Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 17 (0.57 seconds)
M/S Trimurthy Finvest Limited, ... vs The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, ... on 14 August, 2023 cites

Religare Finvest Ltd., New Delhi vs Dcit, Circle- 21(1), New Delhi on 13 July, 2023

40. We are unable to comprehend that as to how the aforesaid order of the ITAT, Indore would assist the case of the assessee company before us. It is not the existence of the assessee company before us which is in question, but it is the authenticity of its claim of having raised genuine amount of share application money from 41 shares applicant/subscriber companies which is the issue for which our indulgence has been sought. Considering the fact that the addition in the case of the assesse company had been made by the A.O u/s.68 of the Act, for the reason that it had failed to discharge the onus that was cast upon it as regards proving the authenticity of its claim of having received genuine amount of share application money from the aforementioned investor companies, therefore, reliance placed on the aforesaid order of the ITAT, Indore in the case of ACIT Vs. Shri Pramod Kumar Sethi (supra), being not relevant to the issue 47 M/s. Trimurti Finvest Limited Vs. DCIT, Circle-1(1), Bilaspur ITA No.19/RPR/2018 in question before us, would by no means come to the rescue of the assessee company.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Delhi Cites 34 - Cited by 2 - Full Document

Aurangabad Electricals Ltd vs Commissioner Of Central Excise, ... on 23 April, 2015

21. Although we, in terms of our observations above by relying on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Aurangabad Electricals Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise & Customs, Aurangabad (2011) 1 STD 118 had admitted the synopsis/written submissions/affidavit that the assessee appellant had filed a/w his letter seeking permission for admission of the same (received through post), however, it would be relevant to point out that though the same states that an "Annexure-A" is being enclosed but no such annexure is found enclosed with the said application/written submission/synopsis.
Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal Cites 11 - Cited by 4 - Full Document

Principal Commissioner Of Income ... vs Nra Iron And Steel Pvt. Ltd. Through ... on 5 March, 2019

We, say so, for the reason that as held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of NRA Iron & Steel Pvt. Ltd. (supra), if the assessee is not able to provide a satisfactory explanation of the nature and source of the investments made, then it is open to the revenue to hold that it is the income of the assessee, and there would be no further burden on the revenue to show that the income is from any particulars source.
Supreme Court of India Cites 14 - Cited by 121 - I Malhotra - Full Document

Chhattisgarh Metaliks And Alloys Pvt. ... vs Income Tax Officer -3(3), Raipur on 13 March, 2023

(i). proving the identity and creditworthiness of the share applicant/subscriber companies, and establishing the genuineness of the transactions under consideration based on irrefutable documentary evidence; and (ii). explanation of the share applicant /subscriber companies about the nature and source of the sum recorded against their name in the books of the assesse company; therefore, the reliance placed by the Ld. AR on the aforesaid order passed in 45 M/s. Trimurti Finvest Limited Vs. DCIT, Circle-1(1), Bilaspur ITA No.19/RPR/2018 the case of Chhattisgarh Metaliks and Alloys (P) Ltd. Vs. ITO (supra) would not come to its rescue.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Raipur Cites 11 - Cited by 3 - Full Document

Shri Pramod Kumar Sethi, Indore vs The Acit 3(1), Indore on 6 November, 2018

40. We are unable to comprehend that as to how the aforesaid order of the ITAT, Indore would assist the case of the assessee company before us. It is not the existence of the assessee company before us which is in question, but it is the authenticity of its claim of having raised genuine amount of share application money from 41 shares applicant/subscriber companies which is the issue for which our indulgence has been sought. Considering the fact that the addition in the case of the assesse company had been made by the A.O u/s.68 of the Act, for the reason that it had failed to discharge the onus that was cast upon it as regards proving the authenticity of its claim of having received genuine amount of share application money from the aforementioned investor companies, therefore, reliance placed on the aforesaid order of the ITAT, Indore in the case of ACIT Vs. Shri Pramod Kumar Sethi (supra), being not relevant to the issue 47 M/s. Trimurti Finvest Limited Vs. DCIT, Circle-1(1), Bilaspur ITA No.19/RPR/2018 in question before us, would by no means come to the rescue of the assessee company.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Indore Cites 11 - Cited by 8 - Full Document
1   2 Next