GRAPES HOTELS RESORTS PRIVATE LIMITED ,GUWAHATI vs. ITO-WARD --3(5) GUWAHATI, GUWAHATI
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal noted that the case was reopened based on information that the assessee received Rs. 25 lacs as share application money from a shell company. The assessee failed to prove the creditworthiness of the share applicants even before the Ld. CIT(A). However, considering the assessee's prayer for another opportunity, the Tribunal remitted the issue back to the AO for fresh consideration.
What were the facts?
The assessee company received share application money from two companies, Kamna Sales Ltd. and Gliter Commosale Pvt. Ltd. The Assessing Officer (AO) added the entire share application money to the assessee's income under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, as the assessee failed to prove the creditworthiness of the applicants. The Ld. CIT(A) upheld the AO's order, noting that one of the investor companies was struck off by the ROC and had no business activity.
What were the issues?
Whether the assessee has discharged its onus to satisfy the conditions of Section 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, regarding the genuineness and creditworthiness of share application money received from newly incorporated companies.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
Section 68,Section 139,Section 147,Section 148,Section 250,Section 133(6)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “GUWAHATI BENCH”, GUWAHATI
PER LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereafter “the Act”) by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereafter “the Ld. CIT(A)] dated 29.12.2023, DIN & order
2 Grapes Hotels Resorts Pvt. Ltd. No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023-24/ 1059175246(1) challenging the order passee by the Ld. CIT(A) as per the grounds of appeal.
Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the assessee filed return of income u/s 139 on 29.08.2012 declaring income of Rs. 1,73,542
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.
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
- 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 →- U Days Garments vs. The Adjudication OfficerMadras · 16 Oct 2026
- M/S Jsw Cement Limited,Jajpur vs. State Of OdishaOrissa · 16 Oct 2026
- M/S.Sreeshobi Enterprises vs. The Appellate AuthorityMadras · 16 Oct 2026
- S.T.Promotors vs. The Commercial Tax OfficerMadras · 16 Oct 2026
- Prashanti Das (M/S. Panchamukhi Enterprises) vs. Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax, CT And GST, Jagatsinghpur CircleOrissa · 16 Oct 2026