Trading Co. Vs. ITO (2008) 220 CTR 622 (Raj) (vi) Nemi Chand Kothari v. CIT

367 ITR 217High Court2014#6795 most cited
17

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2018 to 2025.

Sections most often in play

Section 68Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 115BBESection 131Section 132Section 142(1)

Issues it is cited on

permanent account numberaddition under section 68share application moneygenuineness of the transactionsection 68section 13transferpersoncompanyindiadocumentsection 143(3)

Judgments citing Trading Co. Vs. ITO (2008) 220 CTR 622 (Raj) (vi) Nemi Chand Kothari v. CIT

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI vs. M/S. SHRISH ENTERPRISES PRIVATE LIMITED, DELHI

ITA 5315/DEL/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Aug 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Naveen Chandradcit, Room No. 225E, Cr Vs. M/S Shrish Enterprise Building, 2Nd Floor, Private Limited, Hall No. Ip Estate, 3 & 4, M-27/2, Badli New Delhi - 110002 Industrial Estate, Badli, Delhi – 110042 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aafcs0684N Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Sh. Nitin Gulati, Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. Manish Gupta, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 68

…IT v. Iliac Investment (P) Ltd.: 287 ITR 135 (Del.) • CIT v. Oasis Hospitalities P. Ltd: 333 ITR 119 (Del.) • CIT v. Kamdhenu Steel and Alloys Ltd: 361-ITR 220 (Del.) • CIT v. Victor Electodes Ltd.: 329 ITR 271 (Del.) • CIT v. Vacmet Packaging India (P) Ltd.: 367 ITR 217 (All.) • CIT v. Arunanada Textiles P. Ltd: 333 ITR 116 (Kar) • CIT v. Gagandeep Infrastructure (P.) Ltd.: 80 taxmann.com 272 (Bom) The ratio, thus, emanating from the aforesaid decisions may be summarized as under: The assessee has to prima facie provide documents to prove the identity of the lender as well as the genuineness of the transaction…

UMANG BOARDS (MUMBAI), PVT. LTD,JAIPUR vs. WARD 14(3)(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

ITA 6318/MUM/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Feb 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain & Hon’Ble Shri Prabhash Shankar, Accountatn Member Umang Boards (Mumbai) Vs. Ito – 14(3)(1) Aayakar Bhavan, Mk Pvt Ltd Road, Mumbai – Umang House, 7-B, 400020. Bharat Mata Path, Jamna Lal Bajaj Marg, C-Scheme, Jaipur. Pan/Gir No. Aabcu0882C (Applicant) (Respondent)

Section 133(6)Section 250Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “F” BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER & HON’BLE SHRI PRABHASH SHANKAR, ACCOUNTATN MEMBER Umang Boards (Mumbai) Vs. ITO – 14(3)(1) Aayakar Bhavan, MK Pvt Ltd Road, Mumbai – Umang House, 7-B, 400020. Bharat Mata Path, Jamna Lal Bajaj Marg, C-Scheme, Jaipur. PAN/GIR No. AABCU0882C (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee by Shri Rohan Sogani Revenue by Ms. Nidhi Agarwal, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 14.01.2025 Date of Pronouncement 25.02.2025 आदेश / ORDER PER SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM: The present appeal has been filed by the assessee challenging the impugned order…

EBRO INDIA PVT.LTD. ,DELHI vs. ACIT CIRCLE-7(1), DELHI

In the result, the ground no 4 raised by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1291/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: HeardITAT Delhi09 Sept 2024AY 2018-19

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

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144CSection 68

…nt (P) Ltd. 262 ITR 493 (Del)  PCIT vs Ami Industries India (P) Ltd: 424 ITR 219 (Bom.)  Orient Trading Co. Limited: 49 ITR 723 (Bom.)  CIT v. Gagandeep Infrastructure (P.) Ltd. – [2017] 80 taxmann.com 272 (Bombay)  CIT v. Vacmet Packaging India (P) Ltd.: 367 ITR 217 (All.)  CIT v. Arunanada Textiles P. Ltd: 333 ITR 116 (Kar)  CIT v. Metachem Industries: 245 ITR 160 (MP)  DCIT v. Rohini Builders: 256 ITR 360 (Guj)  CIT v. Shree Rama Multi Tech Ltd.: 215 Taxman 157 (Guj.)(Mag.)  Nemichand Kothari V. CIT: 264 ITR 254 (Gauhati)  CIT v. Talbros Engineering Ltd.: 386 ITR 454 (P&H)  CIT v. Pranav Foundations…

