decision is in regard to issuance of CIT vs. Fair Finvest Ltd ( 2013) 357 ITR 146 share capital and non-verification of shareholder, in those circumstances, the courts took adverse view against the Assessee. In the case of Appellant, there is no creditor at all, rather receipt of money from open market sources, NSE/BSE platform, therefore, the proposition that banking payment is not sufficient is not applicable in the case in…

Winsome Textile Industries Limited, Chandigarh vs. Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-4(1), Chandigarh

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 528/CHANDI/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh27 Feb 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member), SHRI. PARESH M. JOSHI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Tejmohan Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ved Parkash Kalia Sr. DR

Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…(Delhi)(HC)  CIT v. Multiplex Trading & Industrial Co. Ltd. (2016) 378 ITR 351 (Delhi) (HC)  SABH Infrastructure vs ACIT WP(C) No. 1357/2016 DATED 25/09/2017  CIT v. Insecticides (India) Ltd. (2013) 357 ITR 300 (Delhi)(HC)  CIT v. Fair Invest Ltd. (2013) 357 ITR 146 (Delhi)(HC)  CIT v. Kamdhenu Steel & Alloys Ltd. (2014) 361 ITR 220 (Delhi)(HC)  Sarthak Securities Co. (P.) Ltd. v. ITO (2010) 329 ITR 110 (Delhi)(HC)  CIT v. Indo Arab Air Services (2016) 130 DTR78/ 283 CTR 92 (Delhi)(HC)  Sesa Sterlite Ltd. v. ACIT (2019) 417 ITR 334 / 267 Taxman275 (Bom.)(HC)  Nu Power Renewables (P.) Ltd. v. ACIT (2019)…

Late Shri Haji Mohd. Dilshad Through L/H. Shri Dilnawaz & Mrs. Mehrunissa, Muzaffarnagar vs. ACIT, Muzaffarnagar

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 3555/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Feb 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Ms. Rano Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, Sr. DR

Section 131Section 147Section 148

…they have not replied. Moreover, the assessee was never asked to produce the directors. The ld. counsel for the assessee placed reliance on the following case laws: • CIT vs. Odeon Builders Pvt. Ltd. (2019) 418 ITR 315(SC) • CIT vs. Fair Finvest Ltd. (2013) 357 ITR 146 (Del) • Pr. CIT v. Laxman Industrial Resources Ltd., [2017] 397 ITR 106 (Del) • CIT v.Vrindavan Farms (P) Ltd, ITA 71/2015, ITA 72/2015, ITA 84/2015 (del) • CIT Vs M/s Rakam Money Matters Pvt. Ltd. [ITA No. 778 of 2015 Dated 13- 10- 2015] (del) • PCIT vs. Softline Creations Pvt. Ltd (2016) 387 ITR 636 (Del) • Vedic Foundation Private Limited vs.…

Cosmic Informatics Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT Central Circle - 2, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Revenue in appeal No

ITA 2444/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sudhir Kumar & Shri Manish Agarwalita No.2442 To 2445/Del/2023 (Assessment Years 2013-14 To 2016-17) Dcit, Lotus Herbals Pvt. Ltd., Cc-20, Delhi. Room No.269A, 2 Nd Floor, Ara Vs. Centre, E-2, Jhandewalan, New Delhi-110055. Pan-Aaacl0198F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Rohit Jain, Adv. & Shri Shivam Gupta, Ca Department By Sh. Mukesh Jha, Cit Dr & Ms. Pooja Swroop, Cit-Dr 29.09.2025 Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement 23.12.2025 O R D E R Per Manish Agarwal, Am: These Are Five Appeals Filed By The Revenue Against The Separate Orders Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-27, New Delhi. All Are Dated 12.06.2023 For Assessment Years As Tabulated As Under:

Section 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151

…d: 325 ITR 285 (Del))  Pr. CIT vs. RMG Polyvinyl (1) Ltd. 396 ITR 5 (Del)  PCIT vs. G & G Pharma India Ltd. 384 ITR 147 (Del.)  CIT vs. Gulati Industrial Fabrication (P) Limited 217 CTR 494 (Del) [SLP Dismissed by SC in 1134/2009]  CIT vs. Fair Finvest L: 357 ITR 146 (Del)  CIT vs. Viniyas Finance & Investment Pvt Ltd 357 ITR 646 (Del) In view of the aforesaid, the reassessment proceedings having been initiated on the basis of documents already available on record, are invalid and bad in law. Re (d): Sanction under section 151 of the Act for initiation of reassessment proceedings accorded in a mechanical man…

Cosmic Informatics Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT Central Circle - 2, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Revenue in appeal No

ITA 2443/DEL/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Jan 2025AY 2013-14

Section 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151

Brij Gopal Construction Company (P) Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT Central Circle-3, New Delhi

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2363/DEL/2023[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Dec 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Nimisha Singh, CIT DR

Section 115BSection 132Section 139Section 153ASection 153DSection 69BSection 69C

…vitraRealcon (P) Ltd. xii) ITA No. 645/2019 (Del) dated 23.9.2024 PCIT v. Moon Beverages Ltd. III That it is a case of clear lack of enquiry and not a case of objective appreciation of facts on record. i) 361 ITR 10 (Del) CIT v. Gangeshwari Metal (P) Ltd. ii) 357 ITR 146 (Del) CIT vs. Fair Finvest Ltd iii) ITA No. 212/2012 dated 11.4.2012 (Del) CIT v. Goel Sons Golden Estate (P) Ltd. iv) 342 ITR 169 (Del) Nova Promoters & Finlease (P) Ltd v) ITA No. 645/2012 dated 13.1.2015 (Del) Funnay Time Finvest Ltd vi) 361 ITR 220 (Del) CIT vs. M/s Kamdhenu Steel and Alloys Ltd. vii) ITA No. 71/2015 dated 12.8.2015 (Del) CIT…

Vashisth Builders and Engineers Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle- 26(1), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 6934/DEL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Oct 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sudhir Pareek, Judicialmember Vashisth Builders & Engineers Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Dcit, Circle-26(1), A-52, 2Nd Floor, Fiee Complex, New Delhi Okhla Industrial Area, Phase-2, New Delhi. (Pan: Aabcv3687L) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Advocate Revenue By : Shir Vivek K. Upadhyay, Sr. Dr. Date Of Hearing : 27.08.2024 Date Of Order : 11.10.2024 O R D E R Per S. Rifaur Rahman, Am : 1. This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals-10), New Delhi Dated 13.08.2018 For The Assessment Year 2012-13. Aggrieved With The Above Order, Assessee Is In Appeal Before Us By Raising Following Grounds Of Appeal :- I) The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Law & On Facts In Upholding The Assessment Order Passed By The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle 26(1), New Delhi Under Section 143(3) Of The Act, By Making An Addition Of Rs. 7,23,72,000/- Without Appreciating The Facts & 2 Circumstances Of The Case, The Law As Applicable & The Submissions & The Supporting Evidence Produced By The Appellant. Ii) The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Law & On Facts In Upholding The Disallowance / Addition Of Rs. 3,72,000/- Made By The Dcit As Notional Interest On Interest Free Loans Granted By The Appellant Out Of The Interest Expense Claimed By The Appellant Without Appreciating The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Law As Applicable & The Submissions & The Supporting Evidence Produced By The Appellant. Iii) The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Law & On Facts In Upholding The Addition Of Rs. 7,20,000/- Made By The Dcit By Treating The Share Capital Received By The Appellant During The Year As Unexplained Cash- Credit, Without Appreciating The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Law As Applicable & The Submissions & The Supporting Evidence Produced By The Appellant.

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh Gupta, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shir Vivek K. Upadhyay, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)

…. 778/201 5 (High Court of Delhi), Date of order 13.10.2015  CIT vs. Vrindavan Farms (P) Ltd., ITA No.71/2015 (High Court of Delhi) 12  Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Gangeshwari Metal Pvt. Ltd. (2014) 361 ITR0010 (Delhi)  CIT vs Fair Finvest Ltd., (2013) 357 ITR 146, (High court of Delhi)  CIT vs Oasis Hospitalities (P) Ltd., (2011) 333 ITR 119, (High Court of Delhi)  CIT vs Value capital services (P) Ltd., (2008) 307 ITR 334 (High Court of Delhi)  CIT vs Winstral Petrochemicals (P) Ltd., (2011) 330 ITR 0603 (High Court of Delhi)  CIT vs Expo Globe India Ltd., (2014) 361 ITR 0147 (High Court of Delhi) Ad…

M/S.Winwood Marketing Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-6(4), Kolkata.

ITA 675/KOL/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata24 Sept 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumari.T.A. No. 675/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2012-2013 M/S. Winwood Marketing Pvt. Limited,………Appellant 9/12, Lal Bazar Street, 3Rd Floor, Kolkata-700001 [Pan:Aabcw3528M] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,………………………….……Respondent Ward-6(4), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata-700069 Appearances By: Shri Ankit Jalan, A.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri Arun Kumar Meena, Addl. Cit, Sr. D.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing: July 02, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: September 24, 2024 O R D E R

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 68

…rounding circumstances. 13. Let us take into consideration observations made by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Softline Creations P. Ltd. (supra) while taking note of judgment of Hon'ble Delhi High court in the case of CIT Vs. Fair Finvest Ltd., 357 ITR 146 (Delhi). Hon'ble Delhi High Court made following observations: "………This court has considered the concurrent order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) as well as the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal. Both these authorities primarily went by the fact that the assessee had provided sufficient indication by way of permanent account numbers, to…

Anchita Properties Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-12(1), Kolkata.

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

ITA 637/KOL/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 Aug 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A. No. 637/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2013-2014 Anchita Properties Pvt. Limited,………………Appellant 29, Collotola Street, Kolkata-700029 [Pan:Aahca9115E] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,………………………….……Respondent Ward-12(1), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata-700069 & I.T.A. No. 1067/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2013-2014 Anchita Properties Pvt. Limited,………………Appellant 29, Collotola Street, Kolkata-700029 [Pan:Aahca9115E] -Vs.- Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax,…Respondent Pcit, Kolkata-2, Office Of The Income Tax Officer, Ward-12(1), Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata-700069

Section 133(6)Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 263Section 68

…Income Tax vs. Odeon Builders Pvt. Ltd. (21.08.2019- SC) [2019] 418 ITR 315 (SC), 11. Andaman Timber Industries vs. Commissioner of Central Excise 2015 281 CTR 241 (SC), 12 STL Extrusion (P) Ltd [2010 : 333 ITR 269 13. CIT v. Gangeshwari Metal P. Ltd. [(2014) 361 ITR 10 (Delhi)], 14. Orchid Industries Pvt. Ltd., reported in [2017] 397 ITR 136 (BOM)- SLP dismissed by SC 16 & Anchita Properties Pvt. Ltd. 15. Principal Commissioner of Income-tax v. Prakhar Developers (P.) Ltd [2024] 162 taxmann.com 48 (Madhya Pradesh)[01-04-2024] 16. Westlife Development Ltd. v. PCIT [[2017] 88 taxmann.com 439 (Mumbai)/[2016] 49…

Anchita Properties Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. P.C.I.T., Kolkata - 2, Kolkata

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

ITA 1067/KOL/2024[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 Aug 2024AY 2013-2014

Section 133(6)Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 263Section 68

Heaven Vyapaar Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-5(4), Kolkata

ITA 27/KOL/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 Aug 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A. No. 27/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2012-2013 Heaven Vyapaar Pvt. Limited,…………………Appellant 7, Red Cross Place, 4Th Floor, Kolkata-700001 [Pan:Aacch7234G] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,………………………….……Respondent Ward-5(4), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata-700069 Appearances By: N O N E, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri B.K. Singh, Addl. Cit, Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing : June 19, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : August 20, 2024 O R D E R

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 68

…rounding circumstances. 12. Let us take into consideration observations made by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Softline Creations P. Ltd. (supra) while taking note of judgment of Hon'ble Delhi High court in the case of CIT Vs. Fair Finvest Ltd., 357 ITR 146 (Delhi). Hon'ble Delhi High Court made following observations: "………This court has considered the concurrent order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) as well as the Income- tax Appellate Tribunal. Both these authorities primarily went by the fact that the assessee had provided sufficient 14 Heaven Vyapaar Pvt. Limited indication by way o…

Decent Industries P. Ltd., Bhopal vs. ITO-1(2), Bhopal

Appeal is partly allowed

ITA 356/IND/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Indore20 Aug 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani(Virtual Hearing) Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/S Decent Industries Ito-1(2), Private Ltd, Bhopal 5Th Floor, Corporate Park, बनाम/ Db City Area Hills, Vs. Opp. M.P. Nagar Zone I, Bhopal (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent) Pan: Aaeca6271G Assessee By Ms. Shilpa Gupta & Shri N.K. Gupta Revenue By Shri V.K. Singh, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 04.06.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 20.08.2024

Section 133ASection 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 14ASection 68

…iman Investment Pvt. Ltd. 422 ITR 337 Page 4 of 44 M/s Decent Industries Pvt. Ltd ITA No. 356/Ind/2023 – AY 2012-13 (Bombay), NuPower Renewables (P) Ltd. 104 taxmann.com 307 (Bombay), Singnature Hotels (P) Ltd. 338 ITR 51 (Delhi) and Fair Investment Ltd. 357 ITR 146 (Delhi), Ld. AR prayed that the re-opening in such a manner is invalid liable to annulled. 6. Per contra, Ld. DR submitted that the AO received information from Investigation Wing that the assessee was beneficiary of share application money of Rs. 66,91,70,000/- received from companies named “A” and “J”. Thus, the AO had a creditable informati…

Rewin Ceramics Pvt Ltd, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward - 21(3), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 4580/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Jul 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI SUDHIR PAREEK (Judicial Member)

Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 148Section 68

…R 268 PROPOSITION 8: In absence of enquiry/investigation made by AO and failure to rebut documents furnished so furnished by assessee/third party, no addition can be made under section 68 of the Act. 1. CIT vs Gangeshwari Metals P. Ltd. (Delhi HC) reported in 361 ITR 10. 2. CIT vs FCS International Marketing (P) Ltd. (P&H HC) reported in 203 CTR 601. 3. ACIT vs Anima Investments Ltd. (ITAT Delhi TM) reported in 73 ITD 125. 4. CIT vs Kamdhenu Steel & Alloys Ltd. (Delhi HC) reported in 361 ITR 220. 5. PCIT vs. Laxman Industrial Resoruces Ltd. (Delhi HC) in ITA No.169/2017. Rewin Ceramics Pvt. Ltd. vs. ITO 7. On th…

DCIT Central Circle-25, New Delhi vs. Neel Metal Products Ltd, New Delhi

ITA 309/DEL/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Jul 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: Shri Salil Aggarwal, Sr.AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Subhra Jyoti Chakraborty

…gation has been carried out by the learned A O and as such the burden which lay upon the learned A.O. has not been discharged, as such, the addition so made is unsustainable and deserves to be deleted. a) 149 TTJ 165 ITAT (TM) Vishnu Jaiswal vs CIT b) [2013] 357 ITR 146 (Del) CIT vs. Fair Finvest Ltd. c) [2014] 361 ITR 10 (Del) CIT vs. Gangeshwari Metal (P) Ltd. 23.3 In order to appreciate the facts of the instant issue, it would be relevant to extract the submissions so made by assessee company before learned AO and CIT (A), which is extracted below: 37 ITA No.301/Del/2021 & 8 other appeals- DCIT vs. Assessee…

DCIT Central Circle-25, New Delhi vs. Neel Metal Products Ltd, New Delhi

ITA 308/DEL/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Jul 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: Shri Salil Aggarwal, Sr.AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Subhra Jyoti Chakraborty