ABG INTERNATIONAL P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CEN CIR 1(2), MUMBAI
In favour of the Revenue: the assessee's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal upheld the orders of the CIT(A) confirming the validity of reassessment and the additions made on account of share premium and the disallowance under Section 14A. The assessee failed to appear or file submissions before the Tribunal.
What were the facts?
The assessee received substantial share premium in AY 2009-10 and AY 2012-13. The Assessing Officer assessed this premium as income due to lack of substantiation by the assessee. The assessee also challenged the validity of reassessment and a disallowance under Section 14A.
What were the issues?
The key issues were the validity of reassessment proceedings and the taxability of share premium received by the assessee, along with a disallowance under Section 14A.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” Bench, Mumbai
Heard together (2 matters)
Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.
Per Bench :-
Both the appeals filed by the assessee are directed against the orders passed by the learned CIT(A)-47, Mumbai and they relate to A.Y. 2009-10 & 2012-13. The assessee is challenging the decision of the learned CIT(A) in (a) upholding the validity of reassessment in A.Y. 2009-10. (b) upholding the addition of share premium received by the assessee in both the years under consideration. (c) upholding the addition made under section 14A of the I.T. Act in A.Y. 2012-13.
None appeared on behalf of the assessee, even though the notices of hearing were sent to the assessee several times. It is pertinent to note that the assessee is under liquidation and hence notices of hearing were also sent to the official liquidator also several times. However, there was no response from either from the assessee or from the official liquidator. Hence, we proceed to dispose of the appeals ex-parte, without presence of the assessee.
2 ABG International Pvt. Ltd. (In Liquidation)
We heard learned DR and perused the record. The assessee is engaged in the business of providing financial services. In both the years under consideration the assessee has received share premium upon issuing redeemable non-cumulative preference shares. In the year relevant to A.Y. 2009-10, the assessee has received share premium of Rs. 208 crores and in the year relevant to A.Y. 2012-13, it had received share premium of Rs. 278 crores. Assessment in A.Y. 2009-10 was reopened by the Assessing Officer on noticing that the assessee has received huge share premium amount.
Before the Assessing Officer, the assessee did not furnish any information to substantiate the claim of share premium. Accordingly the Assessing Officer assessed the share premium as income of the assessee in both the years. In A.Y. 2012-13 the Assessing Officer also made disallowance of Rs. 15.08 crores under section 14A of the Act.
Before the learned CIT(A) the assessee challenged the validity of reopening of assessment of AY 2009-10 and also additions made in both the years. However, the assessee did not appear before the first appellate authority and hence the learned CIT(A) passed the order confirming the validity of reassessment in A.Y. 2009-10 and the additions made by the Assessing Officer in both the years. Aggrieved, the assessee has filed these appeals before the Tribunal.
We noticed that the learned CIT(A) has passed detailed orders on all the issues contested by the assessee. Before us, as noticed earlier none appeared on behalf of the assessee. No written submission was also filed to contradict the decisions rendered by the learned CIT(A) in all the issues. Hence, we have no other option but to confirm the orders passed by the learned CIT(A) in both the years.
3 ABG International Pvt. Ltd. (In Liquidation)
In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed.
Order pronounced in the open court on 05.12.2022.
More judgments on Section 14A
- Blacksoil Capital Private Limited (As… vs DCIT, Circle-1(1), HyderabadITA 2217/HYD/2026[2017-18]Status: Disposed9 Oct 2026AY 2017-18
- Hiral Construction, Mumbai vs ITO Ward 42(1)(2), MumbaiITA 8431/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: Disposed8 Oct 2026AY 2017-18
- The Dy DIT (It) 1(2), Mumbai vs M/S Citi Bank N.A, MumbaiITA 4981/MUM/2007[2002-2003]Status: Disposed8 Oct 2026AY 2002-2003
- M/S. Citi Bank N.A., Mumbai vs The Addl DIT (It) RG-1, MumbaiITA 4970/MUM/2007[2002-2003]Status: Disposed8 Oct 2026AY 2002-2003
- M/S American Express Bank Ltd., Mumbai vs The Jt DIT (It)1(1), MumbaiITA 9414/MUM/2004[2000-2001]Status: Disposed8 Oct 2026AY 2000-2001
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S. Ut Corp vs. Union Of INDIARajasthan · 26 Oct 2026
- Sunrise Engineering vs. The State Of Andhra PradeshAndhra Pradesh · 26 Oct 2026
- M/S Kalra Traders vs. Union Of INDIAUttarakhand · 26 Oct 2026
- Ms Isoft vs. The Commissioner State TaxUttarakhand · 26 Oct 2026
- M/S Sita Enterprises vs. Office Of The CommissionerUttarakhand · 26 Oct 2026