DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE 1 NOIDA, NOIA vs. M/S AJAY REALCON PVT. LTD., NOIDA

In the result, appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal

section 68 can be sustained in the year of receipt.( Refer Page No. 109 of the CIT(A) order of M/s Allure Developers Pvt Ltd. for AY 2020-21).In this regard reliance is being placed on the following judicial pronouncements:- ITA No.3558/Del/2025 & Others i. Income-tax Officer vs. Kayathwal Estate (P.) Ltd. [2022] 139 taxmann.com

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, NOIDA vs. STAR LANDCRAFT PRIVATE LIMITED, GHAZIABAD

In the result, appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal

section 68 can be sustained in the year of receipt.( Refer Page No. 109 of the CIT(A) order of M/s Allure Developers Pvt Ltd. for AY 2020-21).In this regard reliance is being placed on the following judicial pronouncements:- ITA No.3558/Del/2025 & Others i. Income-tax Officer vs. Kayathwal Estate (P.) Ltd. [2022] 139 taxmann.com

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, NOIDA vs. STAR LANDCRAFT PRIVATE LIMITED, GHAZIABAD

In the result, appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal

section 68 can be sustained in the year of receipt.( Refer Page No. 109 of the CIT(A) order of M/s Allure Developers Pvt Ltd. for AY 2020-21).In this regard reliance is being placed on the following judicial pronouncements:- ITA No.3558/Del/2025 & Others i. Income-tax Officer vs. Kayathwal Estate (P.) Ltd. [2022] 139 taxmann.com

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE 1 NOIDA, NOIDA vs. M/S ALLURE DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal

section 68 can be sustained in the year of receipt.( Refer Page No. 109 of the CIT(A) order of M/s Allure Developers Pvt Ltd. for AY 2020-21).In this regard reliance is being placed on the following judicial pronouncements:- ITA No.3558/Del/2025 & Others i. Income-tax Officer vs. Kayathwal Estate (P.) Ltd. [2022] 139 taxmann.com

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE 1 NOIDA, NOIDA vs. M/S ALLURE DEVELOPERS PRIVATE LIMITED, NOIDA

In the result, appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal

section 68 can be sustained in the year of receipt.( Refer Page No. 109 of the CIT(A) order of M/s Allure Developers Pvt Ltd. for AY 2020-21).In this regard reliance is being placed on the following judicial pronouncements:- ITA No.3558/Del/2025 & Others i. Income-tax Officer vs. Kayathwal Estate (P.) Ltd. [2022] 139 taxmann.com

DY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, NOIDA vs. M/S ALLURE DEVELOPERS PRIVATE LIMITED, DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal

section 68 can be sustained in the year of receipt.( Refer Page No. 109 of the CIT(A) order of M/s Allure Developers Pvt Ltd. for AY 2020-21).In this regard reliance is being placed on the following judicial pronouncements:- ITA No.3558/Del/2025 & Others i. Income-tax Officer vs. Kayathwal Estate (P.) Ltd. [2022] 139 taxmann.com

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE 1 NOIDA, NOIDA vs. M/S ACE RESIDENCY PVT. LTD, GHAZIABAD

In the result, appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal

section 68 can be sustained in the year of receipt.( Refer Page No. 109 of the CIT(A) order of M/s Allure Developers Pvt Ltd. for AY 2020-21).In this regard reliance is being placed on the following judicial pronouncements:- ITA No.3558/Del/2025 & Others i. Income-tax Officer vs. Kayathwal Estate (P.) Ltd. [2022] 139 taxmann.com

ACIT, CIRCLE-18(2), NEW DELHI vs. NIIT TECHNOLOGIES LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal

section 68 can be sustained in the year of receipt.( Refer Page No. 109 of the CIT(A) order of M/s Allure Developers Pvt Ltd. for AY 2020-21).In this regard reliance is being placed on the following judicial pronouncements:- ITA No.3558/Del/2025 & Others i. Income-tax Officer vs. Kayathwal Estate (P.) Ltd. [2022] 139 taxmann.com

