← 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

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(1), Kolkata vs. Pujita Merchandise Private Limited, Kolkata

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1293/KOL/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata07 Nov 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Sanjay Awasthii.T.A. No.1293/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Acit, Cc-2(1), Kolkata………………………..………………….…..……Appellant Vs. Pujita Merchandise Pvt. Ltd.…..….........…………..…........……...…..…..Respondent 37E, Block-B, New Alipore, Kolkata – 700053. [Pan: Aadcp7771M] Appearances By: Shri Subhendu Datta, Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Ravi Tulsiyan, Fca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : November 06, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : November 07, 2024 Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: The Present Appeal Is Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Dated 12.03.2024 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. At The Outset, We Note That There Is A Delay Of 27 Days In Filing The Present Appeal For Which Application For Condonation Of Delay Is Placed On Record, Wherein, The Reasons For The Delay Have Duly Been Mentioned. Considering The Averments Made In The Application, We Find Sufficient Cause For The Delay. Accordingly, We Condone The Delay & Proceed To Adjudicate Upon The Matter. 3. The Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Is A Company & Filed Its Return Of Income For The Assessment Year In Question On 27.09.2012 Reporting A Total Income Of Rs.11,100/-. Thereafter, The Case Of The Assessee Was Selected For Scrutiny Under Cass Followed By Issuance Of Notices U/S 143(2) & 142(1) Of The Act & In Response To

Section 131Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 68

prior years, while only Rs.1,00,000/- was received in the current year from M/s Mohan Management Ltd. Out of the total share application money of Rs.9,46,00,000/-, the assessee refunded Rs.21,00,000/- to M/s Mohan Management Ltd. on 23.02.2012 and received fresh share application of Rs.1 ... from M/s Mohan Management Ltd. in the assessment year in question. We further observe that the assessee had duly furnished details of the share application money, date wise receipts, mode of payment, amount, name, address, income tax returns, PAN No. of share applicants, Profit & Loss A/c along with their balance

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Nungambakkam Chennai vs. Cholamandalam Ms General Insurance Company Limited, Chennai

ITA 1437/CHNY/2024[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai06 Nov 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon'Ble & Shri S. R. Raghunatha, Hon'Bleआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.: 1437/Chny/2024 & Co No.: 46/Chny/2024 निर्धारणवर्ष / Assessment Year: 2009-10 The Deputy Commissioner M/S. Cholamandalam Ms Of Income Tax, V. General Insurance Company Non-Corporate Circle -8, Limited, Room No. 507, 5Th Floor, No.2, Dare House, Chenai Annexe Building, G.P.O., Parrys, No. 121, M.G. Road, Chennai - 600 001. Chennai - 600 034. [Pan:Aabcc-6633-K] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (Respondent/Cross Objector) Assessee By : Ms. Kamakshi, Advocate For Mr. Sandeepbagmar, Advocate Department By : Mr.Nilaybaransom, Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 09.08.2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 06.11.2024 आदेश / Order Per S. R. Raghunatha: This Appeal Filed By The Revenue & Cross Objection Filed By The Assessee Aredirected Against The Order Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, Dated 07.03.2024 & Pertains To Assessment Year 2009-10. 2. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: 1. The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (A) In

For Appellant: Ms. Kamakshi, Advocate forFor Respondent: Mr.NilayBaranSom, CIT
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 40

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, 'ए' न्यायपीठ, चेन्नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL 'A' BENCH, CHENNAI श्री महावीर सिंह, उपाध्यक्ष एवं

P.V.Subramani, Chennai vs. ACIT Corporate Circle-1(3), Chennai

The appeal stand allowed in terms of our order

ITA 561/CHNY/2020[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai06 Nov 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.561/Chny/2020 (िनधा9रणवष9 / Assessment Year: 2009-10) Shri P.V. Subramani Acit बनाम/ C-54, Cmda Truck Complex, Corporate Circle-1(3) Gnt Road, Madhavaram, Chennai. Vs. Chennai-600 110. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Abbps-8164-R (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri N. Arjun Raj (Advocate) - Ld. Ar " थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri Ashwin D Gowda (Addl.Cit) - Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 24-10-2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 06-11-2024

For Appellant: Shri N. Arjun Raj (Advocate) - Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Ashwin D Gowda (Addl.CIT) - Ld. Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 68

entity namely M/s Cargrowings (Madras) Private Ltd. (CMPL). During assessment proceedings of CMPL, it was noted by Ld. AO that CMPL received share application money of Rs.5 Crores from the assessee and accordingly, to verify the same, the case of the assessee was reopened. 3.2 It transpired that the assessee ... Crores and issued cheque in favor of the assessee during March, 2009. The said funds as deployed by the assessee were captured as Share Application money on asset side in Balance Sheet as on 31-03-2009 whereas rental deposit from SCPL was reflected on liabilities side. However, the said