closely held company — 300 judgments | BharatTax

ASIRVAD MICRO FINANCE LIMITED,ANNA SALAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CORPORATE CIRCLE -1(1), CHENNAI

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1139/CHNY/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai10 Mar 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Ms. Padmavathy.Sआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1139/Chny/2025 िनधा$रण वष$ /Assessment Year: 2015-16

For Appellant: Mr. P.R. Prasanna Varma, FCAFor Respondent: Mr. Bipin C.N., CIT

Explanation to clause (23FB) of section 10; 7. From the plain reading of the above provision it is clear that if a closely held company receives any consideration during the year for issue shares in excess of the face value, then the excess over the fair market value will ... series of measures to deter the generation and use of unaccounted money. To this end, I propose— **** * Increasing the onus of proof on closely held companies for funds received from shareholders as well as taxing share premium in excess of fair market value. * Taxing of unexplained money, credits, investments, expenditures

ASCENTECH ENGINEERING SOLUTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 1(1), HYDERABAD

ITA 1686/HYD/2025[2017-18]Status: HeardITAT Hyderabad06 Mar 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं / Ita.No.1686/Hyd/2025

For Appellant: MS Sree Lekha, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri Mathivanan S A, Sr. AR

Section 56(2)(vii)Section 56(2)(viib)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad ‘A' Bench, Hyderabad BEFORE SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI MADHUSUDAN

ORAGADAM CITY DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ITO, CORPORATE WARD-5(1), CHENNAI

In the result, Addition u/s

ITA 2173/CHNY/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 Feb 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S.R.Raghunatha

For Appellant: MR. R. Sivaraman, AdvFor Respondent: Mr. Guru Prasad, Addl. CIT

Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 40Section 56(2)(viib)

analysis and findings with regard to the applicability of Section 56(2)(viib) of the Act: Section 56(2)(viib) applies where a closely held company receives consideration for issue of shares from a resident in excess of FMV. In the present case shares were admittedly issued during the relevant

KARADI PATH EDUCATION COMPANY PRIVATE LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. COMMISSIONER, CHENNAI

ITA 1848/CHNY/2025[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 Feb 2026AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S. R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.:1848/Chny/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year: 2018-19 Karadi Path Education Company Private Limited, 3A No.11, Dev Regency, I Main Road, Gandhi Nagar, Adyar, Chennai - 600 020. [Pan: Aaeck-2995-D] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) Dcit, Vs. Corporate Circle -4(1), Chennai. (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/Appellant By : Shri. Pradhan Priya Dass, C.A. (By Virtual) प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 27.11.2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 17.02.2026 आदेश /O R Der Per S. R. Raghunatha, Am: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Filed Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, (In Short “Ld.Cit(A)”) For The Assessment Year 2018-19, Dated 29.04.2025 In Respect Of The Order Of The National E-Assessment Centre, Delhi (In Short 'Ao') Passed U/S.143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 ( In Short ‘The Act') Dated 28.04.2021. :-2-:

For Appellant: Shri. Pradhan Priya Dass, C.A. (by Virtual)For Respondent: Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, JCIT

Section 143(3)Section 56(2)(vii)Section 56(2)(viib)

section 56(2)(viib) of the Act is attracted in the facts of the present case. Section 56(2)(viib) applies where a closely held company “receives... any consideration for issue of shares

HOLLIS VITRIFIED PRIVATE LIMITED,MORBI, GUJARAT, INDIA vs. THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - 1, RAJKOT, RAJKOT, GUJARAT, INDIA

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee, is dismissed

ITA 363/RJT/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot12 Feb 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Dr. Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No. 363/Rjt/2024 (Assessment Year: 2018-19) (Hybrid Hearing) Hollis Vitrified Pvt. Ltd. Vs. The Pr. Commissioner Of Income Revenue Survey No. 756/P1/P1/P1, Opp. Tax-1, Rajkot Antique Granito, Ghuntu,-Lakhdhirpur Road, Morbi (Gujarat)-363642 "ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aacch5628Q (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Fenil H. Mehta, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Punglia, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 68

that with effect from assessment year 2013-14, section 68 of the Income Tax Act has been amended to provide that if a closely held company fails to explain the source of share capital, share premium or share application money received by it to the satisfaction of the assessing officer

PANKAJ JEWELLERS PRIVATE LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-3(1)(1) OLD WARD-3(1)(2), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 1442/AHD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad04 Feb 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita No. 1442/Ahd/2025 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2017-18 Pankaj Jewellers Private The Income Tax Officer बनाम/ Limited Ward-3(1)(1) V/S. 1199, Dedkani Pole [Old Ito, Ward-3(1)(2)] M.G. Haveli Road Ahmedabad 380 015 Manekchowk Ahmedabad 380 001 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aagcp 4590 D (अपीलाथ$/ Appellant) (%& यथ$/ Respondent) Assessee By : Shri M. S. Chhajed, Ar Revenue By : Shri Nitin Vishnu Kulkarni, Sr.Dr

For Appellant: Shri M. S. Chhajed, ARFor Respondent: Shri Nitin Vishnu Kulkarni, Sr.DR

Section 115BSection 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 250Section 68

account of unexplained cash deposits during the demonetisation period. 4. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a closely held company, engaged in the business of trading in Bullion and Jewellery. The assessee filed its return of income for Assessment Year 2017-18 on 28.10.2017 Pankaj

ACIT, CIRCLE-52(1), NEW DELHI, DELHI vs. SINGHANIA ALU FOIL CONTAINERS MANUFACTURING COMPANY, NEW DELHI

ITA 2743/DEL/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Jan 2026AY 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri Amit Goel, CAFor Respondent: Shri Manish Gupta, Sr.DR

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES ‘G’: NEW DELHI. BEFORE SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER and SHRI VIMAL

ACIT., CIRCLE-5(1), HYDERABAD vs. MADINENI SITARAMAIAH, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is allowed, and the cross- objection filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 598/HYD/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad24 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Us:

Section 143(3)Section 2(22)(e)

assessee during the subject year had received an unsecured loan of Rs. 2,99,49,991/- from M/s. Madineni Infra Private Limited, a closely held company in which he held 50% of the shareholding. The AO further noticed that the said company had accumulated profits ... ACIT-CIRCLE 5(1),HYD. VS. MADINENI SITARAMAIAH nature, source and tax implications. Accordingly, once the AO found that the lender was a closely held company, wherein the assessee was a substantial shareholder, and that accumulated profits were available with the assessee company, the applicability of section

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-01, NEW DELHI vs. SAHARA INDIA COMMERCIAL CORPORATION LTD. , KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and CO of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5793/DEL/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Dec 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri S Rifaur Rahmanआअसं.1977/धिल्ली/2013(नि.व. 2009-10) Sahara India Commercial Corporation Ltd., Sahara India Sadan, 2A, Shakespeare Sarani, Kolkata 700071 ...... अपीलार्थी/Appellant Pan: Aadcs-6118-F बिाम Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle-6, R. No. 334, E-2, Ara, ..... प्रनिवादी/Respondent Centre Jhandewalan Extn. New Delhi आअसं.4728, 2795, 4729, 4730 और 4731/धिल्ली/2017(नि.व. 2010-11 से 2014-15)

Section 142