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Section 68 of the IT Act. The assessed has to prima facie prove (1) the identity of the creditor/subscriber; (2) the genuineness of the transaction, namely, whether it has been transmitted through banking or other indisputable channels; (3) the creditworthiness or financial strength of the creditor/subscriber. (4) If relevant details of the address or PAN identity of the creditor/subscriber

ITO, NEW DELHI vs. SH. SUNIL NAYYAR, DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed and Cross

Bench: Sh. Kuldip Singhdr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 6168/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 Income Tax Officer, Vs Sh. Sunil Nayyar, Ward-49(3), R/O 81-A, Vikrant Enclave, New Delhi Mayapuri, New Delhi-110064 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Abvpn3963B

68 is that there has to credit of amount in the books of the assessee and such credit shall be sum of money emphasis is placed on the physiology used in the section wherein the phrase any sum is found credited has been used and the legislation has not used the word deposited. In other word the balancing effect

CIT vs. TITAN SECURITIES LTD.

section 68 to prove and establish the identity and creditworthiness of the share applicant and the genuineness of the transaction. In such a case, the Assessing Officer cannot sit back with folded hands till the assessee exhausts all the evidence or material in his possession and then come forward to merely reject the same, without carrying out any verification

CIT vs. TITAN SECURITIES LTD

Bench: CASES PERTAINING TO SPL.DIVISION BENCHES

section 68 to prove and establish the identity and creditworthiness of the share applicant and the genuineness of the transaction. In such a case, the Assessing Officer cannot sit back with folded hands till the assessee exhausts all the evidence or material in his possession and then come forward to merely reject the same, without carrying out any verification

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - 7 vs. BIKRAM SINGH,

The appeal is allowed in the above terms

Bench: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR,HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH

Section 68 of the Act. Order of ITAT 15. The ITAT by order dated 19th July, 2016 partly allowed the Assessee’s appeal and deleted the additions in respect of four of the creditors. The summary of the conclusions of the ITAT in respect of the eight creditors and the transactions is set out below: (i) In respect

DCIT, CIRCLE-4(2), NEW DELHI vs. BITS N BYTES SOFT P.LTD, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Judicialmember & Shri M. Balaganeshdcit, Vs. M/S. Bits N Bytes Pvt. Ltd, Circle-4(2), 6020, Sector B/8, Vasant New Delhi Kunj, New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Aadcb1497L

section 68 of the Act in respect of share premium received from non-residents in the facts and circumstances of the case. M/s. Bits N Bytes Pvt. Ltd 3. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the materials available on record. The assessee is engaged in the business of developing vehicle tracking systems and providing services in relation

ACIT, CC-01, NEW DELHI vs. HARISONS DIAMONDS PVT. LTD., DELHI

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

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms Astha Chandra

section 115BBE of the Act as amended by Taxation Laws (Second Amendment) Act, 2016. (iv) That the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has failed to appreciate that substitution of provisions by Taxation Laws (Second Amendment) Act, 2016 w.e.f. 1.4.2017 was not retrospective in nature but was prospective and only application from financial year 2017-18 relevant

HARISONS DIAMONDS PRIVATE LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CC-1, DELHI

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

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms Astha Chandra

section 115BBE of the Act as amended by Taxation Laws (Second Amendment) Act, 2016. (iv) That the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has failed to appreciate that substitution of provisions by Taxation Laws (Second Amendment) Act, 2016 w.e.f. 1.4.2017 was not retrospective in nature but was prospective and only application from financial year 2017-18 relevant

ALEXIS GLOBAL PRIVATE LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 2(2), DELHI, DELHI

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

68 of the Act and the Tribunal was not competent to make the said addition under Section 69-A of the Act, the TANVI entire order of the Tribunal stand vitiated in law." Hence, from the aforesaid, it is clear that the addition made as unexplained expenditure is not sustainable in law and the Hon'ble Income Tax Appellate

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-19, NEW DELHI vs. M/S K.R. PULP & PAPERS LTD,, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri N.K. Choudhry

68 of the I.T. Act, 1961. 8.1. Before deciding the appeal on merit, we would first like to decide the validity of the re-assessment proceedings. As stated earlier, the assessment year involved in the instant case is A.Y. 2009-10 and the original assessment was completed under section 143(3) on 22.11.2011. We find the assessee in response