Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:
TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
By Case ID:

When case Id is present, search is done only for this

Sort By:
RelevanceDefaultDate
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      Show All SummariesHide All Summaries
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        -

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        <h1>Tribunal Invalidates Reassessment, Upholds Deletion of Rs. 10.50 Lakhs</h1> <h3>ITO, Ward 10 (3), New Delhi Versus M/s. Direct Sales (P) Ltd. and vice-versa</h3> ITO, Ward 10 (3), New Delhi Versus M/s. Direct Sales (P) Ltd. and vice-versa - TMI Issues Involved:1. Validity of reassessment under Sections 147 to 151 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.2. Deletion of addition of Rs. 10.50 lakhs under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.Detailed Analysis:1. Validity of Reassessment under Sections 147 to 151 of the Income Tax Act, 1961:The assessee challenged the reassessment order, arguing that the necessary and mandatory conditions of Sections 147 to 151 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, were not complied with. The case was reopened based on information from the Investigation Wing indicating that the assessee company was a beneficiary of accommodation entries from entry operators. The assessee contended that the Additional CIT did not record his satisfaction by applying his independent mind but merely affixed his signature, which does not meet the legal requirements.The Tribunal referred to a previous order (I.T.A. No. 4122 and C.O. No. 388 dated 22 Oct 2014) where similar reasons and satisfaction were recorded under Section 151, and it was decided in favor of the assessee. The Tribunal noted that the CIT's approval was merely an 'approved' signature without recorded satisfaction, which does not comply with Section 151. The Tribunal cited several judgments, including the Mumbai Bench in ITA 611/Mum/2004 and the Delhi High Court in United Electrical Co. Pvt. Ltd. Vs CIT, emphasizing that the superior authority must apply its mind and record satisfaction before granting approval for reassessment.The Tribunal concluded that the reassessment was invalid due to the lack of proper satisfaction as required by law, thereby allowing the assessee's cross-objection.2. Deletion of Addition of Rs. 10.50 Lakhs under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961:The Revenue was aggrieved by the CIT(A)'s action of deleting the addition of Rs. 10.50 lakhs made by the Assessing Officer (A.O.) under Section 68. The A.O. had added this amount, holding that the assessee failed to establish the creditworthiness of the share applicants and the genuineness of the transactions, despite filing copies of IT returns, confirmation copies, and bank statements. The A.O. relied on statements from certain individuals indicating that the shareholders were used for providing accommodation entries.The CIT(A) granted relief to the assessee, relying on the case law of Lovely Exports Ltd. and other decisions, noting that the assessee had filed all necessary documents and that the A.O. did not issue summons to the shareholders for examination.The Tribunal, after hearing both parties, noted that the assessee had provided sufficient documentation, and the A.O. did not take further steps to verify the shareholders' identities. The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, emphasizing that mere non-production of shareholders does not justify the addition under Section 68 if the assessee has provided adequate documentation.Conclusion:- The reassessment was deemed invalid due to non-compliance with the mandatory satisfaction requirements under Sections 147 to 151, leading to the allowance of the assessee's cross-objection.- The addition of Rs. 10.50 lakhs under Section 68 was deleted as the assessee had provided sufficient documentation, and the A.O. did not adequately pursue verification of the shareholders.Thus, the Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal and allowed the assessee's cross-objection.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found