ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, KANPUR vs. BLUE WORLD CORPORATION PRIVATE LIMITED, KANPUR
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, finding that the share applicant company, M/s Newjet Trexim Pvt. Ltd., had sufficient creditworthiness and that the amounts received by the assessee were either explained or had already been taxed in the hands of the share applicant.
What were the facts?
The Revenue appealed against the CIT(A)'s order deleting additions made under Section 68 and 69C of the Income Tax Act. The additions were related to share application money and unexplained funds received from M/s Newjet Trexim Pvt. Ltd., which the AO considered to be from shell companies.
What were the issues?
Whether the additions made on account of share application money and unexplained funds were justified, and whether the share applicant had sufficient creditworthiness to provide the funds.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
Section 68,Section 69C,Section 147,Section 148,Section 133A,Section 131,Section 271(1)(c)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, LUCKNOW BENCH “B”, LUCKNOW
Before: SHRI. SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA & SHRI NIKHIL CHOUDHARY
PER BENCH: These appeals have been preferred by the Revenue against the orders dated 17.10.2023 and 18.10.2023, passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Kanpur – 4 [Ld. CIT(A) ] for Assessment Year 2013-14. 2.0 The brief facts of the case are that the assessee- company is a Private Limited Company. A survey action under section 133A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called 'the Act’) in the case of the assessee was carried out on 07.02.2018. Thereafter, the case of the assessee was centralized with the juri iction of DCIT, Central Circle-I, Kanpur, vide order dated 21.01.2021 passed under section 127 of the Act. The assessee
ITA Nos.438 & 439/LKW/2023 filed its return of
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.
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
- ACIT Central Bilaspur, Bilaspur vs Arun Kumar Agrawal, SaktiITSSA 26/RPR/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Neo Incorporation, Rajkot vs DCIT Circle- 1(2), RajkotITA 471/RJT/2026[2012-2013]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2012-2013
- Bliss Dealtrade Private Limited, Kolkata vs Income Tax Officer - Ward 9(2) Kolkata…ITA 208/KOL/2026[2012-13]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2012-13
- Hemal Paresh Madeka, Rajkot vs Asst.Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 955/RJT/2026[2020-21]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2020-21
- Ajaybhai Dineshbhai Bagdai, Near Central… vs The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(2)(1), New…ITA 74/RJT/2026[2013-14]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2013-14
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Utkal Highways, Bidanasi vs. Union Of INDIAOrissa · 16 Oct 2026
- Pradeep Kumar Behera vs. Superintendent CGST And Central Excise., CuttackOrissa · 16 Oct 2026
- Manas Behera vs. Commissioner, CT And GST Odisha, CuttackOrissa · 16 Oct 2026
- Pramod Kumar Nayak vs. Superintendent, CGST And Central Excise, KendraparaOrissa · 16 Oct 2026
- Nirmal Kumar Sharma S/O Ram Swroop Sharma vs. Union Of INDIARajasthan · 16 Oct 2026