← All Phrases

“share capital and share premium”

Cash Credits & Unexplained ItemsSection 68Section 68694 judgments

The decision most relied on for share capital and share premium is CIT v. Divine Leasing & Finance Ltd. (299 ITR 268), cited in 426 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on share capital and share premium

CIT v. Divine Leasing & Finance Ltd.
299 ITR 268 · 2008 · High Court
426
citing judgments

The Assessing Officer cannot add share capital or share premium amounts if the assessee provides the identity and creditworthiness of the subscriber and establishes the genuineness of the transaction. The court may admit additional evidence under Rule 46A, such as the PAN identity of the creditor.

CIT v. Gagandeep Infrastructure (P.) Ltd.
394 ITR 680 · 2017 · High Court
303
citing judgments

Under Section 68, an assessee is only required to prove the identity and creditworthiness of the immediate creditor or share subscriber and the genuineness of the transaction. The assessee is not obligated to establish the 'source of the source' of funds or the creditworthiness of sub-lenders, as this information may not be within the assessee's special knowledge.

Vodafone India Services (P.) Ltd. v. Union of India
368 ITR 1 · 2014 · High Court
172
citing judgments

The issue of shares and share premium is a capital account transaction, not an income-generating event, therefore Chapter X (Transfer Pricing) provisions are not attracted to deem notional or hypothetical income from such transactions.

MOD Creation Pvt Ltd. v. Case
354 ITR 282 · 2013 · High Court
154
citing judgments

Under Section 68 of the Income-tax Act, the initial burden is on the assessee to establish the authenticity of transactions for unexplained credits. Once authenticity is proven, this burden shifts, and the assessee is not required to prove the genuineness or source of funds of the creditor beyond this.

CIT v. Ultra Modern Exports (P.) Ltd.
40 Taxmann.com 458 · 2013 · High Court
135
citing judgments

An addition under Section 68 for cash credits like share capital or premium cannot be sustained if the assessee provides the identity, creditworthiness, and genuineness of the transaction, and the Assessing Officer fails to conduct further enquiries into the 'source of source' or the ultimate source of funds of the investor/creditor.

CIT v. Empire Builtech (P.) Ltd.
366 ITR 110 · 2014 · High Court
110
citing judgments

For additions under Section 68 related to share capital and premium, the assessee must prove the genuineness of the transaction and the creditworthiness of the investors, beyond merely disclosing their identities. Additions are permissible for amounts attributable to investors whose particulars remain unverified or who fail to respond to inquiries.

PCIT v. Paradise Inland Shipping Pvt. Ltd.
84 Taxmann.com 58 · 2017 · High Court
87
citing judgments

In reassessment proceedings initiated on the ground that companies providing share capital were non-existent, if the assessee provides documentary evidence of their existence, the burden shifts to the revenue to establish reasons for reassessment.

Jatia Investment Co. v. CIT
206 ITR 718 · 1994 · High Court
77
citing judgments

An addition under Section 68 for unexplained cash credits cannot be made when there is no actual cash credit or flow of funds, such as in cases of share swaps or notional credits.

Judgments citing share capital and share premium

DCIT Central Circle-II, Noida vs. Apple Commodities Ltd, Noida

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 2240/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: HeardITAT Delhi10 Jul 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Challa Nagendra Prasadआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A Nos.2239 & 2240/Del/2019 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years:2009-10 & 2010-11 बनाम Dcit Apple Commodities Ltd., 701-A, 7Th Floor, Vs. Central Circle-Ii, 2Nd Floor, Arto Complex, Gd-Itl Tower, Plot No.B- Sector-33, Noida, 08, Uttar Pradesh. Netaji Subhash Place, Pitampura, New Delhi. Pan No.Aadca0300K अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent & Cross Objection Nos. 122 & 123/Del/2019 (In Ita Nos. 2239 To 2240/Del/2019) Assessment Years: 2009-10 & 2010-11 बनाम Apple Commodities Ltd., Dcit 701-A, 7Th Floor, Vs. Central Circle-Ii, 2Nd Floor, Arto Complex, Gd-Itl Tower, Plot No.B-08, Netaji Subhash Place, Sector-33, Noida, Pitampura, New Delhi. Uttar Pradesh. Pan No. Aadca0300K अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 153C

appeals of the Revenue is as to whether the additions made by the Assessing Officer as an unexplained investment being share capital and share premium are sustainable in the absence of incriminating material seized in the course of search. 3. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee submits that ... additions towards share capital and share premium were made by the AO based on the ledger accounts, confirmation accounts by various parties which are all part of regular books of accounts and there is no incriminating material was seized in the course of search belonging to the assessee

DCIT Central Circle-II, Noida vs. Apple Commodities Ltd, Noida

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 2239/DEL/2019[2009-10]Status: HeardITAT Delhi10 Jul 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Challa Nagendra Prasadआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A Nos.2239 & 2240/Del/2019 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years:2009-10 & 2010-11 बनाम Dcit Apple Commodities Ltd., 701-A, 7Th Floor, Vs. Central Circle-Ii, 2Nd Floor, Arto Complex, Gd-Itl Tower, Plot No.B- Sector-33, Noida, 08, Uttar Pradesh. Netaji Subhash Place, Pitampura, New Delhi. Pan No.Aadca0300K अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent & Cross Objection Nos. 122 & 123/Del/2019 (In Ita Nos. 2239 To 2240/Del/2019) Assessment Years: 2009-10 & 2010-11 बनाम Apple Commodities Ltd., Dcit 701-A, 7Th Floor, Vs. Central Circle-Ii, 2Nd Floor, Arto Complex, Gd-Itl Tower, Plot No.B-08, Netaji Subhash Place, Sector-33, Noida, Pitampura, New Delhi. Uttar Pradesh. Pan No. Aadca0300K अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 153C

appeals of the Revenue is as to whether the additions made by the Assessing Officer as an unexplained investment being share capital and share premium are sustainable in the absence of incriminating material seized in the course of search. 3. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee submits that ... additions towards share capital and share premium were made by the AO based on the ledger accounts, confirmation accounts by various parties which are all part of regular books of accounts and there is no incriminating material was seized in the course of search belonging to the assessee

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Airindia Building, Nariman Point, Mumbai vs. Fateh Granite Limited, Andheri, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3484/MUM/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Jul 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

For Appellant: Shri Prakash JhunjhunwalaFor Respondent: Ms. Rajeshwari Menon, Sr.DR
Section 131Section 143(3)Section 68

each on which assessee received share premium of ₹ 990/- per share, aggregating to 4,90,00,000. The said share capital and share premium was received by the assessee from 18 share subscribing companies. Ld. Assessing Officer sought details and explanation on this transaction from ... assessee could not be established. Accordingly, he completed the assessment by making an addition of ₹ 4,90,00,000/- towards share capital and share premium raised during the year by treating it as unexplained cash credit u/s. 68 of the Act. Aggrieved, assessee went in appeal before

Enn Vee Holdings Pvt Ltd, New Delhi vs. DCIT Central Circle 31, New Delhi

In the result, the addition made u/s 68 and u/s 56(2)(viib) in the case of M/s Realtime Marketing Pvt

ITA 1195/DEL/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Jul 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Sh. Yogesh Kumar Us

For Appellant: Sh. Neeraj Jain, Adv. &For Respondent: Ms. Sapna Bhatia, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 68

1195/Del/2023 : Asstt. Year: 2016-17 M/s ENN VEE Holdings Pvt. Ltd. 18. In this case, the assessee has received share capital and share premium from the entities namely, Vinco Metals Pvt. Ltd., Ace trade Solutions Pvt. Ltd., Bon Lon Pvt. Ltd. and Harshit Finvest Pvt. Ltd. 19. With

DCIT, CC-31, New Delhi vs. Realtime Marketing Pvt. Ltd., Delhi

In the result, the addition made u/s 68 and u/s 56(2)(viib) in the case of M/s Realtime Marketing Pvt

ITA 1839/DEL/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Jul 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Sh. Yogesh Kumar Us