GOLDENDUNES HOMES LLP,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

ITA 603/JPR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur20 Aug 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Rohan Sogani, CAFor Respondent: Mrs. Monisha Choudhary, Addl. CIT-DR
Section 115BSection 143(3)Section 68Section 69C

…n.com 460 (Rajasthan)’’ 2.7 Apart from this, the decisions of Hon’ble High Court of other States are relied upon who upheld the said proposition and some of the extracts of the cases are detailed as under:- 1. CIT vs. Vacmet Packaging (India) (P.) Ltd.[2014] 367 ITR 217 (Allahabad) “…The Tribunal, while sustaining the view of the CIT(A), has observed that the assessee had filed documentary evidence in order to prove the genuineness of the share application money consisting of ; (i) share application forms; (ii) copies of bank accounts of the share applicants; (iii) copies of the income tax returns of the share a…

DCIT CIR 1(4) , MUMBAI vs. ANANDILAL & GANESH PODAR SOCIETY, MUMBAI

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

ITA 1792/MUM/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Mar 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

Section 147

…11) 330 ITR 298 (Del) (iv). Sarogi Credit Corporation Vs. CIT (1976) 103 ITR 344 (Pat) (v). Aravali Trading Co. Vs. ITO (2008) 220 CTR 622 (Raj) (vi) Nemi Chand Kothari Vs. CIT (2004) 3264 ITR 254 (Gau) (vii). CIT Vs. Vacmet Packaging (India) Pvt. Ltd. (2014) 367 ITR 217 (All) (viii). CIT Vs. Orissa Corporation P. Ltd. (1986) 159 ITR 78 (SC) 59 ITA.No. 713/Mum/2020 (A.Y.2011-12) ITA NOs. 1791, 1790, 1792 & 1889/MUM/2021& Other appeals Anandilal and Ganesh Podar Society & other group concerns (ix). CIT Vs. Divine Leasing & Finance Ltd. (2008) 299 ITR 268 (Del) (x). CIT Vs. Creative World Telefilm Ltd. (2011) 333…

DCIT CIR 1(4) , MUMBAI vs. ANANDILAL & GANESH PODAR SOCIETY, MUMBAI

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

ITA 1791/MUM/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Mar 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

Section 147

…11) 330 ITR 298 (Del) (iv). Sarogi Credit Corporation Vs. CIT (1976) 103 ITR 344 (Pat) (v). Aravali Trading Co. Vs. ITO (2008) 220 CTR 622 (Raj) (vi) Nemi Chand Kothari Vs. CIT (2004) 3264 ITR 254 (Gau) (vii). CIT Vs. Vacmet Packaging (India) Pvt. Ltd. (2014) 367 ITR 217 (All) (viii). CIT Vs. Orissa Corporation P. Ltd. (1986) 159 ITR 78 (SC) 59 ITA.No. 713/Mum/2020 (A.Y.2011-12) ITA NOs. 1791, 1790, 1792 & 1889/MUM/2021& Other appeals Anandilal and Ganesh Podar Society & other group concerns (ix). CIT Vs. Divine Leasing & Finance Ltd. (2008) 299 ITR 268 (Del) (x). CIT Vs. Creative World Telefilm Ltd. (2011) 333…

DCIT CIR 1(4) , MUMBAI vs. ANANDILAL & GANESH PODAR SOCIETY, MUMBAI

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

ITA 1790/MUM/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Mar 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

Section 147

…11) 330 ITR 298 (Del) (iv). Sarogi Credit Corporation Vs. CIT (1976) 103 ITR 344 (Pat) (v). Aravali Trading Co. Vs. ITO (2008) 220 CTR 622 (Raj) (vi) Nemi Chand Kothari Vs. CIT (2004) 3264 ITR 254 (Gau) (vii). CIT Vs. Vacmet Packaging (India) Pvt. Ltd. (2014) 367 ITR 217 (All) (viii). CIT Vs. Orissa Corporation P. Ltd. (1986) 159 ITR 78 (SC) 59 ITA.No. 713/Mum/2020 (A.Y.2011-12) ITA NOs. 1791, 1790, 1792 & 1889/MUM/2021& Other appeals Anandilal and Ganesh Podar Society & other group concerns (ix). CIT Vs. Divine Leasing & Finance Ltd. (2008) 299 ITR 268 (Del) (x). CIT Vs. Creative World Telefilm Ltd. (2011) 333…

DCIT- CIRCLE- 1, THANE vs. DARSHAN ENTERPRISES , THANE

In the result, the both appeals filed by the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 463/MUM/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Jan 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Amarjit Singh, Am आयकरअपीलसं/ I.T.A. No.462 /Mum/2019 & I.T.A.No.463/Mum/2019 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) बिधम/ Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax M/S Darshan Enterprises Circle-1,6Th Floor, Ashar It Park, 2Nd Floor, Rosa Vista, Vs. B Wing Wagle Industrial Estate Ghodbunder Road, Thane- 400604 Opp. Suraj Water Park, Thane(West) 400615 स्थधयीलेखधसं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. : Aadfd8612N (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Shashi Tulsian Revenue By: Ms. Mahita Nair, Sr Ar सुनवाईकीतारीख / Date Of Hearing: 26/10/2022 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 13/01/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: These Are Appeals Preferred By The Revenue Against The Action Of The Ld.Cit(A)-Nashik Dated 5-11-2018 For Ay 2010-11. [One I.E. Ita 462 Is Against The Quantum Deleted By Ld.Cit(A) & Ita 463 Is Against The Penalty U/S 271(1)(C) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961(Hereinafter “The Act”) Deleted By Ld.Cit(A)]. 2. First Of All We Will Take Up The Quantum Appeal Preferred By The Revenue Wherein The Revenue Challenges The Action Of The Ld. Cit(A) To Have Deleted The Addition Made By The Assessing Officer (Hereinafter Referred To As Ao) Under Section 68 Of The Act. 3. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Partnership Firm Had Filed Return Of Income On 22.09.2010 Declaring Income Of Rs. Rs. 1,47,73,191/-. Later The Case For The Relevant Assessment Year Was Selected For Scrutiny & The Ao Noted That

For Appellant: Shri Shashi TulsianFor Respondent: Ms. Mahita Nair, Sr AR
Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 68

…onstruction Pvt Ltd Mumbai ITAT 3645/Mum/2014 168 TTJ 751 ACIT Vs Sanjay M Jhaveri Mumbai ITAT (2015) Nemi Chand Kothari Vs CIT and 264 ITR 254(2003) Gauhati HC Another CIT Vs Orchid Industries Pvt Ltd 397 ITR 136 Bombay HC CIT Vs Vacmet Packaging (India) Pvt 367 ITR 217 Allahabad HC Ltd (2014) CIT Vs Dwarkadhish Investment Pvt Ltd 330 ITR 298 Delhi HC (2011) CIT Vs Oasis Hospitalitites P LTd 333 ITR 119 Delhi HC 35 ITA. 462& 463/MUM/2019 AY 2010-11 M/s Darshan Enterprises CIT vs Kamdhenu Steel & Alloys Ltd 361 ITR 220 Delhi HC CIT Vs Lovely Exports Pvt Ltd 299 ITR 268 Supreme Court PCIT Vs Veedhata Tower P Ltd…

DCIT- CIRCLE- 1 , THANE vs. DARSHAN ENTERPRISES, THANE

In the result, the both appeals filed by the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 462/MUM/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Jan 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Amarjit Singh, Am आयकरअपीलसं/ I.T.A. No.462 /Mum/2019 & I.T.A.No.463/Mum/2019 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) बिधम/ Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax M/S Darshan Enterprises Circle-1,6Th Floor, Ashar It Park, 2Nd Floor, Rosa Vista, Vs. B Wing Wagle Industrial Estate Ghodbunder Road, Thane- 400604 Opp. Suraj Water Park, Thane(West) 400615 स्थधयीलेखधसं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. : Aadfd8612N (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Shashi Tulsian Revenue By: Ms. Mahita Nair, Sr Ar सुनवाईकीतारीख / Date Of Hearing: 26/10/2022 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 13/01/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: These Are Appeals Preferred By The Revenue Against The Action Of The Ld.Cit(A)-Nashik Dated 5-11-2018 For Ay 2010-11. [One I.E. Ita 462 Is Against The Quantum Deleted By Ld.Cit(A) & Ita 463 Is Against The Penalty U/S 271(1)(C) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961(Hereinafter “The Act”) Deleted By Ld.Cit(A)]. 2. First Of All We Will Take Up The Quantum Appeal Preferred By The Revenue Wherein The Revenue Challenges The Action Of The Ld. Cit(A) To Have Deleted The Addition Made By The Assessing Officer (Hereinafter Referred To As Ao) Under Section 68 Of The Act. 3. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Partnership Firm Had Filed Return Of Income On 22.09.2010 Declaring Income Of Rs. Rs. 1,47,73,191/-. Later The Case For The Relevant Assessment Year Was Selected For Scrutiny & The Ao Noted That

For Appellant: Shri Shashi TulsianFor Respondent: Ms. Mahita Nair, Sr AR
Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 68

…onstruction Pvt Ltd Mumbai ITAT 3645/Mum/2014 168 TTJ 751 ACIT Vs Sanjay M Jhaveri Mumbai ITAT (2015) Nemi Chand Kothari Vs CIT and 264 ITR 254(2003) Gauhati HC Another CIT Vs Orchid Industries Pvt Ltd 397 ITR 136 Bombay HC CIT Vs Vacmet Packaging (India) Pvt 367 ITR 217 Allahabad HC Ltd (2014) CIT Vs Dwarkadhish Investment Pvt Ltd 330 ITR 298 Delhi HC (2011) CIT Vs Oasis Hospitalitites P LTd 333 ITR 119 Delhi HC 35 ITA. 462& 463/MUM/2019 AY 2010-11 M/s Darshan Enterprises CIT vs Kamdhenu Steel & Alloys Ltd 361 ITR 220 Delhi HC CIT Vs Lovely Exports Pvt Ltd 299 ITR 268 Supreme Court PCIT Vs Veedhata Tower P Ltd…

SEJAL JEWELLERS PVT. LTD.,,SURAT vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(1)(2),, SURAT

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 435/AHD/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Surat28 Feb 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shripawan Singh, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.435/Ahd/2017 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2012-13) (Virtual Court Hearing) Sejal Jewellers Pvt. Ltd, Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(1)(2), V Ug-4/5 Rangila Park, Ghod Dod Surat, Aaykar Bhavan, Majura Gate, S. Road, Surat-395007 Surat "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaqcs 8686 P (Appellant ) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Rasesh Shah, CAFor Respondent: Shri H.P. Meena– CIT-DR
Section 131Section 131(1)(d)Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 68

…om.) (HC)  CIT vs. M/s Creative World Telefilms Ltd. [ITA (L) No. 2182 of 2009] (Bomb. HC)  Barkha Synthetics Ltd. Vs ACIT [283 ITR 0377] (Raj. HC)  CIT v/s. Pranav Foundation Ltd. – 51 taxmann.com 198 (Mad.)  CIT v/s. Vacmet Packaging (India) Pvt. Ltd. – 367 ITR 217 (All.)  CIT v/s. Navbharat Duplex Ltd. – Tax Appeal No. 279 of 2010 (All.)  CIT vs STL Extrusion (P) Ltd [ 333 ITR 269] (MP)  CIT v/s Arunananda Textiles (P) Ltd. [333 ITR 116] [KAR]  CIT vs. Peoples General Hospital Ltd. [85 CCH 0223] [MP.]  Deem Roll Tech Ltd. v/s. Dy. CIT [92 taxmann.com 72] (Ahd.)  ACIT vs. El Dorado Biotech (P.) Ltd. […

DY CIT CC 1(4) , MUMBAI vs. M/S HEMADARI MACHINE TOOLS PVT LTD., MUMBAI

ITA 714/MUM/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Aug 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar () & Shri Ravish Sood () Dy. Commissioner Of Income-Tax M/S Hemadari Machine Tools Central Circle -1 (4), Vs. Pvt. Ltd., Podar Centre, 85 Room No. 902, 9Th Floor, Parel Post Office Lane, Off Pratishtha Bhavan, Dr. Ambedkar Road, Parel, Old Cgo Bldg, (Annexe), Mumbai – 400 012 M.K. Road, Mumbai – 400 020

For Appellant: Ms. Ritu Kamal Kishore, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Gurbinder Singh, D.R
Section 131Section 132Section 133ASection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 68

…11) 330 ITR 298 (Del) (iv). Sarogi Credit Corporation Vs. CIT (1976) 103 ITR 344 (Pat) (v). Aravali Trading Co. Vs. ITO (2008) 220 CTR 622 (Raj) (vi) Nemi Chand Kothari Vs. CIT (2004) 3264 ITR 254 (Gau) (vii). CIT Vs. Vacmet Packaging (India) Pvt. Ltd. (2014) 367 ITR 217 (All) (viii). CIT Vs. Orissa Corporation P. Ltd. (1986) 159 ITR 78 (SC) (ix). CIT Vs. Divine Leasing & Finance Ltd. (2008) 299 ITR 268 (Del) (x). CIT Vs. Creative World Telefilm Ltd. (2011) 333 ITR 100 (Bom) (xi). CIT Vs. Value Capital Services Ltd. (2008) 307 ITR 334 (Del) (xii). DCIT Vs. Rohini Builders (2002) 256 ITR 360 (Guj) (xiii). CIT Vs.…

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, BEAWAR vs. M/S SHEPHALI HOTELS & RESORTS PVT. LTD., BEAWAR

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1224/JPR/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur05 Mar 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: : Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Jm & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Am Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita No. 1224/Jp/2018 Fu/Kzkj.K O"Kz@Assessment Year : 2012-13 Cuke The Ito M/S. Shephali Hotels & Resorts Pvt. Ltd Vs. Ward- 1 14-A, Ashirwad Bhawan Beawar Champa Nagar, Beawar Lfkk;H Ys[Kk La-@Thvkbzvkj La-@ Pan/Gir No.: Aamcs 9146 A Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent Jktlo Dh Vksj Ls@ Revenue By : Shri A.K. Mehla, Jcit-Dr Fu/Kzkfjrh Dh Vksj Ls@ Assessee By : Shri Prakul Khurana, Ca Lquokbz Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Hearing : 21/02/2020 ?Kks"K.Kk Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Pronouncement : 05 /03/2020 Vkns'K@ Order Per Vijay Pal Rao, Jm This Appeal By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Cit(A), Ajmer Dated 01-08-2018 For The Assessment Year 2010-11. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds. ‘’In View Of The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Cit(A), Ajmer Has Erred In:- 1. Deleting Addition Of Rs. 21,5,00,000/- Made On Account Of Bogus Share Application Money Received

For Appellant: Shri Prakul Khurana, CAFor Respondent: Shri A.K. Mehla, JCIT-DR fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@
Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 68

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCH ‘B’, JAIPUR Jh fot; iky jko] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh foØe flag ;kno] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k Before : Shri Vijay Pal Rao, JM & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 1224/JP/2018 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year : 2012-13 cuke The ITO M/s. Shephali Hotels & Resorts Pvt. Ltd Vs. Ward- 1 14-A, Ashirwad Bhawan Beawar Champa Nagar, Beawar LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@ PAN/GIR No.: AAMCS 9146 A vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by : Shri A.K. Mehla, JCIT-DR fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by…

DCIT 1(2)(1), MUMBAI vs. INSTITUTIONAL INVESTOR ADVISORY SERVICES INDIA P.LTD, MUMBAI

ITA 3399/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Oct 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Ram Lal Negidcit-1(2)(1) Vs. M/S. Institutional Investor Advisory Room No.535, 5Th Floor Services India Ltd. Aaykar Bhawan Maker Chambers-Iii M.K.Road Nariman Point, Mumbai-400 021 Mumbai-400 020 Pan/Gir No.Aacci5147H (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

Section 143(2)Section 68

…e, the share application money cannot be treated as undisclosed income in the hands of the company. The addition, if at all, should be in the hands of the applicants if their creditworthiness cannot be proved. d) CIT v. Cacmet Packaging (India) P. Lid. (2014) 367 ITR 217 (All) - genuineness of transaction and creditworthiness of application proved. Amount not assessable. e) CIT v. Sachitel Communications P. Ltd. (2014) 227 Taxman 219 (Guj) - where identity and capacity proved, addition was deleted. f) CIT v. Sam Tobacco India ltd. (2014) 222 Taxman 58 (All) - where in support of receipt of share application money…

VIJAY AGGARWAL,DELHI vs. ITO, WARD- 48(5), NEW DELHI

In the result, all the appeals of different assessees are partly allowed

ITA 1077/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 May 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: : Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri L.P. Sahuassessment Year: 2010-11

Section 147Section 148Section 56(2)(vii)Section 68

…exfab Marketing Ltd. ix) ITA No. 4498/D/2010 A.Y. 2003-04 dated 30.12.2010 Intimate Jewels (P) Ltd. x) ITA No. 1078/D/2013 A.Y. 2002-03 (Del) Mithila Credit Services Ltd. vs. ITO xi) ITA No. 5656/D/2012 A.Y. 2004-05 (Del) Gulati Glass Industries (P) Ltd. xii) 367 ITR 217 (All) CIT vs. Vacmet Packaging (India) (P) Ltd. xiii) 44 taxmann.com 460 (Raj) CIT vs. Supertech Diamond Tools (P.) Ltd. xiv) 51 taxmann.com 198 (Mad) CIT vs. Pranav Foundation Ltd. xv) 50 taxmann.com 416 (Mad) Victory Spinning Mills Ltd. ITA Nos. 1077 to 1081/Del/2019 31 xvi) ITA NO. 2082/D/2011 dated 8.12.2014 A.Y. 2007-08 ACIT vs. Divine (In…

DCIT, CIR-10(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S MAA AMBA TOWERS LTD., KOLKATA

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 1381/KOL/2015[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata12 Oct 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri, M. Balaganeshassessment Year :2012-13

Section 131Section 143(3)Section 68

…ing decisions of other High Courts where the unanimous view was that no addition u/s 68 in respect of share application money is permissible once the assessee shows that there was genuine issuance of the equity shares. CIT Vs Vacmet Packaging (India) Pvt Ltd (367 ITR 217) (Allah HC) CIT Vs Pranav Foundation Ltd (229 Taxman 58) (Mad HC) CIT Vs Supertech Diamond Tools Pvt Ltd (229 Taxrnan 62) (Raj HC) CIT Vs Victory Spinning Mills Limited (50 taxmann.com 416) (Mad HC) 4.13 In all the above decisions the relief was allowed by the High Courts by placing reliance on the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of CIT Vs…

ITO, JAIPUR vs. ALOOK FINETRADE P LTD, JAIPUR

In the result, ground no.2 taken by the assessee company is allowed

ITA 180/JPR/2015[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur14 May 2018AY 2005-06
For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal (CA)For Respondent: Smt. Seema Meena (JCIT) fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@
Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES, JAIPUR Jh fot; iky jko] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh foØe flag ;kno] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JM & SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 180/JP/2015 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year : 2005-06 cuke Income Tax Officer, M/s Alok Fintrade (P) Ltd., 411, 3rd Floor, Shalimar Complex, Vs. Ward-2(2), Jaipur. Church Road, M.I. Road, Jaipur. LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AAECA 6776 G vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent izR;k{ksi.k@C.O. No. 20/JP/2015 (Arising out of vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No.…

SHIVALIK KINEMA PVT. LTD.,JAIPUR vs. DCIT, JAIPUR

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

ITA 400/JPR/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur23 Apr 2018AY 2010-11
For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal (CA)For Respondent: Smt. Seema Meena (JCIT)
Section 139(1)Section 147Section 148Section 68

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES, JAIPUR Jh fot; ikWy jko] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh foØe flag ;kno] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JM & SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA. No. 400/JP/2016 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years : 2010-11 cuke M/s Shivalik Kinema Pvt. Ltd., DCIT, Vs. E-822, Road No. 14, VKI, Circle-04 Jaipur Jaipur LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AAACS6572L vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Shri P.C. Parwal (CA) jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by : Smt. Seema Meena (JCIT) lq…