“share capital and share premium”

Minto Park Estates Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-12(3), Kolkata.

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2012-13

share capital and that even during the assessment proceedings, the assessee had furnished all the details in respect of the share capital and share premium including the details of the investors who had made their submissions before the AO. (b) The Hon’ble Court also observed that ... anything substantive brought on record to justify the addition made by him. Ld. AO has simply added the amount of share capital and share premium on the ground that assessee has not produced the directors/shareholders. Thus, going by the records placed by the assessee of all the share

M/S City Shoppe Estates Limited, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir. 4(3), Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2010-11

entities which were mere paper companies/entities used to introduce back the unaccounted income generated by it in the guise of share capital and share premium and unsecured loans through host of entry operators. It was further noted that in the year under consideration, assessee had taken benefit ... thus completed by making an addition of Rs. 40 lakh by holding it as unaccounted money in the garb of share capital and share premium in the books of the assessee treating it as unexplained cash credit u/s. 68 of the Act. Aggrieved, assessee went in appeal before

M/S. Swaviman Services Pvt. Ltd., Howrah vs. I.T.O., Ward - 12(2), Kolkata

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

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg, Hon’Ble & Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 773/Kol/2022 Assessment Year: 2014-15 M/S. Swaviman Services Private Income Tax Officer, Ward- Vs 12(2), Kolkata Limited 84, Panchanantal Road 2Nd Floor, Block-A Flat No. 204 Liluah Howrah - 711204 [Pan : Aadcs5897D] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Sunil Surana, A/R Revenue By : Shri P.P. Barman, Addl. Cit, Sr. D/R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 18/03/2024 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 08/04/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Dr. Manish Borad: The Present Appeal Is Directed At The Instance Of The Assessee Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) - 4, Kolkata (Hereinafter The “Ld. Cit(A)”) Dated 27/12/2019, Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act’), For Assessment Year 2014-15. 2. At The Outset The Ld. Counsel For The Assessee Submitted That The Order Of The Ld. Assessing Officer Is Ex-Parte & Assessee Also Failed To Appeal Before The Ld. Cit(A) & The Impugned Additions Are On Account Of Unexplained Share Capital & Share Premium. Referring To The Audited Balance Sheet, He Submitted That The Assessee Has Not Received Any Share Capital & Share Premium During The Year. However, Since The Assessee Did Not Appear Before The Lower Authorities, An Opportunity May Be Granted To Furnish Necessary Details To Prove That No Fresh Share Capital & Share

parte and assessee also failed to appeal before the ld. CIT(A) and the impugned additions are on account of unexplained share capital and share premium. Referring to the audited balance sheet, he submitted that the assessee has not received any share capital and share premium ... addition u/s 68 of the Act is in challenged before us which is made by the Assessing Officer for unexplained share capital and share premium amounting to Rs.1,57,00,000/-. The assessee is a private limited company furnished return for Assessment Year 2014-15 on 23/06/2015 declaring

Onkar Parivahan Finance Private Limited, Kolkata Burrabazar vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 9(2), Kolkata, Chowringhee

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Ble & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Hon’Bleassessment Year: 2015-16 Onkar Parivahan Finance Private Dcit, Circle-9(2), Limited Kolkata Vs.

were placed before the AO. Thereafter, the ld. AO relying on various decisions of the Hon’ble High Court held that share capital and share premium aggregating to Rs. 2,62,57,500/- as unexplained cash credit within the meaning of section 68 of the Act and added

Soubhik Exports Limited., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir-8(2), Kolkata / N E-Assessment Centre, Delhi.

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg, Hon’Ble & Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Ble

alleged cash creditors have been scrutinised by the revenue authorities and all have sufficient funds in the form of share capital and share premium which have been brought forward from the preceding years and are sufficient enough to explain the investment of alleged sum. The ld. Counsel

Soubhik Exports Limited., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir-8(2), Kolkata.

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg, Hon’Ble & Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Ble

alleged cash creditors have been scrutinised by the revenue authorities and all have sufficient funds in the form of share capital and share premium which have been brought forward from the preceding years and are sufficient enough to explain the investment of alleged sum. The ld. Counsel

M/S Dv Re-Rolling Mills Pvt Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-9(1), Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2012-13

share capital and that even during the assessment proceedings, the assessee had furnished all the details in respect of the share capital and share premium including the details of the investors who had made their submissions before the AO. (b) The Hon’ble Court also observed that ... anything substantive brought on record to justify the addition made by him. Ld. AO has simply added the amount of share capital and share premium on the ground that assessee has not produced its director. Thus, going by the records placed by the assessee of all the share

M/S Landmark Exim Pvt Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-1(4), Kolkata

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

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2012-13

allottees confirmed the transactions. 8. For that Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the action of Assessing Officer in assessing the share capital and share premium as unexplained cash credit merely for the reason of non-appearance of the share applicants in response to summon

Ranisati Hosiery (P) Ltd., Kolkata vs. PCIT-4, Kolkata.

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawali.T.A. No.1278/Kol/2023 Assessment Year : 2012-13 Ranisati Hosiery (P) Ltd…….….…………............…...……………....Appellant Siddha Weston, Room No.126, 9, Weston Street, Kolkata – 700013. [Pan: Aafcr2959B] Vs. Pcit-4, Kolkata…………..….............................................…..…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri Rajeeva Kumar & Giridhar Dhelia, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Rakesh Kumar Das, Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : January 31, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : March 18, 2024 आदेश / Order संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य "वारा / Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Revision Order Dated 12.03.2019 Of The Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax-4, Kolkata [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Pcit’] Passed U/S 263 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. As Per The Note Of The Registry, The Appeal Is Time Barred By 1722 Days. A Separate Application For Condonation Of Delay Has Been Filed Which Is Further Supported With The Affidavit Of Shri Bhupendra Bansal, Director Of The Assessee Company. It Has Been Explained That The Impugned Order Dated 12.03.2019. That The Copy Of The Order Was Not Served Upon The Assessee. That The Assessee Came To Know About The Passing Of The Impugned Order Only After The Receipt Of The Subsequent Assessment Order Passed U/S 144 R.W.S. 263 Of The Act. The Assessee

premium was also furnished. However, the Assessing Officer without going into the said details and evidences simply made the addition of share capital and share premium only on the ground that the director of the assessee company in response to summons issued

Sharda Ferro Works(P)Ltd, Howrah vs. DCIT, Asansol

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2012-13

moot point raised by the assessee in the present appeal is in respect of addition made by the Ld. AO towards share capital including share premium raised during the year ,treated as unexplained cash credit u/s. 68, amounting to Rs.2,05,50,000/-. 5. Brief facts ... Counsel for the assessee has placed on record a paper book containing 147 pages in support of corroborating the transaction of share capital including share premium raised during the year. Ld. Counsel for the assessee has made a detailed and elaborate submission on the issue. He took