RANGOLI INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LIMITED,SURAT vs. ACIT, CIRCLE 2(1)(1), SURAT

ITA 861/SRT/2024Status: DisposedITAT Surat17 September 2026AY 2012-134 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) failed to consider the assessee's submissions and evidence, leading to an ex-parte order. Therefore, the matter was remanded back to the CIT(A) for proper verification and adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee received share capital and premium of Rs. 6,71,25,000/-. The Assessing Officer added this amount under Section 68, finding the explanation for the source of funds unsatisfactory. The CIT(A) dismissed the assessee's appeal.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in passing an ex-parte order without providing a sufficient opportunity to be heard and considering the submitted evidence. Whether the addition of share premium under Section 68 was justified.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 68,Section 78(2),Section 69C

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, SURAT BENCH, SURAT

Before: MS. SUCHITRA KAMBLE & SHRI B.M. BIYANI

For Respondent: Shri J.K. Chandnani, CIT(DR)
Pronounced: 17.09.2026

PER : SUCHITRA KAMBLE, J M:

The appeal filed by the assessee is against the order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [in short “CIT(A)”] dated 19.06.2024 for the Assessment Year (in short “AY”) 2012-13. 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:

“1. On the facts and circumstances of the case as well as law on the subject, the learned CIT(A) has erred in passing ex-parte order wi

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 68

All 29,931 judgments and leading authorities on Section 68 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →