FINERGY TRANSPORT FINANCE LTD.,NAMAKKAL vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1,, NAMAKKAL
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal accepted the assessee's plea for another opportunity to substantiate its case. The issue of the impugned addition was restored to the Assessing Officer for de novo adjudication.
What were the facts?
The assessee's appeal for AY 2016-17 arose from an order confirming an addition of Rs. 20 Lacs under section 68, representing share capital introduced by a shareholder who had not filed an Income Tax Return. The Assessing Officer and CIT(A) held the creditworthiness of the share capital as unproven due to lack of documentary evidence.
What were the issues?
Whether the creditworthiness of the share capital introduced could be substantiated by the assessee.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI
Before: HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM & HON’BLE SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI, JM
(िनधा9रणवष9 / Assessment Year: 2016-17) M/s Finergy Transport Finance Ltd. ACIT (Formerly known as M/s.Trancity Finance Ltd.) Circle-1 बनाम/ 88, Mullai Mahal, Namakkal. Vs. Narashima Sannathi Street, Namakkal-637 001. �थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No. AACCT-5557-A (अपीलाथ�/Appellant) : (� थ� / Respondent) अपीलाथ� कीओरसे/ Appellant by : Shri N.Arjun Raj (CA)- Ld. AR � थ�कीओरसे/Respondent by : Ms. Kavitha (Addl.CIT)-Ld. Sr. DR सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing : 28-08-2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 03-09-2024 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member)
Aforesaid appeal by assessee for Assessment Year (AY) 2016-17 arises out of the order of learned Addl. /Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Thane [CIT(A)] dated 03-04-2024 in the matter of an assessment framed by Ld. Assessing Officer [AO] u/s. 143(3) of the Act on 18-12-2018. In the assessment order, Ld. AO made addition of Rs.20 Lacs u/s 68 which represent share capital introduced by one shareholder by the name Shri C. Thangaraju who did not file Income Tax Return and accordingly, Ld. AO held that he lacked creditworthiness. The Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the same for want of documentary evidences. Aggrieved, the assessee is in further appeal before us. The Ld. AR has pleaded for another opportunity to the assessee to substantiate its case which has been opposed by Ld. Sr. DR.
Accepting the plea of Ld. AR, we restore the impugned issue back to the file of Ld. AO for de novo adjudication with a direction to the assessee to substantiate the introduction of share capital to the extent of Rs.20 Lacs. No other ground has been urged in the appeal.
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 →- Ankil Jagdishchandra Kholwadwala vs. Union Of INDIA And AnrBombay · 22 Oct 2026
- Fasil Hussain Shah vs. Ut Of J And K Th Commissioner Secretary TO Government Finance Department And OthersJammu and Kashmir and Ladakh · 21 Oct 2026
- M/S. Devkinandan Traders vs. State Of U.P. And AnotherAllahabad · 21 Oct 2026
- M/S Dixit Medical Agencies vs. State Of U.P. And AnotherAllahabad · 21 Oct 2026
- Sukant Kumar vs. Union Of INDIA And 6 OthersAllahabad · 21 Oct 2026