← All Phrases

“share application money”

Cash Credits & Unexplained ItemsSection 68Section 682,489 judgments

The decision most relied on for share application money is CIT v. Lovely Exports (P) Ltd. (216 CTR 195), cited in 854 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on share application money

CIT v. Lovely Exports (P) Ltd.
216 CTR 195 · 2008 · Supreme Court
854
citing judgments

If an assessee company receives share application money from alleged bogus shareholders and provides their details to the Assessing Officer, no addition can be made under Section 68 in the company's hands; the Department must proceed against the shareholders by reopening their individual assessments.

(Central)-1 v. NRA Iron & Steel (P) Ltd.
103 Taxmann.com 48 · 2019 · Supreme Court
696
citing judgments

When assessing cash credits, share capital, or loans, the assessee bears the onus to prove the identity, creditworthiness, and genuineness of transactions. This burden is not discharged merely by documentary evidence if field inquiries reveal accommodation entries or dealings with paper/shell companies.

Commissioner of Income Tax v. Nova Promoters and Finlease (P) Ltd.
342 ITR 169 · 2012 · High Court
658
citing judgments

To make an addition under Section 68 for unexplained cash credits, the Assessing Officer must conduct proper inquiry into the identity, genuineness, and creditworthiness of the creditor, especially concerning share application money. The assessee's initial discharge of burden by providing necessary details shifts the onus back to the AO for further investigation, including the source of source.

Nemi Chand Kothari v. CIT
264 ITR 254 · 2003 · High Court
340
citing judgments

For a cash credit, merely transacting by cheque is insufficient to discharge the assessee's burden of proof. The assessee must prove the identity of the creditors, the genuineness of the transaction, and the creditworthiness of the creditors; upon which, the burden shifts to the revenue.

CIT v. Kamdhenu Steel & Alloys Ltd.
361 ITR 220 · 2014 · High Court
328
citing judgments

When making an addition under section 68, the creditworthiness or financial strength of an investor contributing share capital or share application money can be proved by producing their bank statements showing sufficient balance for the investment. The Supreme Court dismissed the SLP against this decision.

CIT v. Sophia Finance Ltd.
205 ITR 98 · 1994 · High Court
295
citing judgments

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.

CIT v. Oasis Hospitalities P. Ltd.
333 ITR 119 · 2011 · High Court
292
citing judgments

When explaining cash credits under Section 68, the assessee must establish the identity of the creditor, their creditworthiness or financial capacity, and the genuineness of the transaction. Merely proving identity does not discharge this initial onus, which shifts to the Assessing Officer once these three elements are prima facie proven.

CIT v. Nipun Builders & Developers
350 ITR 407 · 2013 · High Court
264
citing judgments

For any sum credited in an assessee's books, including share application money, the assessee must prove the identity and creditworthiness of the creditor and the genuineness of the transaction. Failure to discharge this onus under Section 68 renders the amount taxable.

Judgments citing share application money

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Daffodil Buildcon Pvt. Ltd., Agra

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed and the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2927/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Mar 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kambleassessment Year: 2012-13 Daffodil Buildcon Pvt. Ltd., Vs Dcit, 303, 3Rd Floor, Global Foyer, Circle-7(1), Golf Course Road, Sector-43, Cr Building, Ip Estate, Gurgaon. New Delhi. Pan: Aaccd4642C Assessment Year: 2012-13 Dcit, Vs. Daffodil Buildcon Pvt. Ltd., 303, 3Rd Floor, Global Foyer, Circle-7(1), Cr Building, Ip Estate, Golf Course Road, Sector-43, New Delhi Gurgaon. Pan: Aaccd4642C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Sudesh Garg, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Jagdish Singh, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 09.02.2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 17.03.2021 Order Per R.K. Panda, Am: These Are Cross Appeals. The First One Is Filed By The Assessee & The Second One Is Filed By The Revenue & Are Directed Against The Order Dated 9Th

For Appellant: Shri Sudesh Garg, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Jagdish Singh, Sr. DR
Section 68

Share Premium. 3. From the various details furnished by the assessee, he noted that the above- mentioned shares were issued on account of share application money received from these entities, the details of which are as under:- S. Name and address Opening Share issued /Amount Closing No. of the company ... year Rs, 5,02,20,000/- 4. The AO asked the assessee to furnish the complete details of share capital, share premium, share application money and unsecured loan received during the year to prove the identity and credit worthiness of persons and genuineness of the transactions in terms

M/S. Daffodil Buildcon Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed and the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2422/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Mar 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kambleassessment Year: 2012-13 Daffodil Buildcon Pvt. Ltd., Vs Dcit, 303, 3Rd Floor, Global Foyer, Circle-7(1), Golf Course Road, Sector-43, Cr Building, Ip Estate, Gurgaon. New Delhi. Pan: Aaccd4642C Assessment Year: 2012-13 Dcit, Vs. Daffodil Buildcon Pvt. Ltd., 303, 3Rd Floor, Global Foyer, Circle-7(1), Cr Building, Ip Estate, Golf Course Road, Sector-43, New Delhi Gurgaon. Pan: Aaccd4642C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Sudesh Garg, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Jagdish Singh, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 09.02.2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 17.03.2021 Order Per R.K. Panda, Am: These Are Cross Appeals. The First One Is Filed By The Assessee & The Second One Is Filed By The Revenue & Are Directed Against The Order Dated 9Th

For Appellant: Shri Sudesh Garg, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Jagdish Singh, Sr. DR
Section 68

Share Premium. 3. From the various details furnished by the assessee, he noted that the above- mentioned shares were issued on account of share application money received from these entities, the details of which are as under:- S. Name and address Opening Share issued /Amount Closing No. of the company ... year Rs, 5,02,20,000/- 4. The AO asked the assessee to furnish the complete details of share capital, share premium, share application money and unsecured loan received during the year to prove the identity and credit worthiness of persons and genuineness of the transactions in terms

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Technico Industries Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

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

ITA 5204/DEL/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Mar 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kambleassessment Year: 2011-12 Dcit, Vs Technico Industries Pvt. Ltd., Circle-25(1), 103, Pratap Bhawan, Cr Building, Ip Estate, Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg, New Delhi. Near Indian Express Building, New Delhi. Pan: Aaact4445P (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Aditya Kumar, Ca & Shri Ashwani Kumar, Ca Revenue By : Mrs Aashna Paul, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 17.12.2020 Date Of Pronouncement : 09.03.2020 Order Per R.K. Panda, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against Order Dated 31St March, 2015 Of The Cit(A)-9, New Delhi Relating To Assessment Year 2011-12. 2. Facts Of The Case, In Brief, Are That The Assessee Is A Company Engaged In The Business Of Manufacturing Of Sheet Metal Components & Tools & Dies. It Filed Its Return Of Income On 29Th September, 2011 Declaring ‘Nil’ Income. The Said Return Was Revised On 14Th September, 2012 Declaring A Loss Of Rs.3,61,68,075/-. During The Course Of Assessment Proceedings, The Ao, On Perusal Of The Balance Sheet Filed By The Assessee, Noted That The Assessee Company Has Issued 14,72,000 Equity Shares At A Premium Of Rs.115. From The Various Details Furnished By The Assessee, The Ao Noted That The Assessee Has Issued Shares To The Following Persons/Parties:-

For Appellant: Shri Aditya Kumar, CA &For Respondent: Mrs Aashna Paul, CIT-DR
Section 133(6)

added by the AO while passing the order. Similarly, an amount of Rs.1 crore was transferred by means of journal entry to the share application money account which has been added by the AO under the head ‘unsecured loan’ as well as ‘share application money’ resulting in double addition ... explain the source of source, however, in the instant case, the assessee has duly explained the source of the loan and the share application money received from the creditor and the AO in the assessment order has not brought any material on record to controvert the evidence filed