← 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

Metallium Impex Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 5(2)(3), Mumbai

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

ITA 1146/MUM/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Jun 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadav & Shri Anikesh Banerjeeassessment Year : 2012-13 Metallium Impex Pvt. Ltd., The Income Tax Officer, 101, Gagangiri Tower, Ward-5(2)(3), 25/29, Dr. Deshmukh Lane, Vs. 566, Aayakar Bhavan, V.P. Road, M.K. Road, Mumbai-400004. Mumbai-400020. Pan : Aaacm5162E (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Shri M.S. Mathuria For Revenue : Shri Annavaram Kosuri Date Of Hearing : 12-06-2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 18-06-2025 O R D E R Per Vikram Singh Yadav, A.M : This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [„Ld.Cit(A)‟], Dated 27-12-2024, Pertaining To Assessment Year (Ay) 2012-13, Wherein The Assessee Has Taken The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

For Appellant: Shri M.S. MathuriaFor Respondent: Shri Annavaram Kosuri
Section 127Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 148Section 68

wherein the AO brought to tax a sum of Rs. 5,25,00,000/- received by the assessee as share application money as un-explained and deemed to be income of the assessee u/s. 68 of the Act. The assessee thereafter carried the matter in appeal before the Ld.CIT ... impugned order confirming the findings of the AO. It was further submitted before the Ld.CIT(A) that the matter relating to the share application money and share premium was duly examined thoroughly during the original assessment proceedings and necessary documentation was submitted before the Ld.CIT(A) that