GURU-G-TEX PRINT PRIVATE LIMITED ,SURAT vs. ITO, WARD 1(1)(1), SURAT, SURAT

PDF · subscribers
ITA 314/SRT/2026Status: DisposedITAT Surat28 October 2026AY 2012-134 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the CIT(A) had issued notices of hearing/compliance but did not provide details of their service to the assessee. The assessee had filed details before the AO, which were also available before the CIT(A), but these were not considered. Consequently, the Tribunal found it appropriate to remand the matter back to the file of the CIT(A) for proper consideration and verification of the details. The CIT(A) was directed to adjudicate the issue on its merits, and the assessee was to be given an opportunity of hearing in accordance with the principles of natural justice. The Tribunal did not decide the merits of the addition itself but rather the procedural deficiency in the CIT(A)'s order. The issue of whether the addition under Section 68 was justified was left undecided on merits at this stage.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Guru-G-Tex Print Private Limited, is appealing an order dated 09.12.2025 passed by the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi. The appeal pertains to Assessment Year 2012-13. The Assessing Officer (AO) selected the assessee's case for scrutiny under Section 143 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. During the assessment, the AO sought details regarding share capital receipts totaling Rs. 10,42,88,000/-. Despite the assessee providing complete details, the AO made an addition of this amount under Section 68 of the Act. The assessee appealed this order to the CIT(A), who passed an ex-parte order dismissing the appeal for want of response. The assessee's grounds of appeal challenge the CIT(A)'s confirmation of the addition without considering submissions and request for personal hearing.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the addition of Rs. 10,42,88,000/- under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, was justified without considering the submissions filed by the assessee (Assessee's contention: The CIT(A) erred by confirming the addition without considering the detailed submissions filed before both the AO and the appellate authority. The assessee argues that the CIT(A) passed an ex-parte order and dismissed the appeal for want of response, which is bad in law. The assessee seeks deletion of the addition and a personal hearing. Revenue's contention: The Ld. Departmental Representative relied upon the assessment order and the order of the CIT(A).). 2. Whether the order passed by the CIT(A)-NFAC without considering the submission is bad in law and should be set aside and quashed (Assessee's contention: The order is bad in law as it was passed without considering the assessee's submissions. Revenue's contention: Not recorded.). 3. Whether personal hearing should be granted (Assessee's contention: Personal hearing may be granted. Revenue's contention: Not recorded.).

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 68,Section 143,Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, SURAT BENCH, SURAT

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

Pronounced: 28.10.2026

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SURAT BENCH, SURAT BEFORE MS. SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI B.M. BIYANI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.314/SRT/2026 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2012-13) GURU-G-TEX PRINT PRIVATE ITO, WARD 1(1)(1), SURAT LIMITED ROOM # 111, 38, DIAMOND NAGAR, OPP. AAYAKAR BHAVAN, Vs. MIRANAGAR, VARACHHA ROAD, MAJURAGATE, SURAT-395006, GUJARAT SURAT-395002, GUJARAT अपीलधर्थी Appellant प्रत्यर्थी Respondent

Permanent Account Number of Assessee: AADCG5545Q

अपीलधर्थी द्वारा/Appellant represented by: Shri Suresh K Kabra, CA प्रत्यर्थी द्वारा/Respondent represented by: Shri Ashish Kumar, Sr. DR सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of conclusion of hearing: 19.08.2026 घोषणा की तारीख / Date of pronouncement: 28.10.2026 O R D E R PER : SUCHITRA KAMBLE, J M:

The appeal filed by the assessee is against the order passed by the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [in short “CIT(A)”] dated 09.12.2025 for the Assessment Year (in short “AY”) 2012-13. 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: “1. The Ld. CIT(A), NFAC has erred and was not just and proper on the facts of the case and in law in confirming the addition of Rs.10,42,88,000/- u/s 68 without considering the submission filed by the appellant vide Ack No Re 01042114595930 dated 01/04/2021 and dismissing the appeal for want of response from the appellant. 2.1 The Order by the CIT(A)-NFAC without considering the submission is bad in law and may be kindly set aside and quashed.

ITA No.314/SRT/2026 (A.Y. 2012-13) GURU-G-TEX PRINT PRIVATE LIMITED 2.2 The addition made by Ld. Assessing Officer and confirmed by the Ld. CIT(A)- NFAC may be kindly deleted. 2.3 Personal hearing may be granted. Any other relief that your honours may deem fit may be granted. 2.4. 3. The assessee craves leave to add, amend, modify alter or delete any of the grounds at the time of hearing.” 3. The assessee is a private limited company engaged in the trading of textiles fabrics. The assessee's case was selected for scrutiny u/s 143 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”) and assessment order was passed u/s 143(3). During the course of assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer (in short the “AO”) had asked for details with respect to receipt of amount towards Share Capital as under: Name of the No of Shares Amount @ Rs Share Premium Total Amount Investor 10/- @Rs 90/- @Rs 100/- ALPESH 46,900 4,69,000 42,21,000 46,90,000 BODRA JAGDISH 2,30,000 23,00,000 2,07,00,000 2,30,00,000 BODRA SANGITA 3,40,000 34,00,000 3,06,00,000 3,40,00,000 BODRA RAMESH 1,50,000 15,00,000 1,35,00,000 1,50,00,000 BODRA SUNIL BODRA 1,63,330 16,33,300 1,46,99,700 1,63,33,000 URMILA 1,12,650 1,12,650 1,01,38,500 1,12,65,000 BODRA (Four Square Future) TOTAL 10,42,880 1,04,28,800 9,38,59,200 10,42,88,000

The AO had issued show cause as to why such receipts of Share Capital may not be added u/s 68 to the total income. The assessee submitted complete details, which is incorporated in the assessment order. However, the AO being predetermined made the addition u/s 68 of Rs.10,42,88,000/- considering the reply is not acceptable. 4. Being aggrieved by the assessment order, the assessee filed appeal before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) passed ex-parte order and dismissed the appeal of the assessee.

ITA No.314/SRT/2026 (A.Y. 2012-13) GURU-G-TEX PRINT PRIVATE LIMITED

5.

The Ld. Authorised Representative (in short “the Ld. AR”) submitted that the CIT(A) has not at all considered the details filed before the AO as well as before the appellate authority. Therefore, the Ld. AR requested that the matter maybe remanded back to the file of the CIT(A).

6.

The Ld. Departmental Representative (in short “Ld. DR”) relied upon the assessment order and the order of the CIT(A).

7.

We have heard both the parties and perused all the relevant materials available on record. It is pertinent to note that the CIT(A), though issued the notice of hearing/compliance, has not given the details of service of these notices to the assessee. The assessee filed the details before the AO which were before the CIT(A) as well but the same were not considered by the CIT(A). Therefore, it will be appropriate to remand back this matter to the file of the CIT(A) for proper consideration/verification of the details and adjudicate the same on merit. Needless to say, the assessee be given opportunity of hearing by following principles of natural justice.

8.

In result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose.

Order pronounced in the open court on 28.10.2026

Sd/- Sd/- (B.M. BIYANI) (SUCHITRA KAMBLE) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Surat; Dated: 28.10.2026 //True Copy// * Kishore, Sr. P.S.

Copy of the Order forwarded to: 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent

ITA No.314/SRT/2026 (A.Y. 2012-13) GURU-G-TEX PRINT PRIVATE LIMITED 3. CIT- concerned 4. DR, ITAT, Surat 5. Guard File By order, Digitally signed by HEMA KISHORE HEMA KISHORE JAKKA JAKKA Date: 2026.10.30 15:17:21 +05'30' Assistant Registrar/Sr.PS/PS ITAT, Surat Bench

More judgments on Section 68

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →