STURDY TEI UP (P) LTD.,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O.,WARD-3(3), KOLKATA
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal found that the assessee failed to provide necessary details regarding the share applicants even before the CIT(Appeals). Consequently, the appeal was dismissed for lack of merit.
What were the facts?
The assessee declared a low income but raised share capital of Rs. 1,27,50,000 on premium. The Assessing Officer added this amount as unexplained credit due to lack of information from the assessee.
What were the issues?
Whether the addition of share capital as unexplained credit under Section 68 is justified when the assessee fails to provide details of share applicants.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘B’ BENCH, KOLKATA
Before: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(KZ) & Shri Rajesh Kumar
Per Rajpal Yadav, Vice-President (KZ):- The assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal against the order of ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-17, Kolkata dated 23.07.2019 passed for A.Y. 2012-13.
The assessee has taken two grounds of appeal, out of which Ground No. 2 is general in nature, which does not call for recording of any specific finding.
Assessment Year: 2012-2013 Sturdy Tie Up (P) Limited 3. In Ground No. 1, the assessee has pleaded that the ld. CIT(Appeals) has erred in confirming the addition of Rs.1,27,50,000/- which was added by the ld. Assessing Officer with the aid of section 68. In response to the notice of hearing, Shri Subash Agarwal, Advocate had appeared. However, after some dates, he stopped appearing. Today, when we took the file, then none appeared on behalf of the assessee. We called Shri Subash Agarwal, Advocate. Then it was submitted by Shri Siddharth Agarwal, Advocate, who is the son of Shri Subash Agarwal, that this assessee is not cooperating and did not supply the information so that a paper book can be filed before the Tribunal. Therefore, he expressed inability of appearing before the Tribunal from the office of Shri Subash Agarwal & Associates, Advocates. Considering this stand of the ld. Counsel, we deem it appropriate to proceed ex-parte qua the assessee.
With the assistance of ld. D.R., we have gone through the record carefully. It emerges out from the record that the assessee has declared income of Rs.7,902/-. It has raised a share capital of Rs.1,27,50,000/-, which was raised on premium. The ld. Assessing Officer failed to take note of the details of share applicants probably in the absence of any information submitted at the end of the assessee. He made the addition of this amount as unexplained credit.
Before the ld. CIT(Appeals), the assessee has filed statement of facts running into four pages. The ld. CIT(Appeals) took into consideration this statement of facts and dismissed the appeal.
With the assistance of ld. CIT(DR), we have gone through both the orders as well as the statement of facts. We find that in the statement of facts also, the assessee has not given the bifurcation, from whom it has received this share application money. It has not narrated the complete facts rather just made a reference of the facts discussed in the assessment order in two paragraphs on the first page
Assessment Year: 2012-2013 Sturdy Tie Up (P) Limited of the statement of facts, thereafter it made reference to a large number of decisions. After going through all these details, we do not find any merit in this appeal of the assessee. It is dismissed.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open Court on November 4th , 2022. Sd/- Sd/- (Rajesh Kumar) (Rajpal Yadav) Accountant Member Vice-President (KZ) Kolkata, the 4th day of November, 2022 Copies to : (1) Sturdy Tie Up (P) Limited, C/o. Subash Agarwal & Associates, Advocates, Siddha Gibson, 1, Gibson Lane, Suite-213, 2nd Floor, Kolkata-700069
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. Sikka Motors PVT LTD vs. Union Of INDIA & Anr.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026
- Shri Yaras Suresh Babu Prabhu Kumar vs. The Union Of INDIATelangana · 27 Oct 2026
- Santa Singh vs. SuperintendentUttarakhand · 27 Oct 2026
- Azaad Builders vs. Assistant Commissioner SGSTUttarakhand · 27 Oct 2026
- Shadab Malik vs. State Of U.P. And 2 OthersAllahabad · 26 Oct 2026