INDIAN RED CROSS SOCIETY AJMER BRANCH,AJMER vs. CIT (EXEMPTION), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1003/JPR/2026Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur29 October 2026AY 2026-276 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay of 34 days in filing the appeal, accepting the assessee's explanation regarding the incorrect email ID used for communication. Regarding the merits, the Tribunal perused the materials, including the paper book and the AO's records. The assessee had submitted detailed replies to the AO, explaining that the share application money of Rs. 45 lakhs was received during FY 2012-13 and the allotment of shares was done during AY 2014-15. The balance sheet as on 31.03.2014 clearly showed the receipt of share application money pending allotment. The assessee also produced board resolutions, applications for allotment, bank statements, and PAN cards of investors, which the AO had not considered. The Tribunal found that the addition made under Section 68 for AY 2014-15 on account of share application money was not sustainable in law, as the receipt of funds predated the assessment year in question. Therefore, the entire addition made by the AO was liable to be deleted. The appeal filed by the assessee was allowed.

What were the facts?

The assessee, M/s. ATI Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., filed its return of income for Assessment Year 2014-15 on 13.11.2014, declaring a total income of Rs. 14,54,620/-. The Assessing Officer (AO) initiated scrutiny assessment and asked for details of share capital received from four entities: Anuneeta Corporate Services Pvt. Ltd., Tej Corporate Services Pvt. Ltd., Nova Corporate Services Pvt. Ltd., and Tiscon Sales Agency Pvt. Ltd., totaling Rs. 45,00,000/-. The AO added this amount under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, as not genuine, after summons issued under Section 133(6) were returned unserved for three parties and one party did not reply. The assessee appealed to the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)], who dismissed the appeal ex-parte for non-prosecution. The assessee then filed an appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) against the CIT(A)'s order.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the Ld. CIT(A), NFAC erred in dismissing the appeal ex-parte without providing adequate opportunity of hearing, given that notices were sent to an incorrect email ID (nirmalandlalit@gmail.com instead of nirmalandlalit47@gmail.com) and a significant gap existed between the last notice and the appellate order? 2. Whether the Ld. CIT(A), NFAC erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 45,00,000/- under Section 68 of the Act without deciding the appeal on merit, by treating the shares allotted to four specific companies as bogus, despite the assessee's contention that the share application money was received in an earlier financial year (FY 2011-12 or 2012-13) and only the allotment was made in the year under consideration? Assessee's Contentions: - The CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal ex-parte due to incorrect email communication and lack of adequate opportunity. (Ground 1) - The addition of Rs. 45,00,000/- under Section 68 is incorrect as the share application money was received in FY 2011-12 (or 2012-13) and only allotment was made in AY 2014-15. The assessee provided bank statements, Board Resolutions, share allotment applications, and PANs of investors to the AO. (Ground 2) Revenue's Contentions: - Not recorded in the judgment.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 68,Section 133(6),Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘B’ BENCH, JAIPUR

Before: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar

For Appellant: Shri P. C. Parwal, FCA
For Respondent: Ms. Namita Patel, JCIT

आदेश/ORDER

PER : T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER:- This appeal is filed by the assessee as against the ex-parte appellate order dated 17.03.2025 passed by Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, arising out of the assessment order passed u/s. 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) relating to the Assessment Year 2014-15.

2 I.T.A No. 1003/JPR/2025 Page No M/ s. ATI I nfr a str uct u r e P v t. Lt d.

2.

The Registry has noted that there is a delay of 34 days in filing the above appeal. The assessee by way of Notarized Affidavit explained that the appellate order was sent to email ID nirmalandlalit@gmail.com, whereas in Form 35 the email ID given by the assessee is nirmalandlalit47@gmail.com and when the assessee enquired about the status of the appeal, he came to know through CA who browsed income tax portal, an appellate order dated 13.03.2025 was passed, thereby the delay of 34 days in filing the appeal and requested to condone the delay.

2.1. Considering the above submission of the assessee, where reasonable cause has been made out, thereby the delay of 34 days in filing the above appeal is hereby condoned.

3.

Brief facts of the case are that the assessee filed its return of income for the Assessment Year 2014-15 on 13.11.2014 declaring total income of Rs. 14,54,620/-. The return was taken for scrutiny assessment. The assessee was asked to produce complete details alongwith address of the following persons from whom assessee received share capital during the year:-

Sr. Name of the concern/person Share Capital Issues No. 1. Anuneeta Corporate Services Pvt. Ltd. 1000000 2 Tej Corporate Services Pvt. Ltd. 1000000 3 Nova Corporate Services Pvt.Ltd. 1500000 4 Tiscon Sales Agency Pvt. Ltd. 1000000 Total 4500000

3.1. The AO also issued summon u/s. 133(6) of the Act to ascertain the genuineness and creditworthiness of the above parties. Three of the

3 I.T.A No. 1003/JPR/2025 Page No M/ s. ATI I nfr a str uct u r e P v t. Lt d.

notices were returned unserved and one party has not replied, thereby the AO added the share application money of Rs. 45 Lakhs as not genuine u/s. 68 of the Act.

4.

Aggrieved against the assessment order, assessee filed appeal before Ld. CIT(A) who dismissed the appeal of the assessee by passing exparte order for non-prosecution.

5.

Aggrieved against the appellate order, the assessee is in appeal before us raising the following Grounds of Appeal:-

“1. The Ld. CIT(A), NFAC has erred on facts and in law in dismissing the appeal ex-parte on the ground that assessee is not interested in pursuing the appeal without providing adequate opportunity of hearing in as much as the notices were sent at e-mail id nirmalandlalit@gmail.com whereas in Form No.35 the e- mail id mentioned is nirmalandlalit47@gmail.com and the last notice was issued on 08.10.2024 and thereafter appellate order was passed on 17.03.2025, i.e. after more than 5 months and in between no notice was issued.

2.

The Ld. CIT(A), NFAC has erred on facts and in law in confirming the addition of Rs.45,00,000/- u/s 68 of the Act without deciding the appeal on merit by treating the shares allotted to Anuneeta Corporate Services Pvt. Ltd. (Rs.10 lacs), Tej Corporate Services Pvt. Ltd. (Rs.10 lacs), Nova Corporate Services Pvt. Ltd. (Rs.15 lacs) and Tiscon Sales Agency Pvt. Ltd. (Rs.10 lacs) as bogus ignoring that the amount was received from these companies during FY 2011-12 and not in the year under consideration.

3.

The appellant craves to alter, amend and modify any ground of appeal.”

6.

Heard the rival submissions and perused the materials available of record including the Paper Book filed by the assessee. Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that assessee vide reply dated 03.06.2026 and 27.06.2016 justified the allotment of shares at premium during the earlier year. In the letter dated 06.07.2016 which is available at page no. 25 of the Paper Book wherein it was explained that during the

4 I.T.A No. 1003/JPR/2025 Page No M/ s. ATI I nfr a str uct u r e P v t. Lt d.

year, only allotment of shares was made. Whereas the share application amount was received during the F.Y. 2011-12 and in support of the same, bank statements were filed which is available at page no. 26 to 29 of the Paper Book, Further the Board Resolution, application for allotment of equity shares relating to bank statement and PAN of their applicants were filed before the AO which is available at page no. 1 to 20 of the Paper Book. When the share application money was received during the F.Y. 2011-12 relating to A.Y. 2012-13, additions u/s. 68 of the Act cannot be made for the present A.Y. 2014- 15. Thus, Ld. AR pleaded that the assessment order passed is not legally sustainable in the law.

7.

During the course of hearing, Ld. DR was directed to produce the assessment records to verify the reply letters filed by the assessee before the AO. In response, Ld. Sr. DR vide letter dated 30.07.2026, wherein produced copy of 142 notice dated 03.06.2016 and detailed reply filed by the assessee dated 27.06.2016 as well as balance sheet ending 31.03.2012 and 31.03.2014. It is seen from the record that assessee has made detailed reply before the AO and explained that the share application money of Rs. 45 lakhs were received during the F.Y. 2012-13 and allotment of shares done during the present A.Y. 2014- 15. Copy of the balance sheet as on 31.03.2014 makes it clear that the receipt of share application money pending allotment of Rs. 45 lakhs. Further the assessee also produced the board resolution and application for allotment of equity shares, bank statements and PAN cards of the investors which were not considered by the AO. For ready reference, the copy of reply letter dated 03.06.2016 filed by the assessee is reproduced as follows:-

5 I.T.A No. 1003/JPR/2025 Page No M/ s. ATI I nfr a str uct u r e P v t. Lt d.

“With reference to above said rhatter it is requested that the case has been fixed for today i.e. 03.06.2016 in the case of M/s ATI INFRASTURE PVT. LTD. Sir, in compliance of this we are submitting hereby following details as desired: 1. Sir, the premium charged on issue of shares to the above share applicants is justified as the company is a profit making company and produced good EPS and has invested its funds in Real Estate Businesses vis. Land etc. which has a very good market value and the projects can bring handsome profit in future. The Directors are very sound and well experienced in this field to carry on the business and management of the Company and the Investments made by the company are also very sound. However, we are also enclosing of Report of valuation of shares as on 31.03.2014 just before allotment of shares herewith for your kind verification.

2.

Sir, it is submitted that during the financial year 2013-14 company allotted its shares to the following share applicants. Sir, as earlier submitted that the share application money was received in earlier years and only allotment was done during the year. However Copies of Share Certificates are enclosed herewith for your ready reference. The details of share applicants are as follow:

Name of Share Applicants PAN No. of Share Allotted

1) Tej Corporate services Pvt. Ltd. Mumbai AACCT7508H 40000

2) Tiscon Sales Agency Pvt. Ltd. Mumbai AACCT7650C 40000

3) Nova Corporate Services Pvt. Ltd. Mumbai AACCT7650C 60000

4) Anuneeta Corporate Services Pvt. Ltd. Mumbai AAJCA5310R 40000

Sir, the above requirements are being submitted in compliance to the scrutiny Assessment for the AY 2014-15. However, if any other information asked for the same shall be submitted at the earliest.”

8.

On perusal of the same, it makes clear that the addition made u/s. 68 of the Act on account of share application money for the present A.Y. 2014-15 is not sustainable in the law. Thus, the entire addition made by the AO is liable to be deleted.

6 I.T.A No. 1003/JPR/2025 Page No M/ s. ATI I nfr a str uct u r e P v t. Lt d.

9.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is hereby allowed.

Order pronounced in the open court on 29-10-2026

Sd/- Sd/- (ANNAPURNA GUPTA) (T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated 29/10/2026 Dhananjay K., Sr. PS आदेश क� ��त�ल�प अ�े�षत / Copy of Order Forwarded to:- 1. Assessee 2. Revenue 3. Concerned CIT Digitally signed by 4. CIT (A) Dhananjay Kumar 5. DR, ITAT Date: 2026.11.03 '11:54:32 +05'30 6. Guard file. By order/आदेश से, सहायक पंजीकार आयकर अपील�य अ�धकरण, जयपुर

More judgments on Section 68

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →