“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

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

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

D More Fashion Private Limited, Surat vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle -1, (1)(1), Surat

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

ITA 426/SRT/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Surat29 Aug 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.426/Srt/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2010-11) (Virtual Court Hearing) D More Fashion Pvt. Ltd. Dy. Commissioner Of Income- 145, Mahalaxmi Marke Ring Tax, Circle-(1)(1)(1), Aaykar Vs. Road, Opp. Surat Textile Bhawan, Majura Gate, Opp. Market, Surat-395002 New Civil Hospital, Surat- 395001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aadcd 2876 M (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Ms. Chaitali Shah, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr-DR

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

Officer has erred in making addition of Rs.1,55,00,000/- u/s 68 of the Act on account of alleged bogus share capital and share premium. 4.On the facts and circumstances of the case as well as law on the subject, the learned Assessing Officer has erred

Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(1)(1), Surat vs. M/S. Priyanshi Textile Private Ltd., Surat

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 199/SRT/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Surat29 Aug 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.199/Srt/2022 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: (2013-14) (Physical Court Hearing) Assistant Commissioner Of M/S. Priyanshi Textile Pvt.Ltd., Income-Tax, Circle-2(1)(1), C/2, Plot No.74-79, Kim Sayan Vs. Surat, Room No.612, 6Th Floor, Road, Sunrise Interagated Textile Aayakar Bhawan, Near Majura Park, Kareli, Olpad, Surat- Gate, Surat-395001 394540 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaacy 4125 F (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent) िनधा"रती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Mehul Shah, Ca राज" की ओर से/Revenue By : Shri Ashok B. Koli, Cit- Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 26/07/2023 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 29/08/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. A. L. Saini: Captioned Appeal Filed By The Revenue, Pertaining To Assessment Year (Ay) 2013-14, Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [Nfac/Ld. Cit(A) For Short] Dated 30.04.2022, Which In Turn Arises Out Of An Assessment Order Passed By The Assessing Officer, Under Section 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) Dated 29.03.2016. 2. Grounds Of Appeal Raised By The Revenue Are As Follows: “(I) On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Deleting The Addition Of Rs.2,72,33,000/- Made By The Assessing Officer On Account Of Unexplained Cash Credit In The Form Of Unsecured Loan U/S 68 Of The Act As The Assessee Has Failed To Prove Bona Fide Of The Transaction Within The Meaning Of Section 68 Of The I.T. Act, 1961. (Ii) On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Deleting The Addition Of Rs.1,08,00,000/- Made By The Assessing Officer On Account Of Unexplained Share Capital & Share Premium U/S 68 Of The Act, Since The Assessee Failed To Prove The Source Of Source.

For Appellant: Shri Mehul Shah, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ashok B. Koli, CIT- DR

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 68

erred in deleting the addition of Rs.1,08,00,000/- made by the Assessing Officer on account of unexplained share capital and share premium u/s 68 of the Act, since the assessee failed to prove the source of source. ITA No.199/SRT/2022 A. Y. 2013-14 M/s Priyanshi Textile ... Revenue relates to deleting the addition of Rs.1,08,00,000/- made by the Assessing Officer on account of unexplained share capital and share premium. We note that this ground No.2 raised by the Revenue relates to ground No.1 of the Revenue, which we have adjudicated, therefore

Shalu Dyeing Ptg Mills Pvt. Ltd., Surat vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 2(1)(1), Surat

ITA 118/SRT/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Surat28 Aug 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.118/Srt/2023 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: (2012-13) (Physical Hearing) Shalu Dyeing Ptg Mills Pvt. Ltd., Vs. The Dcit, 262 G.I.D.C Industrial Estate, Pandesara, Circle-2(1)(1), Surat – 394221. Surat. (Appellant) (Respondent) "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aadcs8213P Appellant By Shri Rasesh Shah, Ca Respondent By Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr. Dr 15/06/2023 Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement 28/08/2023

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(va)Section 68Section 69C

applicant companies, in the assessment order page No. 24 to page No.32. The assessing officer also discussed the modus oparendi of share capital and share premium which are invested by the share applicant companies, vide page No. 1 to 23 of the assessment order. The assessing officer ... fulfilled the three conditions of section 68 of the Act viz, identity, creditworthiness and genuineness, in respect of the share capital and share premium received by the assessee-company. Therefore, assessing officer issued a show cause notice to the assessee stating that why the amount received as share

ITO WD.5(1) (1), Mumbai vs. M/S. Ams Trading & Investment Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai

ITA 1863/MUM/2021[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Aug 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri S Rifaur Rahman Ito – Ward 5(1)(1), Amstrading&Investment Room No.570, 5Th Pvt Ltd.,1St Floor, बनाम/ Floor, Shatrunjayapartments, Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, 28 Sindhi Lane, M.K.Road, Nanubhai Desai Road, Mumbai- 400020. Mumbai – 400004. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aafca6183N (""थ" / Respondent) (अपीलाथ" /Appellant)

For Appellant: Smt.Sujatha Iyangar.DRFor Respondent: Shri.AjaySingh&ShriYogesh Joijode.AR

Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 68

LdCIT(A) was justified in deleting the additions on account of AMS Trading &Investment Pvt Ltd.Mumbai. accommodation entries by way of share capital and share premium of Rs1,55,00,000/- u/s. 68 of the I.TAct, 1961 from M/s. Empower Industries Ltd without appreciating the fact that Shri ... through a doubtless channel like that of a banking channel, the receipt in the hands of the assessee towards share capital or share premium does not change its colour The money so invested in the assessee company would still be the money available and belonging to the investors

Movefast Automobiles Pvt Ltd, Faridabad vs. ITO Ward - 1(5), Faridabad

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

ITA 6183/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Aug 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg & Shri M. Balaganeshassessment Year: 2015-16 Movefast Automobiles Pvt. Ltd., Vs Ito, Ff-9, Vishnu Place, Ward-1(5), Near Neelam Flyover, Faridabad. Sector-20, Faridabad. Pan: Aaicm2607C

For Appellant: Shri Rajiv SaxenaFor Respondent: Ms Raja Rajeshwari R., Sr. DR

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 56(2)(viib)Section 68

ground No.2 raised by the assessee is challenging the addition made in the sum of Rs.43,25,000/- in respect of share capital and share premium received u/s 68 of the Act. 6. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material available on record ... order that no business activity was carried out during the year. The ld. AO observed that the assessee company received share capital and share premium from the following persons:- 7. The assessee furnished the complete details of these share subscribers by furnishing the name, address

Maakhan Milk Products Pvt. Ltd., Haryana vs. ITO Ward 1(5), Faridabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 6180/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Aug 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg & Shri M. Balaganeshassessment Year: 2015-16 Maakhan Milk Products Pvt. Ltd., Vs Ito, 1066, Baba Nagar, Ward-1(5), Near Janta Barat Ghar, Faridabad. Old Faridabad, Faridabad, Haryana – 121 002. Pan: Aaicm2610H

For Appellant: Shri Rajiv SaxenaFor Respondent: Ms Raja Rajeshwari R., Sr. DR

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 56(2)(viib)Section 68

ground No.2 raised by the assessee is challenging the addition made in the sum of Rs.30,00,000/- in respect of share capital and share premium received u/s 68 of the Act. 5. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material available on record ... assessment order that no business activity was carried out during the year. The ld. AO observed that the assessee company received share capital and share premium from the following persons:- 2 6. The assessee furnished the complete details of these share subscribers by furnishing the name, address

Income Tax Officer -10(2)(3), Mumbai vs. M/S Maiden Marketing India Pvt Ltd, Mumbai

ITA 1624/MUM/2023[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Aug 2023AY 2015-2016

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Amarjit Singhincome-Tax Officer Vs. M/S Maiden Marketing 10(2)(3), India Private Limited Room No. 212, 2 Nd Floor, 1601, Plot No. A-4, Cts Aayakar Bhavan, No. 694, Peninsula Park, Mumbai – 400020 16Th Floor, Fun Republic Lane, Andheri (West), Mumbai – 400 053 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aaicm7168E Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Himanshu GandhiFor Respondent: Mahita Nair

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 56(2)(viib)

facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT(Appeals) erred in holding that the issues of share capital and share premium were already examined at the time of the original assessment proceeding under section 143(3) of the Act and the additions

ACIT, Circle-21(2), New Delhi vs. Rishi Infratach P. Ltd, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of Revenue is dismissed

ITA 9424/DEL/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Aug 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Sh. G. S. Pannu & Sh. Saktijit Dey, Vice-Acit Vs. M/S. Rishi Infratach Pvt. Ltd. Circle – 21(2) 31, Bhogal, Jangpura Road, New Delhi New Delhi-110 014 Pan No. Aafcr 0028 M (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Salil Aggarwal, Sr. Adv. Shri Shailesh Gupta, Adv. Revenue By Shri Pramod Kumar, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing: 17.05.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 14.08.2023

Section 131Section 143(3)Section 68

facts, the Assessing Officer called upon the assessee to prove the identity, creditworthiness and genuineness of the parties from whom such share capital and share premium was received. In response to the query raised, the assessee furnished audited financial statements, copies of Income-tax returns, bank account statements ... observed, as per the first proviso to Section 68 of the Act, if any amount representing share application money, share capital or share premium is found credited in the accounts of the assessee and explanation offered by the assessee to establish the genuineness of such transactions

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Sam Portfolio Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, Appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 6220/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Aug 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.I.T.A. No. 6219/Del/2015 (A.Y 2009-10)

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Advocate; &For Respondent: Shri H. K. Chowdhary

Section 147Section 250Section 4

completed on 23/12/2011 on an income of Rs.16,65,61,150/- which inter alia included protective addition in respect of unexplained share capital and share premium of Rs. 1,94,45,100/- and unexplained other deposits of Rs. 14,61,64,641/-. 5. Aggrieved by the said assessment ... Unexplained share capital, share premium and unexplained bank deposits 6. During the year the assessee has reflected increase in share capital and share premium at Rs 6,48,170/- and Rs.1,87,96,930/- respectively. Vide questionnaire dated 01.01.2015 the assessee was 21 ITAs. 6219 & 6220/Del/2015

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Sam Portfolio Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, Appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 6219/DEL/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Aug 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.I.T.A. No. 6219/Del/2015 (A.Y 2009-10)

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Advocate; &For Respondent: Shri H. K. Chowdhary

Section 147Section 250Section 4

DCIT, Central Circle-8, New Delhi vs. Bhaijee Commodities Pvt. Ltd., Delhi

ITA 9133/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Aug 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri Surinder Mahajan CAFor Respondent: Shri Kanav Bali, Sr.DR

Section 133(6)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 68

Income of the assessee company for A.Y. 2009-10 & 2010-11, the following has been observed with regard to the share capital and share premium of the assessee company:- Sr. Particulars A.Y 2009-10 A.Y. 2010-11 Increase No. (+)/Decreas e (-) 1. Authorized Rs.3,00,00,000 Rs.10

Bhaijee Commodities Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT Circle-4(2), New Delhi

ITA 7921/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Aug 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri Surinder Mahajan CAFor Respondent: Shri Kanav Bali, Sr.DR

Section 133(6)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 68

Natwar Lal Gala, Mumbai vs. CIT (A)-52, Mumbai

ITA 399/MUM/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jul 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon’Ble

Section 68

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “B”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI

Natwar Lal Gala, Mumbai vs. CIT (A)-52, Mumbai

ITA 398/MUM/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jul 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon’Ble

Section 68

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “B”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI

Natwar Lal Daga, Mumbai vs. CIT (A)-52, Mumbai

ITA 397/MUM/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jul 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon’Ble

Section 68

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “B”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI

Natwar Lal Daga, Mumbai vs. CIT (A)-52, Mumbai

ITA 396/MUM/2021[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jul 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon’Ble

Section 68

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “B”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI

Forever Flourishing Fin. & Inv. Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT (CC)-3(4), Mumbai

In the result, appeal for the assessment year 2012

ITA 6120/MUM/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jul 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal ()

For Appellant: Mr. Ashok Bansal/Ajay DagaFor Respondent: Mr. Ankush Kapoor, CIT-DR

Section 143(2)Section 147

appeal of the assessee challenging the Now we take up the appeal of the assessee challenging the addition of share capital and share premium in terms of section 68 addition of share capital and share premium in terms of section 68 addition of share capital

Forever Flourishing Fin & Inv. Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT-CC-3(4), Mumbai

In the result, appeal for the assessment year 2012

ITA 6040/MUM/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jul 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal ()

For Appellant: Mr. Ashok Bansal/Ajay DagaFor Respondent: Mr. Ankush Kapoor, CIT-DR

Section 143(2)Section 147

Lokenath Investment Consultants P.Ltd, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle-8, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1097/DEL/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Jul 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Yogesh Kumar Us

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Ms. Sarita Kumari, CIT DR

Section 139Section 148Section 153ASection 153C

paras 6.1.1 to 6.1.26. It has been explained that Priya Gold Group has taken accommodation entries in the form of share capital and share premium by following modus operandi: By first acquiring control of some non-existent Kolkata based companies (which have heavy premium in their books without

Jayton Trading Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax (Central)-2, Raipur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 65/RPR/2021[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur31 Jul 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.65/Rpr/2021 (Assessment Year: 2012-2013) Jayton Trading Private Limited, Vs Dcit (Central)-2, Raipur 15, Crooked Lane, 1St Floor, Hare Street, Kolkata Pan No. :Aaacj 6659 B (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent) "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Jehangir D. Mistry, Sr. Advocate, Shri Madhur Agrawal, Advocate Shri Praveen Khandelwal & Praveen Goyal, Cas राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : Smt. Ila M. Parmar, Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 29/05/2023 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 31 /07/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Arun Khodpia, Am : The Assessee Has Filed This Appeal Against The Order Passed By The Cit(A)-3, Bhopal, Dated 06.07.2021 For The Assessment Year 2012-2013, On The Following Grounds :- 1. That On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Order Dated 06/07/2021 Passed U/S 250 Of The Act & The Assessment Order Passed U/S 144 R.W.S. 147 Of The Act Dated 30/12/2019 Are Illegal & Void Ab Initio. 2. That On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The First Appellate Authority Erred In Not Confirming That The Notice Issued U/S 148 Of The Act Dated 28/03/2019 Is Bad In Law. 2.1 That On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The First Appellate Authority Erred In Not Holding That The Notice Issued U/S 148 Of The Act Dated 28/03/2019 Is Time Barred By Limitation In View Of First Proviso To Section 147 Of The Act. 2.2 That On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The First Appellate Authority Erred In Confirming The Reason Recorded U/S 148(2) Of The Act Though The Same Is Only A Change Of Opinion On Account Of Borrowed Satisfaction Without Application Of Mind By The Assessing Officer.

For Appellant: Shri Jehangir D. Mistry, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Ila M. Parmar, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 148(2)Section 250Section 68

beneficiary company is M/s Jayton Trading Pvt. Ltd. To whom the said Shri Suresh Agrawal had provided accommodation entries for share capital and share premium. The AO found that the share capital and premium had been received by the assessee company from the Kolkata based shell company