Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 9 of 9 (0.21 seconds)Section 131 in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Cit vs Nipun Builders & Develpers Pvt. Ltd. on 7 January, 2013
14. The Ld. AR vehemently argued that in the case of Nova
Promoters, which is relied upon by the Ld. DR, entry operators as
given statement that they have issued cheques and in turn received
cash but admittedly no such statement by any entry operator in
this case, and also submitted that in the case of Nova Promoters the
ratio of decision of lovely exports will be applicable where AO has no
material in his possession to show that particular submitted by the
assessee are false and cannot be acted upon, then no addition can
be made on the hands of the company and remedy is to go after
shareholders and in the present case the Ld. AO has absolutely no
adverse material against the assessee company in terms of
statement, entry provider and confirmation etc. the Ld. AR also
submitted that in the case of CIT vs. Nipun Builders & Developers
(P) Ltd. (2013) 30 taxmann.com 292, the addition was confirmed
14
ITA No.- 6338/Del/2017
AJ Energy Pvt. Ltd.
Commissioner Of Income Tax vs Victor Electodes Ltd on 12 May, 2010
15. The Ld. AR relied upon the judgment 2010 (5) TMI 62, CIT vs.
Victor Electodes Ltd., in which Hon'le Delhi High Court held that
there is no legal obligation on the assessee to produce some director
or other representative of the applicant companies before the AO.
The relevant para no. 6 to 9 is reproduced as under:
Commissioner Of Income Tax vs Divine Leasing And Finance Ltd. [Along ... on 16 November, 2006
In the case of CIT vs. Divine Leasing and Finance Ltd., and
General Exports and Credits Ltd. 2006 (11) TMI 121, Hon'ble Delhi
High Court held that in the matter of share capital- cash credit-
assessee co. has furnished all the necessary details such as PAN
No. etc. of share applicants to prove their genuineness and credit
worthiness and the Ld. AO has neither controverted nor
disapproved the material filed by the assessee and failed to react to
the shifting of the burden to investigate into the creditworthiness of
the share applicants and this appeal is dismissed and addition are
not justified as part of share capital.
Commissioner Of Income Tax ???Ii Etc. ... vs Kamdhenu Steel & Alloys Ltd. on 23 December, 2011
Likewise, in the case of CIT vs.
Kamdhenu Steel & Alloys Ltd., 2011(12) TMI 394, Hon'ble Delhi
High Court reiterated that once adequate evidence / material is
given, which would prima facie discharge the burden of the
17
ITA No.- 6338/Del/2017
AJ Energy Pvt. Ltd.
Article 8 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Asst Cit 24(2), Mumbai vs Lovely Fragrances, Mumbai on 7 December, 2018
In the case Lovely Exports (supra)
as mentioned hereinabove, the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that if
the share application money is received by the assessee company
from alleged bogus shareholders whose name is given to the Ld. AO
then the Department is free to reopen individual assessment in
accordance with law.
The Income Tax Act, 1961
1