← 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

Nepra Environmental Solutins Private Limited, Gandhinagar vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(1)(1), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 1683/AHD/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad25 Feb 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं/Ita No.1683/Ahd/2024 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year : 2013-14 | Nepra Environmental- Solutions Private Limited 705, Sharan Circle Hub Nr. Sharan Homes, Zundal Gandhinagar 382 421 (Gujarat) स्थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aaccp 0273 F (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) Assessee By: Revenue By: | The Income Tax Officer बनाम / | Ward-3(1)(1) V/S. Ahmedabad (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Shri Divyakant Parikh, Ar Shri Santosh Kumar, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 20/02/2025 25/02/2025 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement: आदेश/Order Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am: This Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre [Nfac], Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As “Cit(A)"], Dated 07-08-2024, For The

For Appellant: Revenue byFor Respondent: The Income Tax Officer
Section 131Section 143(3)Section 56(2)(viib)Section 68

Rs.1,97,068/- claimed by the assessee. (ii) Addition of Rs.95,00,000/- under section 68 of the Act in respect of share application money received. (iii) Alternative addition of Rs.70,99,350/- under section 56(2)(viib) of the Act on account of excessive share premium. Facts ... revenue sources disclosed were only interest income and miscellaneous receipts. The AO observed that the assessee had received Rs.95,00,000/- as share application money from five subscribers, namely: Smt. Kokilaben Navnitlal Patel Rs.20,00,000/- Smt. Sheetal Thadani alias Sheetal Brijesh Patel - Rs.20,00,000/- Smt. Vaishali Dhaval Patel

Pooja Equiresearch Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT, Central Circle 8(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 5941/MUM/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Feb 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry, Jm & Shri Prabhash Shankar, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.5941/Mum/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year :2011-2012) Pooja Equiresearch Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Dcit, Central Circle-8(2), B-101, Hari Darshan Bhogilal Mumbai Phadia Road, Kandivali (West) स्थायी लेखा सं./Pan No. : Aaacp 6499 F (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) निर्ाारिती की ओर से /Assessee By : Ms. Dinkle Hariya & Ms. Shruti Kalyanikar राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Mahesh Pamnani, Sr.Dr

For Appellant: Ms. Dinkle Hariya & MsFor Respondent: Shri Mahesh Pamnani, Sr.DR
Section 133(6)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 68

Wipro Suppliers (P) Ltd by purchasing 60,000 shares of Rs. 10 each (Premium Rs.490) (vii) Brotex Vanijya (P) Ltd had replied that share application money of Rs. 50,00,000 received from Wipro Suppliers (P) Itd is used for loan to assessee. (viii) Spring Enclave (P) Ltd has made ... context to the pre-amended Section 68 of the Act has held that where the Revenue urges that the amount of share application money has been received from bogus shareholders then it is for the Income Tax Officer to proceed assessing them to tax in accordance with law. It does

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle3-(4), Hyderabad vs. Aarthik Greentech Solutions Private Limited, Hyderabad

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 32/HYD/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad21 Feb 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri K.Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.32/Hyd/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2014-15) Asst.Commissioner Of Vs. Aarthik Greentech Income Tax Solutions Pvt.Ltd. Central Circle-3(4) Hyderabad Hyderabad [Pan : Aalca6887D] आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.33/Hyd/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2014-15) Asst.Commissioner Of Vs. Aarthik Infra Projects Income Tax Pvt.Ltd. Central Circle-3(4) Hyderabad Hyderabad [Pan : Aahca0719N] (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri P.Murali Mohan Rao,Ar रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By: Ms.M.Narmada, Cit-Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 19/12/2024 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of 21/02/2025 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Manjunatha G., A.M: These Appeals Filed By The Revenue Are Directed Against Order Dated 11.09.2020 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) [“Ld.Cit(A)”]-11, Hyderabad Pertaining To A.Y.2014-15. Since, Facts Are Identical & Issues Are Common, For The Sake Of Aarthik Greentech Solutions Pvt. Ltd. & Aarthik Infra Projects Pvt.Ltd.

For Appellant: Shri P.Murali Mohan Rao,ARFor Respondent: Ms.M.Narmada, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 143(1)Section 153C

investor companies, coupled with evidences filed by the assessee, called upon the assessee to file further evidences to justify the advances / share application money received from the companies. In response, the assessee has filed names and address of the investor company along with PAN and also filed confirmation letter along ... decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs.Lovely Exports (supra), where, it has been clearly held that, if the share application money is received by the assessee company from alleged bogus shareholders, whose names are given to the Assessing Officer, then the department is free

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 3(4), Hyderabad vs. Zainab Investments Private Limited, Hyderabad

ITA 70/HYD/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad20 Feb 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri K.Narsimha Charyआ.अपी. सं/Ita No.66/Hyd/2021 To 69/Hyd/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ष/A.Y: 2011-12, 2013-14, 2015-16 & 2016-17) Asst.Commissioner Of Income Tax Central Circle-3(4) Hyderabad (Appellant) Vs. M/S Zainab Investments Pvt. Ltd. Secunderabad [Pan : Aaacz4043R] (Respondent) आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.70/Hyd/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ष/A.Y: 2018-19) Asst.Commissioner Of Income Tax Central Circle-3(4) Hyderabad (Appellant) Vs. M/S Zainab Investments Pvt. Ltd. Secunderabad [Pan : Aaacz4043R] (Respondent) आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.111/Hyd/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ष/A.Y: 2018-19) M/S Zainab Investments Pvt. Ltd. Secunderabad [Pan : Aaacz4043R] (Appellant) Vs. Asst.Commissioner Of Income Tax Central Circle-3(4) Hyderabad (Respondent) निर्धारिती द्वारा / Assessee By: Shri P.Murali Mohan Rao,Ar राजस्व द्वारा / Revenue By: Shri Srinath Sadanala, Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 26/11/2024 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of 20/02/2025 Pronouncement: 2

For Appellant: Shri P.Murali Mohan Rao,ARFor Respondent: Shri Srinath Sadanala, DR
Section 132Section 143(1)Section 153ASection 68

Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs.Lovely Exports, 216 CTR 195 (SC), where it has been clearly held that if the share application money is received by the assessee company from alleged bogus shareholders, whose names are given to the Assessing Officer, then the department is free to proceed ... decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs.Lovely Exports (supra), where, it has been clearly held that, if the share application money is received by the assessee company from alleged bogus shareholders, whose names are given to the Assessing Officer, then the department is free

Assiatant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 3(4), Hyderabad vs. Zainab Investments Private Limited, Hyderabad

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue and the assessee for the A

ITA 69/HYD/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad20 Feb 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri K.Narsimha Charyआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.66/Hyd/2021 To 69/Hyd/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा/A.Y: 2011-12, 2013-14, 2015-16 & 2016-17) Asst.Commissioner Of Vs. M/S Zainab Income Tax Investments Pvt. Ltd. Central Circle-3(4) Secunderabad Hyderabad [Pan : Aaacz4043R] (Appellant) (Respondent) आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.70/Hyd/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा/A.Y: 2018-19) Asst.Commissioner Of Vs. M/S Zainab Income Tax Investments Pvt. Ltd. Central Circle-3(4) Secunderabad Hyderabad [Pan : Aaacz4043R] (Appellant) (Respondent) आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.111/Hyd/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा/A.Y: 2018-19) M/S Zainab Investments Vs. Asst.Commissioner Of Income Tax Pvt. Ltd. Central Circle-3(4) Secunderabad Hyderabad [Pan : Aaacz4043R] (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri P.Murali Mohan Rao,Ar रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By: Shri Srinath Sadanala, Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 26/11/2024 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of 20/02/2025 Pronouncement:

For Appellant: Shri P.Murali Mohan Rao,ARFor Respondent: Shri Srinath Sadanala, DR
Section 132Section 143(1)Section 153A

Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs.Lovely Exports, 216 CTR 195 (SC), where it has been clearly held that if the share application money is received by the assessee company from alleged bogus shareholders, whose names are given to the Assessing Officer, then the department is free to proceed ... decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs.Lovely Exports (supra), where, it has been clearly held that, if the share application money is received by the assessee company from alleged bogus shareholders, whose names are given to the Assessing Officer, then the department is free