M/S RITEBABC AGRITECH SOLUTION P LTD,INDORE vs. DCIT ,CIRLE 8(1) (1) MUMBAI, MUMBAI

ITA 179/IND/2021Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 January 2026AY 2013-14Bench: SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member), MS. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL (Judicial Member)1 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal observed that the assessee consistently failed to appear and provide necessary documentary evidence before the assessment and appellate authorities, including the Tribunal itself. Despite multiple opportunities, the assessee did not discharge its primary onus of proving the genuineness of the transactions. The share valuation reports and the details of projects relied upon by the assessee were found to be unsubstantiated and, in some cases, involved related parties and non-commenced projects.

What were the facts?

The assessee companies have filed appeals against the orders of the CIT(A) concerning assessment years 2013-14 and 2014-15. The core issue revolves around additions made by the AO under section 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for alleged unexplained cash credits in the form of share capital and share premium, and short-term borrowings. The assessee failed to provide sufficient evidence to establish the identity, creditworthiness, and genuineness of the transactions.

What were the issues?

Whether the additions made by the Assessing Officer under section 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, as unexplained cash credits and borrowings, were justified, given the assessee's failure to provide cogent evidence of identity, creditworthiness, and genuineness of transactions.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 68,Section 143(2),Section 142(1),Section 143(3),Section 250,Section 131(1)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “D” BENCH, MUMBAI

Before: SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, AM

For Appellant: Shri Annavaram Kosuri, Sr. AR
Hearing: 28.01.2026Pronounced: 29.01.2026

Per Kavitha Rajagopal, JM:

The captioned appeals have been filed by two different assessee companies,

challenging the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [‘Ld.

CIT(A)’ for short] passed u/s. 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act'), pertaining to the Assessment Years (‘A.Y.’ for short) 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2014-15. As the facts

ITA Nos.179 & 180/Mum/2021 M/s. Ritebane Agritech Solution

are identical in these appeals, we here

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 68

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →