M/S. RADHWA TRADING PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. PR.CIT - 3, KOLKATA, KOLKATA
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 held that the assessment order was erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of revenue as the Assessing Officer had not properly examined the genuineness and creditworthiness of share subscribers. Therefore, the revisionary proceedings under Section 263 were rightly initiated.
What were the facts?
The assessee's appeal was dismissed due to non-appearance on multiple occasions. The Principal CIT had revised the assessment order, finding it erroneous and prejudicial to revenue. The revision was based on the AO's failure to examine the identity, genuineness, and creditworthiness of subscribers for substantial share capital and premium received.
What were the issues?
Whether the Principal CIT correctly exercised his revisionary powers under Section 263 when the Assessing Officer failed to conduct proper inquiries regarding share capital and premium under Section 68.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, KOLKATA BENCH “A”, KOLKATA
Before: SHRI MANISH BORAD, HON’BLE & SHRI SONJOY SARMA, HON’BLE
Present for: Appellant by : None Respondent by : Shri Devi Sharan Singh, CIT(DR) Date of Hearing : 28.04.2022 Date of Pronouncement : 06.07.2022 O R D E R
PER SONJOY SARMA, JM:
This appeal filed by the assessee is against the order of Pr. CIT-3, Kolkata dated 03.03.2017 for A.Y. 2012-13.
At the time of hearing of the case, i.e. on 28.04.2022, neither anybody appeared on behalf of the assessee nor has filed application seeking adjournment despite the fact that on last occasion i.e. on 15.02.2018, this Tribunal dismiss the appeal of the assessee due to non-appearance of the assessee. However, the assessee had filed M.A. No. 31/Kol/2021 for restoration of the appeal of the assessee and the Tribunal recall the order dated 15.02.2018 and restored the appeal of the assessee. Again on 28.04.2022 when the case was called none appeared on behalf of the assessee nor file any adjournment petition, although the notice was affixing on the notice board of the Tribunal. It appears from the conduct of the assessee that assessee is not seriously interested in pursuing this appeal before the Tribunal. We, therefore, have no option
M/s. Radhwa Trading Pvt. Ltd. A.Y. 2012-13 except to adjudicate the issues on merit raised in this appeal on the basis of available records.
The ld. departmental representative vehemently argued supporting the order of ld. PCIT. We have heard rival contentions and perused the record placed before us. Through this appeal, assessee has challenged the revisionary proceeding carried out by ld. PCIT holding the assessment order dated 28.10.2014 as erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of revenue.
On going through the impugned order, we note that ld. PCIT has observed that during the year, assessee has issued 2,52,600 equity shares of Rs. 10/- each at a premium of Rs. 990/-. During the year share capital of Rs. 25,26,000/- and share premium of Rs. 25,00,74,000/- was received. Ld. PCIT observed that the alleged share capital and share premium prima facie does not look genuine as the assessee is not involved in genuine business activities. Ld. PCIT further observed that the ld. AO failed to examine the identity, genuineness and creditworthiness of the share subscribers from whom share capital and share premium has been received.
We further note that in the assessment order, ld. AO has not discussed about the said issue of the genuineness and creditworthiness and identity of the share subscribers. No documents have been filed on behalf of the assessee to indicate that the ld. AO has conducted an enquiry in light of the provisions of section 68 of the Act regarding share capital of Rs. 25,26,000/- and share premium of Rs. 25,00,74,000/-. Even in the impugned order, it is discernible that even after providing various opportunities assessee failed to appear.
We, therefore, under the given facts and circumstances of the case, are of the considered view that since the issue raised in the show cause notice u/s 263 of the Act by ld. PCIT has not been examined by the Assessing Officer in the assessment proceeding, the assessment order dated 28.10.2014 framed u/s 143(3) of the Act is erroneous so far as prejudicial to the interest of revenue and, therefore, find no infirmity
M/s. Radhwa Trading Pvt. Ltd. A.Y. 2012-13 in the finding of ld. PCIT given in the impugned order u/s 263 of the Act and thus has rightly assumed jurisdiction u/s 263 of the Act and set aside the assessment order dated 28.10.2014 directing the Assessing Officer to carry out the assessment proceeding afresh after conducting relevant enquiries to examine the identity, Genuineness and creditworthiness of the share capital and share premium of Rs. 25,26,000/- and Rs. 25,00,74,000/- in light of the provisions of section 68 of the Act. Accordingly, all the grounds raised by the assessee are dismissed.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court on 06.07.2022.
More judgments on Section 263
- Gillette India Limited, Mumbai vs Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, JaipurITA 1316/JPR/2026[2018-19]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Neo Structo Construction P. Ltd., Ahmedabad vs The Pr. CIT- 3, AhmedabadITA 1216/AHD/2026[2015-2016]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2015-2016
- Vimal Harilal Baldania, Gandhidham vs The ITO Ward 2, GandhidhamITA 770/RJT/2025[2017-18]Status: Disposed15 Oct 2026AY 2017-18
- J.D. Marketing, Kolkata vs ITO, Ward 37(1), KolkataITA 1493/KOL/2026[2015-2016]Status: Disposed15 Oct 2026AY 2015-2016
- J.D. Marketing, Kolkata vs ITO, Ward 37(1), KolkataITA 1492/KOL/2026[2013-2014]Status: Disposed15 Oct 2026AY 2013-2014
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S. Mehra Mac Industries Private Limited vs. The Deputy State Tax OfficerTelangana · 30 Oct 2026
- Santosh Das And Anr. vs. Union Of INDIACalcutta · 30 Oct 2026
- M/S Rama Krishna Industries vs. State Of Hp And OthersHimachal Pradesh · 30 Oct 2026
- Smt Usha W/O Shri Tarun vs. Union Of INDIARajasthan · 29 Oct 2026
- M/S Maruti Nandan Minetech Private Limited vs. The Joint CommissionerRajasthan · 29 Oct 2026