BHUMIKA FISCAL SERVICES PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD - 1(3), KOLKATA

ITA 1885/KOL/2026Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 September 2026AY 2008-200914 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the assessee had provided sufficient evidence to prove the identity, creditworthiness, and genuineness of the share transactions. The AO and CIT(A) failed to conduct proper inquiries into the evidence submitted by the assessee.

What were the facts?

The assessee received share capital and premium amounting to ₹10,69,00,000/-. The Assessing Officer (AO) initially framed the assessment, but the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (PCIT) invoked revisionary powers under Section 263, finding the AO's inquiry insufficient. In de-novo proceedings, the AO made the addition as unexplained cash credit due to non-compliance with summons by directors.

What were the issues?

Whether the addition of share capital and premium as unexplained cash credit was justified when the assessee provided substantial evidence of identity, creditworthiness, and genuineness of the transactions?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 68,Section 263,Section 133(6),Section 131

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” BENCH, KOLKATA

For Appellant: Shri Soumitra Choudhury
For Respondent: Shri Raman Garg, DR
Hearing: 08.09.2026Pronounced: 16.09.2026

Per Rajesh Kumar, AM:

This is an appeal preferred by the assessee against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the “Ld. CIT(A)”] dated 01.12.2025 for the AY 2008-09. 2. At the outset, we note that the appeal of the assessee is barred by limitation by 83 days. At the time of hearing the counsel of the assessee explained the reasons for delay in filing the appeal. The Ld. D.R did not raise any objection in condoning the delay. After hearing the rival contentions and perusing the materials available on record, we find that the Bhumika Fiscal Services Pvt. Ltd.; A.Y. 2008-09 delay is for bonafide and genuine

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 →