Just a moment...

Top
FeedbackReport
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Feedback/Report an Error
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: ?
Even if Sort by Date is selected, exact match will be shown on the top.
RelevanceDate
    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
      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

        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>Assessee successfully proves genuineness of long-term borrowings from related parties under section 68</h1> <h3>ITO, Ward 1 (1), New Delhi. Versus M/s. AMB Homes Pvt. Ltd. And (Vice-Versa)</h3> ITO, Ward 1 (1), New Delhi. Versus M/s. AMB Homes Pvt. Ltd. And (Vice-Versa) - TMI Issues Involved:1. Legitimacy of the assessment under Section 144 of the Income Tax Act.2. Validity of additions under Section 14A of the Act.3. Validity of additions under Section 68 concerning unsecured loans.4. Creditworthiness and genuineness of transactions with specific parties.5. Treatment of share application money versus loans and advances.Detailed Analysis:1. Legitimacy of the Assessment under Section 144:The assessment was conducted under Section 144 due to the non-compliance of the assessee with the notices issued under Sections 143(2) and 142(1). The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)] upheld the assessment under Section 144, confirming that the Assessing Officer (AO) followed due procedure. The non-compliance justified the AO's decision to proceed with a best judgment assessment.2. Validity of Additions under Section 14A:The CIT(A) deleted the additions under Section 14A, noting that the assessee did not receive any exempt income during the relevant assessment year. This decision was based on the principle that Section 14A disallowance is not applicable in the absence of exempt income.3. Validity of Additions under Section 68 Concerning Unsecured Loans:The AO made additions under Section 68, suspecting the unsecured loans as unexplained cash credits. The CIT(A) reviewed the evidence provided by the assessee, including confirmations and supporting documents, and remanded the matter for further verification. Post-verification, the CIT(A) deleted most of the additions, except for Rs. 1 crore from M/s. Ambika Tradeexpo Pvt. Ltd., due to insufficient evidence to prove identity, creditworthiness, and genuineness.4. Creditworthiness and Genuineness of Transactions with Specific Parties:- Manoj Sethi: The CIT(A) found the identity, creditworthiness, and genuineness of the transaction with Manoj Sethi, a director of the company, to be established, as substantial amounts were repaid during the year.- Crayons Advertising Ltd.: The CIT(A) accepted the transactions as genuine based on confirmations and substantial declared income by the party.- Mani Mudra Vincom Pvt. Ltd.: Despite initial concerns about creditworthiness, the CIT(A) accepted the transactions as genuine after considering interest payments and supporting documents.- Omni Media Communication Pvt. Ltd.: The CIT(A) acknowledged a minor classification error but accepted the transactions as genuine due to confirmations and supporting documents.- Pawansut Media Services Pvt. Ltd.: The CIT(A) accepted the transactions based on balance sheet analysis and confirmations.- Real Vyapar Pvt. Ltd.: Despite initial concerns, the CIT(A) found the transactions genuine after verifying the reply and supporting documents.5. Treatment of Share Application Money Versus Loans and Advances:The CIT(A) noted misclassifications in the balance sheet regarding amounts received as share application money versus loans and advances. However, these were considered minor errors, and the transactions were accepted as genuine where appropriate confirmations were provided.Conclusion:The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision to delete most additions under Section 68, except for the Rs. 1 crore from M/s. Ambika Tradeexpo Pvt. Ltd., due to insufficient evidence. The appeal by the Revenue was dismissed, and the cross-objections by the assessee were also dismissed, as the issues were resolved in favor of the assessee. The Tribunal emphasized the importance of proving identity, creditworthiness, and genuineness in transactions involving unsecured loans and share application money.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found