What is CIT v. Sophia Finance Ltd. authority for?

To discharge the burden of proof under Section 68 for share capital or share application money, an assessee must establish the identity of the shareholders and the genuineness of the transaction, confirming that the payment was truly made by them.

How many judgments cite CIT v. Sophia Finance Ltd.?

289 judgments on BharatTax cite CIT v. Sophia Finance Ltd. (205 ITR 98), spanning 2008 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does CIT v. Sophia Finance Ltd. come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 1961, Section 68, Section 142(1), Section 148, Section 68 of the Income Tax Act, Section 133(6).

CIT v. Sophia Finance Ltd. (205 ITR 98)

JCIT, (OSD), CIRCLE 1(1), RAIPUR, RAIPUR vs. PLATINUM WORLD HOSPITALITY PRIVATE LIMITED, RAIPUR, RAIPUR

In the result appeal filed by the appellant is allowed

ITA 130/RPR/2026[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur10 Mar 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.130/Rpr/2026 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2014-15 The Joint Commissioner Of Income Tax (Osd), Circle-1(1), Raipur (C.G.)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR

Section 68

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण "यायपीठ “एक-सद"य” मामला रायपुर म" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RAIPUR BENCH “SMC”, RAIPUR "ी पाथ" सारथी चौधर", "या"यक सद"य के सम" BEFORE SHRI PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.130/RPR/2026 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2014-15 The Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (OSD), Circle-1(1), Raipur (C.G.) .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/s. Platinum World Hospitality Private Limited Nayan Tara, Opportunity. C.M. House, Civil Lines, Raipur (C.G.)-492 001 PAN: AAFCP6488B ……""यथ" / Respondent Assessee by : None Revenue by : Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR सुनवाई क"…

DCIT, CC-1(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. AMBICA DHATU PRIVATE LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2389/KOL/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata05 Mar 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: SHRI RAJESH KUMAR (Accountant Member)

Section 131Section 133(6)Section 250

…Act by Assessing Officer. Finally, the Ld. CIT(A) deleted the addition by relying on the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Lovely Exports Pvt. Ltd. (2008) 216 CTR 195 (SC) and CIT Vs. Sophia Finance Ltd. (1993) 70 taxmann.com 69 (1994) 205 ITR 98. The Ld. CIT(A) deleted the addition by holding that the order of Assessing Officer is not sustaining in the eyes of law. 6. After hearing the rival contention and perusing the material on record. We note that the undisputed fact that the assessee filed before the Assessing Officer or all the evidences qua 9 shares subscriber and all the subscrib…

VIJIT SINGH,JAIPUR vs. ITO WARD 3(2) JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1246/JPR/2025[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur17 Nov 2025AY 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri Shrawan Kumar Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Gaurav Awasthi, JCIT

Section 147Section 234ASection 250

…, as held earlier in CIT vs. Orissa Credit Corp.\nLtd. 159 ITR 78 (SC) and recently referred inCIT vs P. Mohan Kala 291\nITR 279 (SC).\nIdentity Established: It is further submitted that even assuming the ratio so\nlaid down in the case of Sophia Finance Ltd. 205 ITR 98 (Del.) is\nheldapplicable, i.e . what is required is only to establish that there existed a\nshareholder and the payment was really madeby it, which stands established\nin the present case, as would appear from the above documents enclosed.\nThus identity of all these persons stood established beyond doubt.\nKindly refer a decision in Labhchand Bo…

M/S. RELIGARE CAPITAL MARKETS LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

Appeal is partly allowed in above terms

ITA 753/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Aug 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA (Judicial Member), SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member)

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 68Section 92Section 92B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI BENCH: ‘A’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2011-12 Vs. DCIT, Religare Capital Markets Ltd., D-3, P3B, District Centre, Circle-21(1), Saket, New Delhi New Delhi PAN: AADCR5200R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv. Ms. Somya Jain, CA Department by Sh. Ramesh Chand, Sr. DR Date of hearing 14.05.2025 Date of pronouncement 12.08.2025 ORDER PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JM This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2011-12 is directed against Deputy Commissioner of I…

ITO, WARD- 15(3), NEW DELHI vs. LIVEWIRE COMMERCIAL PVT. LTD., DELHI

In the result, appeal of Revenue in ITA No

ITA 7542/DEL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jul 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Amitabh Shuklaito, Ward 15(3) Vs. M/S Livewire Commercial Room No. 311-A, 3Rd Private Limited Floor, C.R. Building, 39/1386, Chandni Chowk, I.P. Estate, Delhi – 110006 New Delhi – 110002 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aaacl2105J Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Ms. Monika Singh, CIT, DRFor Respondent: Shri Praveen Kumar (Executive of the company)

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 68

…various judicial pronouncements in this regard and has submitted that there was no question of any addition in the hands of the appellant company. In this regard, Full Bench of Hon'ble jurisdictional Delhi High Court in case of CIT vs Sophiya Finance Limited 205 ITR 98 held that once P a g e | 8 M/s Livewise Commercial Pvt. Ltd. identity of the shareholder is established, no addition on account of share capital can be made in the hands of the company-assessee. Further, it was held by Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Steller Investment Limited 192 ITR 287 that addition of share capital cannot be…

SHRI KRISHAN KUMAR JALAN,BANGALORE vs. ITO, W-1, SIRSA

In the result appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 933/CHANDI/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh15 Jan 2025AY 2014-15

For Appellant: \nShri P.K. Prasad, Advocate &For Respondent: \nDr. Vivek Vardhan, JCIT, Sr. DR

Section 10(38)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250(6)Section 253Section 68

…the AO cannot be faulted.\"\nThe Hon'ble Kolkata High Court has dealt with this issue of section 68 by relying on\nvarious decisions like N.R. Portfolio Pvt. Ltd., A Govindarajulu Mudaliar Vs. CIT 205\nITR 802 (SC), Full Bench decision of Sophia Finance Ltd. 205 ITR 98 (Del), Nova\nPromoters Finlease (P) Ltd. 342 ITR 169 (Del), CIT Vs. Nipun Builders Ltd. 350 ITR 407\nand held that mere issuance of cheque and providing bank detail would not be\nsufficient to discharge the liability of assessee in view of the link between entry\nproviders and incriminating evidence.\nIn this case of Swati Bajaj, Hon'ble Kolkata H…

M/S SWIFT VINTRADE PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. CIT, KOLKATA-1I, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1032/KOL/2014[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Nov 2024AY 2009-2010

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishraassessment Year: 2009-10

For Appellant: N o n eFor Respondent: Shri A. Kundu, CIT, DR

Section 143Section 148Section 263

…g judicial pronouncements: i) Rampyari Devi Saraogi Vs. CIT 67 ITR 84 (SC), 5 Swift Vintrade Pvt. ltd., AY: 2009-10 ii) Tara Devi Agarwal Vs. CIT 88 ITR 323 (SC), iii) Gee Vee Enterprises Vs. Addl. CIT 99 ITR 375, 386 (Del.), iv) CIT Vs. Sophia finance Ltd. 205 ITR 98 (Del), v) CIT Vs. Active Traders P. Ltd. 214 ITR 583 (Cal), vi) CIT Vs. Nivedan Vanijya Niyojan Ltd. 263 ITR 623 (Cal), vii) CIT V. Bhagwati Jewels Ltd. 201 ITR 461 (Del.). 2.4. He was of the view that the Ld. AO has power to investigate the identity of the shareholders to satisfy that they exist. The genuineness of the investment has to be examin…

HERITAGE HOSPITALS LTD,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-11(1), NEW DELHI

ITA 4090/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Oct 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Anand Kumar Pandey, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sandeep Kumar Mishra, Sr. DR

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 68

…DLT 97 (DB) (Del) and Commissioner of Income Tax-II v. MAF Academy P. Ltd., 206 (2014) DLT 277 (DB) (Del). The aforesaid decisions mentioned above refer to the earlier decisions of Delhi High Court in Commissioner of Income Tax v. Sophia Finance Ltd., [1994] 205 ITR 98 (FB)(Delhi), CIT v. Divine Leasing and Finance Limited [2008] 299 ITR 268 (Delhi) and observations of the Supreme Court in CIT v. Lovely Exports P. Ltd. [2008] 319 ITR (St.) 5 (SC). 12. The main submission of the learned counsel for the assessee is that once the assessee had been able to show that the shareholder companies were duly incorporated…

KALINDEE ESTATES PRIVATE LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER , JAIPUR

ITA 770/JPR/2024[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur21 Oct 2024AY 2010-2011

For Appellant: Sh. Tarun Mittal, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Anup Singh, Addl. CIT

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 68

…widely worded and AO is not precluded from making enquiry as to the true nature and source thereof even if the sum is credited as share application money. In this regard reliance is placed over the following judgments:- CIT Vs Sophia Finance Limited (Del-FB) 205 ITR 98 CIT Vs Nivedan Vanijyya Niyojan Ltd. (Cal) 263 ITR 623 CIT Vs Rathi Finlease Ltd. (MP) 215 CTR 429] As regards the contention that the case of M/s Satyatej Vyapar Pvt. Ltd. has been completed by ITO, Ward 5(1), Kolkata under section 147/143(3) wherein bank entries of M/s Satyatej Vyapaar Pvt. Ltd. has been considered and no adverse inference has b…

AGS DEVELOPERS PVT LTD ,JASOLA DELHI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1 (4), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2185/DEL/2024[2008-2009]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Oct 2024AY 2008-2009

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat[Assessment Year : 2008-09] Ags Developers Pvt.Ltd., Vs Ito, H.No.47, Pocket Ii, Ward -1(4), Near Appollo Hospital, Jasola, New Delhi. New Delhi-110076. Pan-Aafca1795G Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Sandeep Goel, Adv. Respondent By Shri Siddharth B.S. Meena, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 04.09.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 18.10.2024

Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 68

…No.320/2012 dated when there is evidence and material to show that the Delhi 25.08.2014 subscriber was a paper company and not a genuine investor..... Hon’ble High CIT Vs Sophia Finance Provisions of Section 68 are applicable even to share Court of Delhi Ltd 205 ITR 98 [Delhi application money and if on inquiry it is found that shareholders do not exist, sum credited may be treated as assessee's income Hon’ble Titan Securities Ltd 357 Where AO found that share applicants were Jurisdictional ITR 184 [Delhi) established entry operators giving accommodation High Court of entries and thus be added amount paid by the…

EBRO INDIA PVT.LTD. ,DELHI vs. ACIT CIRCLE-7(1), DELHI

In the result, the ground no 4 raised by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1291/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: HeardITAT Delhi09 Sept 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar, CIT DR

Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144CSection 68

…R 135 (Del.)  CIT v. Oasis Hospitalities P. Ltd: 333 ITR 119 (Del.)  CIT v. Kamdhenu Steel and Alloys Ltd: 361 ITR 220 (Del.)  CIT v. Victor Electodes Ltd.: 329 ITR 271 (Del.)  CIT v. Nipuan Auto (P.) Ltd. 361 ITR 155 (Delhi)  CIT v. Sophia Finance Ltd.: 205 ITR 98 (Del)(FB)  Divine Leasing and Finance Ltd. &Ors: 299 ITR 268 (Del.) affirmed in Lovely Export (P) Ltd.: 319 ITR (St.) 5  CIT v. Dwarkadhish Investment Ltd: 194 Taxman 43 (Del.)  CIT v Antartica Investment (P) Ltd. 262 ITR 493 (Del)  PCIT vs Ami Industries India (P) Ltd: 424 ITR 219 (Bom.)  Orient Trading Co. Limited: 49 ITR 723 (Bom.)  CIT v…

PADMAVATI AGRICO (INDIA) PVT LTD,AJMER vs. ACIT CIRCLE - 1, AJMER

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 702/JPR/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur05 Sept 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Tarun Mittal (CA)For Respondent: Sh. Anoop Singh (Addl. CIT)

Section 143Section 147

…holders, their GIR Nos. and income tax particulars and their bank statements, identity of share holders was fully established and, therefore, no addition could be made in assessee’s hands under section 68 on account of share application money – Held, yes. 5. 205 ITR 98 (Delhi ) CIT Vs. Sophia Finance Ltd. If the shares holders are identified and it established that they have invested money in the purchases of shares, then the amount received by the company would be regarded as a capital receipt. 6. 397 ITR 136 CIT Vs. Orchid Industries Pvt. Ltd. (Bom) – [DOD:05.07.2017] 23 Padmavati Agrico (India) Pvt. Ltd. v…

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-13, NEW DELHI vs. BAR INVESTMENTS AND FINANCE PRIVATE LIMITED, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of revenue is dismissed

ITA 2165/DEL/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Jul 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Sh. S. Rifaur Rahman & Sh. Sudhir Kumarassessment Year: 2016-17 Dcit, Vs. Bar Investments & Central Circle – 13, Finance Private Limited B- New Delhi 64/1, Wazirpur Industrial Area, New Delhi-110052 Pan No. Aaacb0955E (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Sh. Sanjay Kumar, Cit Dr Respondent By Sh. Pradeep Dinodia,Ca Sh. R.K. Kapoor, Ca Sh. Ravi Kumar, Ca Sh. Harish Dhamija, Ca Date Of Hearing: 18/07/2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 31/07/2024 Order Per Sudhir Kumar, Jm:

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 68

…he documents. Perusal of the order of the Ld CIT(A) reveals that the asessee has filed the financial statements and all other relevant documents to prove the genuineness and creditworthiness of the companies. In the case of CIT vs Sophia Finance Ltd’s (1994) 205 ITR 98 (FB) Delhi the Hon’ble Delhi High Court held as under :- “17. It is neither necessary nor desirable to give examples to indicate under what circumstance section 68 of the Act can or cannot be invoked. What is clear, however, is that section 68 clearly permits an Income-tax Officer to make enquiries with regard to the nature and source of any or a…

ITO -24(2)(1), MUMBAI, PIRAMAL CHAMBERS vs. KAILASH CHANDRA GUPTA, HUF, MUMBAI

ITA 4013/MUM/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Jul 2024AY 2012-13

Section 10(38)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 148

…e by the AO cannot be faulted." The Hon'ble Kolkata High Court has dealt with this issue of section 68 by relying on various decisions like N.R. Portfolio Pvt. Ltd., A Govindarajulu Mudaliar Vs. CIT 205 ITR 802 (SC), Full Bench decision of Sophia Finance Ltd. 205 ITR 98 (Del), Nova Promoters Finlease (P) Ltd. 342 ITR 169 (Del), CIT Vs. Nipun Builders Ltd. 350 ITR 407 and held that mere issuance of cheque and providing bank detail would not be sufficient to discharge the liability of assessee in view of the link between entry providers and incriminating evidence. In this case of Swati Bajaj, Hon'ble Kolkata High C…

KAUSHIK CHANDRAVADAN PARIKH,MUMBAI vs. NFAC, DELHI

ITA 2064/MUM/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Jul 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal (Jm) & Shri Omkareshwar Chidara (Am)

Section 10(38)Section 132Section 68

…he Hon'ble Kolkata High Court has dealt with this issue of section 68 by relying on various decisions like N.R. Portfolio Pvt. Ltd., A Govindarajulu 16 Kaushik Chandravadan Parikh Mudaliar Vs. CIT 205 ITR 802 (SC), Full Bench decision of Sophia Finance Ltd. 205 ITR 98 (Del), Nova Promoters Finlease (P) Ltd. 342 ITR 169 (Del), CIT Vs. Nipun Builders Ltd. 350 ITR 407 and held that mere issuance of cheque and providing bank detail would not be sufficient to discharge the liability of assessee in view of the link between entry providers and incriminating evidence. In this case of Swati Bajaj, Hon'ble Kolkata High C…