DILIPKUMAR SOHANLAL MAHESHWARI,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(2), AHMEDABAD

ITA 1662/AHD/2025Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad10 March 2026AY 2017-18Bench: passing order under section 143, making addition of Rs 2,87,47,934/- under section 68. It is evident from the records that the order of assessment is passed without inquiry. The Learned AO as well as Learned CIT Appeals, has ignored all relevant facts placed on record i.e. Share Purchase Details, Sale Contract Notes, Demat Accounts, STT Paid Certificates, Date of Purchase and Sale, Demat Account Entries, Bank Statements for receipt and payment, Provisions of Section 10(38) of the Act. No ad6 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The tribunal found the assessee's claim of genuine share purchase doubtful due to inconsistencies like shares being unlisted/suspended, lack of demat account details for purchase, and contract notes for sale pertaining to a different company. Merely selling through a stock exchange was deemed insufficient to prove the genuineness of the underlying purchase. Consequently, the tribunal upheld the addition made by the AO under Section 68.

What were the facts?

The assessee claimed Long Term Capital Gains (LTCG) exemption of Rs. 2,87,47,934/- under Section 10(38) from the sale of shares of Moneytech Finlease Ltd. The Assessing Officer (AO) disallowed this claim, treating the amount as unexplained cash credit under Section 68, citing doubts about the genuineness of the share purchase via preferential allotment and identifying the transaction as off-market. The CIT(A) upheld the AO's order.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee's claim for Long Term Capital Gains exemption from the sale of shares was genuine, and whether the addition under Section 68 for unexplained cash credit was valid.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 68,Section 10(38),Section 142,Section 143,Section 115BBE

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AHMEDABAD “B” BENCH

Before: Dr. BRR Kumar & Ms. Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Shri Kalpesh Shah, A.R
For Respondent: Shri Abhijit, Sr. D.R

Per Suchitra Kamble, Judicial Member:

This is an appeal filed against the order dated 02-07- 2025 passed by National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi for assessment year 2017-18. 2. The grounds of appeal are as under:- “1. The learned AO passed the order of assessment, making huge addition of Rs 2,87,47,934/- under section 68 in violation of rules of natural justice. The AO has made no attempt to bring in any evidence contrary on record to refuse and reject the explanations supported by evidences produced by the Assessee. The AO has found no defect in evidences but rejected the same on the basis of doubt and surmises. Thus the order of assessment is void and bad in law.

2.

The officer is required to mak

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 →