For Appellant: Sh. Neeraj Jain, Adv. &For Respondent: Ms. Sapna Bhatia, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 68

1195/Del/2023 : Asstt. Year: 2016-17 M/s ENN VEE Holdings Pvt. Ltd. 18. In this case, the assessee has received share capital and share premium from the entities namely, Vinco Metals Pvt. Ltd., Ace trade Solutions Pvt. Ltd., Bon Lon Pvt. Ltd. and Harshit Finvest Pvt. Ltd. 19. With

ACIT, Central Circle-17, New Delhi vs. Diamond Tradex Co. Ltd, New Delhi

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 6167/DEL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Jun 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Anubhav Sharma[Assessment Year: 2012-13

Section 143(3)Section 68

Assessing Officer has made addition of Rs. 1.5 Crore u/s 68 in the hands of appellant holding that the receipt of share capital and share premium from three companies viz. (i) Cornelius Marketing & Research Pvt. Ltd.. (ii) Mithilanchal Investment & Finance & Finance (P) Ltd. and (iii) Rising Portfolio ... Section 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1991 by treating the above amount claimed to having been received on account of share capital and share premium as unexplained credit. 2. That the Ld.CIT(A) has erred in ignoring the facts as the aвековие company failed to discharge

Hnv Printpack LLP, Delhi vs. ITO Ward 59(3), New Delhi

Appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 838/DEL/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Jun 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Kul Bharatassessment Year: 2011-12

Section 139Section 147Section 148Section 68

made on the ground that an accommodation entry was received by the Appellant in the form of share capital and share premium from M/s White Collar Management Private Limited (refer para 5.1 of the Asssessment Order). The addition was made as the AO was of the opinion that

Balaka Vinimay Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-2(1), Kolkata

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 161/KOL/2024[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Jun 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg, Hon’Ble & Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 160 & 161/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2008-09 Balaka Vinimay Pvt. Ltd. Income Tax Officer, Ward – 2(1), 9/12, Lal Bazar Street Vs Kolkata Kolkata - 700001 [Pan : Aadcb2610B] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri A.K. Tibrewal, A/R & Saurav Gupta, A/R Revenue By : Shri Abhijit Kundu, Cit, Sr. D/R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 09/04/2024 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 21/06/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Dr. Manish Borad: The Instant Appeals Are Directed At The Instance Of The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, (Hereinafter The “Ld. Cit(A)”). Ita No. 160/Kol/2024 Is Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A) Dt. 29/11/2023, Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter ‘The Act’) Arising Out Of The Penalty Order Passed By The Ld. Assessing Officer U/S 271(1)(C) Of The Act & Ita No. 161/Kol/2023, Is Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A) Dt. 28/11/2023, Arising Out Of The Order Of The Ld. Assessing Officer Passed U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 254 Of The Act, For Assessment Year 2008-09. 2. Though The Assessee Has Raised Various Grounds In Both These Appeals, But The Effective Issue Raised In Ita No. 161/Kol/2024 Is Against The Addition Made U/S 68 Of The Act For Unexplained Share Capital Confirmed By The Ld. Cit(A) & In Ita No. 160/Kol/2024 Is Against The Levy Of Penalty U/S 271(1)(C) Of The Act On The Addition Made

For Appellant: Shri A.K. Tibrewal, A/R and Saurav Gupta, A/RFor Respondent: Shri Abhijit Kundu, CIT, Sr. D/R
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 263Section 271(1)(c)Section 68

been made by the AO alleging it to be unexplained cash credit received by the assessee in the form of share capital and share premium. The Revenue authorities have alleged that the assessee has merely furnished the documentary evidences but the assessee failed to appear before the Revenue ... held that the assessee had been unable to explain the nature and source of this share application money which included share capital and share premium totaling to Rs.3.59 Crores, on account of issue of share of face value of Rs.10/- and premium of Rs.90/- received from

Balaka Vinimay Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-2(1), Kolkata

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 160/KOL/2024[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Jun 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg, Hon’Ble & Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 160 & 161/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2008-09 Balaka Vinimay Pvt. Ltd. Income Tax Officer, Ward – 2(1), 9/12, Lal Bazar Street Vs Kolkata Kolkata - 700001 [Pan : Aadcb2610B] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri A.K. Tibrewal, A/R & Saurav Gupta, A/R Revenue By : Shri Abhijit Kundu, Cit, Sr. D/R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 09/04/2024 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 21/06/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Dr. Manish Borad: The Instant Appeals Are Directed At The Instance Of The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, (Hereinafter The “Ld. Cit(A)”). Ita No. 160/Kol/2024 Is Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A) Dt. 29/11/2023, Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter ‘The Act’) Arising Out Of The Penalty Order Passed By The Ld. Assessing Officer U/S 271(1)(C) Of The Act & Ita No. 161/Kol/2023, Is Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A) Dt. 28/11/2023, Arising Out Of The Order Of The Ld. Assessing Officer Passed U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 254 Of The Act, For Assessment Year 2008-09. 2. Though The Assessee Has Raised Various Grounds In Both These Appeals, But The Effective Issue Raised In Ita No. 161/Kol/2024 Is Against The Addition Made U/S 68 Of The Act For Unexplained Share Capital Confirmed By The Ld. Cit(A) & In Ita No. 160/Kol/2024 Is Against The Levy Of Penalty U/S 271(1)(C) Of The Act On The Addition Made

For Appellant: Shri A.K. Tibrewal, A/R and Saurav Gupta, A/RFor Respondent: Shri Abhijit Kundu, CIT, Sr. D/R
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 263Section 271(1)(c)Section 68

been made by the AO alleging it to be unexplained cash credit received by the assessee in the form of share capital and share premium. The Revenue authorities have alleged that the assessee has merely furnished the documentary evidences but the assessee failed to appear before the Revenue ... held that the assessee had been unable to explain the nature and source of this share application money which included share capital and share premium totaling to Rs.3.59 Crores, on account of issue of share of face value of Rs.10/- and premium of Rs.90/- received from

Deergold Vincom Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. I.T.O, Ward-6(1), Kol, Kolkata

ITA 499/KOL/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Jun 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Him Relating To The Identity & Financial Worthiness Of The Share Applicants, The Justification Of The Premium Received By The Assessee & Also Relating To The Genuineness Of The Transaction In Question. The Assessee Will Duly Comply With The Notices Issued By The Cit(A) & Will Also Furnish The Required Documents & Evidences Before The Cit(A) Or Before The Assessing Officer, As The Case May Be.

Section 68

section 143(2) was issued and served upon the assessee. The ld. Assessing Officer has observed that the assessee has received share capital and share premium. The scrips having face value of Rs.10/- were sold at Rs.500/-, which means Rs.490/- were taken as a premium. The ld. Assessing

M/S. Alang Metal Exim Pvt. Limited., Bhavnagar vs. ACIT, Circle-1, Bhavnagar

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is treated as partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2329/AHD/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad19 Jun 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Accountnat Member Assessment Year : 2012-13 M/S.Alang Metal Exim Pvt.Ltd. The Acit Shop No.3, Arpan Flat Vs Circle-1 Shishuvihar Circle, Bhavnagar Bhavnagar – 364 001 (Gujarat) Pan:Aaeca 9651 Q ….. अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr.Adv. & Shri Parimalsinh B. Parmar, Ar Revenue By : Shri Sudhendu Das, Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 13 /06/2024 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 19/06/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokarthis Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 20-9-2018 Passed By The Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)–6, Ahmedabad [Hereinafter Referred To As “The Ld.Cit(A)”] In Confirming The Addition Of Rs.7,00,00,000/- Under Section 68 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”) & Disallowance Of Rs.3,30,000/- Out Of Loading & Unloading Charges Made By The Assessing Officer (Hereinafter Referred To As “Ao”) In His Assessment Order Passed Under Section 143(3) Of The Act For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2012-13. M/S.Alang Metal Exim Pvt.Ltd. Vs. Acit Asst. Year : 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr.Adv. &For Respondent: Shri Sudhendu Das, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 68

made an addition of Rs.7,00,00,000/- under Section 68 of the Act in respect of share capital and share premium received from the following parties during the year under consideration, which was confirmed by the Ld.CIT(A): Name of the Party Share Share Total ... both in law and on the facts of the case in confirming the action of AO of making an addition of share capital and share premium of Rs.7,00,00,000/- as unexplained income u/s.68 of the Act. 2. The learned CIT(A) has erred both

ITO, Ward- 7(1), New Delhi vs. Delite Buildpro Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 6396/DEL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Jun 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Ms Madhumita Royito, Vs. Deccan Buildmart Pvt. Ltd, 94-G, Apartment No. 1, 9Th Ward-7(1), New Delhi Cross Road, Rajmahalvilas Extension, Sadashiva Nagar, Bangalore, Karnataka-560080 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Aadcd7416M Ito, Vs. Delite Buildpro Pvt. Ltd, Ward-7(1), 34, I-O, New Qutab New Delhi Apartment, Ward No. 1, Desu Road, Desu Road, Mehrauli, Near Bhagwait Hospital, New Delhi-110030 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aadcd7412R Assessee By : Shri Mukesh Soni, Adv Shri Prakul Khurana, Adv Revenue By: Shri Vivek Kumar Upadhyay, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 25/04/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 12/06/2024

For Appellant: Shri Mukesh Soni, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Kumar Upadhyay, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)

directed by the ld AO to justify the receipt of share premium. The assessee responded that amounts received towards share capital and share premium from corporate entities were pursuant to allotment of equity shares to the investors at a premium and the shares were allotted

ITO, Ward- 7(1), New Delhi vs. Deccan Buildwell Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 6213/DEL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Jun 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Ms Madhumita Royito, Vs. Deccan Buildmart Pvt. Ltd, 94-G, Apartment No. 1, 9Th Ward-7(1), New Delhi Cross Road, Rajmahalvilas Extension, Sadashiva Nagar, Bangalore, Karnataka-560080 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Aadcd7416M Ito, Vs. Delite Buildpro Pvt. Ltd, Ward-7(1), 34, I-O, New Qutab New Delhi Apartment, Ward No. 1, Desu Road, Desu Road, Mehrauli, Near Bhagwait Hospital, New Delhi-110030 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aadcd7412R Assessee By : Shri Mukesh Soni, Adv Shri Prakul Khurana, Adv Revenue By: Shri Vivek Kumar Upadhyay, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 25/04/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 12/06/2024

For Appellant: Shri Mukesh Soni, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Kumar Upadhyay, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)

directed by the ld AO to justify the receipt of share premium. The assessee responded that amounts received towards share capital and share premium from corporate entities were pursuant to allotment of equity shares to the investors at a premium and the shares were allotted

M/S Wisley Real Estate Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-11(3), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 55/KOL/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata06 Jun 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A. No. 55/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2012-2013 M/S. Wisley Real Estate Pvt. Ltd.,…..........Appellant 86C, Viswakarma, 1St Floor, Topsia Road, Tiljala, Kolkata-700046 [Pan:Aakcs8704L] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,……..........................Respondent Ward-11(3), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata-700069 Appearances By: Shri A.K. Tulsyan, Fca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri P.P. Barman, Addl. Cit, Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing : 18Th March, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: June 6Th , 2024 O R D E R

Section 131Section 133(6)Section 234BSection 68

have heard rival contentions and perused the records placed before us. Addition u/s 68 of the Act for unexplained share capital and share premium of Rs. 1.40 Cr is in challenge before us. We notice that the assessee company issued fresh share capital during the year ... placed before us, we find that assessee has successfully discharged primary onus casted upon it to explain the source of alleged share capital and share premium. Ld. AO did not find any fault or any shortcoming in the compliances made by the appellant company. It is also

Srilakshmi Finvest Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward - 5(1), Kolkata

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

ITA 73/KOL/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 Jun 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 68

term capital gain, whereas, as a matter of fact, the addition has been made by the Assessing Officer on account of share capital and share premium amounting to Rs.8,57,50,000/- u/s 68 of the Act. The ld. AR, therefore, prayed that at both stages below

ACIT, Central Circle-13, New Delhi vs. Pragun Finance Pvt.Ltd., New Delhi

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 886/DEL/2020[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 May 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Anubhav Sharmaassessment Year: 2010-11 Acit, Vs Pragun Finance Pvt. Ltd., Central Circle-13, 26, Main Ring Road, New Delhi. Part-4, Lajpat Nagar, New Delhi. Pan: Aaecp2711N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Kanwaljit Singh, Ca Revenue By : Shri P.N. Barnwal, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 28.03.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 30.05.2024

For Appellant: Shri Kanwaljit Singh, CAFor Respondent: Shri P.N. Barnwal, CIT-DR
Section 153ASection 153CSection 37

That the ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in deleting the addition on account of unexplained share capital and share premium investment amounting to Rs.13,32,00,000/- and commission charges @ 2% amounting to Rs.2664000/- paid to bogus companies. 6. That

M/S Kamachi Steels Private Limited, Chennai vs. DCIT, Centrl Circle-1(1), Chennai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee for A

ITA 902/CHNY/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai29 May 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.902/Chny/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15) M/S. Kamachi Steels Private Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of Limited, Income Tax, No.664, T.N. Road, Central Circle 1(1) Tondiarpet, Chennai. Chennai 600 081. [Pan: Aaack 4450B] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri. T. Vasudevan, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent By : Shri. Arv Srinivasan, Irs, Addl. Cit सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 09.05.2024 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 29.05.2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per Manu Kumar Giri ()

For Appellant: Shri. T. Vasudevan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. ARV Srinivasan, IRS, Addl. CIT
Section 143(3)Section 68

Income Tax Act, 1961 (In short ‘the Act’). Assessing officer (In short ‘AO’) during the course of assessment proceedings added these (Share Capital and Share Premium) credits in the absence of confirmation received from seven (7) parties. The assessee has filed the various details as mentioned in para ... filed the same before Ld.CIT(A). Ultimately, Ld.CIT(A) upheld the order of assessing officer (In short ‘AO’) who assessed the share capital and share premium credits of Rs.6,50,00,000/- as unexplained cash credit in the hands of assessee

Magnum Credit & Consultants Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-7(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 326/KOL/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 May 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 131Section 144Section 68

company, since no cash was involved in the transaction of said allotment of shares. conversion of this liability in which share capital and share premium could not be treated as unexplained cash credits under Section 68 of the Act. The Revenue filed an appeal against the said

ITO, Ward-5(1), Kolkata vs. M/S Vishnu Distributors Pvt Ltd, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is devoid of any merit, hence dismissed

ITA 50/KOL/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 May 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumari.T.A. No. 50/Kol/2022 Assessment Year: 2012-2013

Section 131Section 14ASection 68

Rs.6,00,00,000/- under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 as unexplained cash credit in the form of share capital and share premium only on the ground that no cash or cheque was actually received by the respondent assessee and the purchase of share ... company, since no cash was involved in the transaction of said allotment of shares, conversion of this liability in which share capital and share premium could not be treated as unexplained cash credits under Section 68 of the Act. The Revenue filed an appeal against the said

M/S Jain Amar Clothing Pvt. Ltd., Ludhiana vs. DCIT, CC-III, Ludhiana

In the result, the ground no

ITA 374/CHANDI/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh16 May 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: SHRI. AAKASH DEEP JAIN (Vice President), SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Rohit Sharma, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 263Section 68

copy of complete Balance Sheet set was duly filed with the AO during the original assessment proceedings wherein addition to share capital and share premium is duly reflected. (PB-II Pg-467,469, 470) ii) Copy of reply dated 22.12.2014 to the queries as raised during the original ... page-355, wherein complete details were filed with name, address, PAN and bank statements of the persons from whom share capital and share premium was received during the year under consideration. Further comparative share holding for 31.03.2011 and 31.03.2012 was also filed. (Relevant page