ADHUNIK VENTURES PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD - 4(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2438/KOL/2017Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 March 2019AY 2012-132 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the assessee did not produce the directors of the share subscribing companies before the authorities. Considering the facts, the Tribunal decided to remand the matter back to the Assessing Officer for fresh verification of the details of the share subscribing companies.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was against an order confirming an addition of Rs. 2,87,40,000/- made under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act on account of share application money and premium. The Assessing Officer had made the addition due to non-compliance with notices issued to verify the share subscribers.

What were the issues?

Whether the addition made under Section 68 on account of share application money was justified without proper verification of share subscribers, and if the matter should be remanded for fresh verification.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 68,Section 131

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, KOLKATA BENCH “B”, KOLKATA

Hearing: 11.02.2019Pronounced: 20.03.2019

ORDER

PER S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER This appeal filed by the assessee against the order dated 12.10.2015 passed by CIT(A)-13, Kolkata for AY 2012-13.

2.

The assessee has raised as many as eight grounds, but however, the only one ground which emanates in confirming the addition made on account of share application received u/s 68 of the Act.

3.

Heard both parties and perused the material available on record. It is noted from the assessment order that the AO added an amount of Rs. 2,87,40,000/- under the head of unexplained cash credit under section 68 of the act on account of share and premium amount. To verify the details of share subscribers, the AO issued notice under section 131 of the Act and there was no compliance to the said notice. Ld. AR submits that the assessee did not produce the concerned Director of shares subscriber companies before the AO as well as the CIT(A). Ld.AR prayed to remand the matter to the file of AO for his fresh verification in respect of details of shares subscribing companies. Ld.

1.

(ASSESSMENT YEAR-2012-13) DR did not report objection. Taking into consideration the issue raised in this appeal and in the facts and circumstances of the case, we deem it proper to remand the matter to the file of AO for his fresh verification as indicated above. Thus, grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.

4.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the open court on 20.03.2019.

Sd/- Sd/- (J.SUDHAKAR REDDY) (S.S.VISWANETHRA RAVI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER [ Date:-20.03.2019 *Amit Kumar* Copy forwarded to:

1. 1. Appellant- Adhunik Ventures Pvt.Ltd., P-44, Rabindra Sarani, 3rd Floor, R-306, Kolkata-700001.

2. Respondent- ITO, Ward-4(3), Aayakar Bhawan, 8th Floor, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata-700069.

3. CIT-Kolkata 4. CIT(Appeals)-Kolkata 5. DR: ITAT -Kolkata Benches By order

AR/H.O.O ITAT, KOLKATA

More judgments on Section 68

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →