← 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

Roselabs Polymers Limited, Ahmedabad vs. DCIT, Circle-3(1)(2), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is dismissed in limine

ITA 425/AHD/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad21 Feb 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Ld. Cit(A) For The Assessment Year 2012-13 An Exparte Appellate Order Was Passed. For The Assessment Year 2012-13 One Shri Sagar Vasoya Appeared Before Ld. Cit(A), However The Assessee Appeal Was Dismissed By A Detailed Speaking Order.

Section 143(3)Section 68

assessment, the Assessing Officer made addition of - (a) Rs.24,74,05,000/- as unexplained cash credit u/s. 68 of the Act being the share application money received from various parties, (b) Rs.6,94,61,653/- being the purchases are not genuine and also disallowed proportionate depreciation claim thereon

Roselabs Polymers Limited, Ahmedabad vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-3(1)(2), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is dismissed in limine

ITA 28/AHD/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad21 Feb 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Ld. Cit(A) For The Assessment Year 2012-13 An Exparte Appellate Order Was Passed. For The Assessment Year 2012-13 One Shri Sagar Vasoya Appeared Before Ld. Cit(A), However The Assessee Appeal Was Dismissed By A Detailed Speaking Order.

Section 143(3)Section 68

assessment, the Assessing Officer made addition of - (a) Rs.24,74,05,000/- as unexplained cash credit u/s. 68 of the Act being the share application money received from various parties, (b) Rs.6,94,61,653/- being the purchases are not genuine and also disallowed proportionate depreciation claim thereon

Panchkoti Infrabuild(P)Ltd, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-5(2), Kolkata

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

ITA 1019/KOL/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Feb 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 68

justified in confirming the addition of Rs. 5,18,00,000/- made by the AO on account of the share application money received by wrongly treating the same as unaccounted cash credit u/s 68. 3. The appellant craves leave to add further grounds of appeal or alter the grounds

Vish Realty Solutions Private Limited, Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward-5(3), Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 250/KOL/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Feb 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg, Hon’Ble & Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 250/Kol/2020 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Vish Realty Solutions Private Limited Income Tax Officer, Ward-5(3), 55, Ezra Street Vs Kolkata 2Nd Floor Kolkata - 700001 [Pan : Aadcv9938N] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri S. Jhajharia, A/R Revenue By : Shri Vineet Kumar, Addl. Cit, D/R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 16/01/2024 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 21/02/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Dr. Manish Borad: The Present Appeal Is Directed At The Instance Of The Assessee Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) -10 (Hereinafter The “Ld. Cit(E)”) Dt. 02/12/2019, Passed U/S 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act”) For The Assessment Year 2012-13. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:- “1. That The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-Io, Kolkata Erred In Passing An Order Dated 2Nd Of December, 2019 Under Section 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Dismissing The Appeal Of The Appellant Without Allowing Reasonable Opportunity Of Being Heard. 2. That The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) - 10, Kolkata Erred In Confirming The Addition Of Share Application Money Ofrs. 5,86,00,000/- Made By The Assessing Officer Under Section 68 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 On Irrelevant Considerations & Arbitrary Grounds.

For Appellant: Shri S. Jhajharia, A/RFor Respondent: Shri Vineet Kumar, Addl. CIT, D/R
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 263Section 68

allowing reasonable opportunity of being heard. 2. That the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) - 10, Kolkata erred in confirming the addition of share application money ofRs. 5,86,00,000/- made by the Assessing Officer under section 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on irrelevant considerations and arbitrary ... CASS followed by issuance of notice u/s 143(2) and 142(1) of the Act. During the year under consideration, the assessee received share application money of Rs.5,86,00,000/-. The assessee was asked to furnish various details and documents in order to explain identity and creditworthiness

Reliance Corporation, Mumbai vs. Dy. CIT Central Circle - 1, Thane

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 2725/MUM/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Feb 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail (Jm)

Section 147Section 68

establish the genuineness of the party such as PAN of all the creditors along with the confirmation, their bank statements showing payment of share application money. It was also observed by the Tribunal that the Assessee has also produced the entire record regarding 8 Reliance Corporation issuance of shares ... context to the preamended 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 by reopening the assessment of such shareholders and assessing them

Reliance Corporation, Mumbai vs. Dy. CIT Central Circle - 1, Thane

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 2724/MUM/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Feb 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail (Jm)

Section 147Section 68

establish the genuineness of the party such as PAN of all the creditors along with the confirmation, their bank statements showing payment of share application money. It was also observed by the Tribunal that the Assessee has also produced the entire record regarding 8 Reliance Corporation issuance of shares ... context to the preamended 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 by reopening the assessment of such shareholders and assessing them

Reliance Corporation, Mumbai vs. Dy. CIT, Central Circle - 1, Thane

ITA 2723/MUM/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Feb 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail (Jm)

Section 147Section 68

establish the genuineness of the party such as PAN of all the creditors along with the confirmation, their bank statements showing payment of share application money. It was also observed by the Tribunal that the Assessee has also produced the entire record regarding issuance of shares i.e. allotment of shares ... context to the preamended 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 by reopening the assessment of such shareholders and assessing them

Baba Iron Industries Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-9(1), Kolkata.

ITA 925/KOL/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata19 Feb 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Sri Rajpal Yadav & Dr. Manish Borad

Section 143(3)Section 144Section 144BSection 249Section 253Section 254Section 263Section 3Section 5

close-circuit. When companies incorporated under the Companies Act raise their capital through shares, various persons would apply for shares and then give share application money. This amount received from such share holder would naturally be credited in the books of accounts of the assessee. Once the alleged share capital ... shareholder company was only a paper company having no source of income, but had made substantial and huge investments in the form of share application money. The assessing officer has referred to the bank statement, financial position of the recipient and beneficiary assessee and surrounding circumstances. 19. Let us take

M/S Gopikar Supply Pvt Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-1(4), Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 504/KOL/2020[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata19 Feb 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Ble & Shri Anikesh Banerjee, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 504/Kol/2020 Assessment Year: 2008-09 M/S. Gopikar Supply Pvt. Ltd. Income Tax Officer, Ward – 1(4), 2, Ganesh Chandra Avenue Vs Kolkata Commerce House 2Nd Floor, Room No. 5 Kolkata - 700015 [Pan: Aabcg1344F] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : None Revenue By : Shri Rakesh Kumar Das, Cit, D/R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 01/02/2024 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 19/02/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Dr. Manish Borad: The Above Captioned Appeal Is Directed At The Instance Of The Assessee Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) -14, Kolkata, (Hereinafter The “Ld. Cit(A)”) Dt. 12/06/2020, Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act”) For The Assessment Year 2008-09. 2. When The Appeal Was Called Out, None Appeared On Behalf Of The Even, There Is No Application Filed By The Assessee Seeking Adjournment. Perusal Of Record Reveals That Beginning From 29/08/2022, The Appeal Has Been Listed For Hearing On Six Occasions After Which, The Ld. Counsel For The Assessee Withdrew His Power Of Attorney. Thereafter, Multiple Notices For Hearing Sent Through Registered Post, E-Mail & Phone To The Assessee In The Details Given In 2

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Rakesh Kumar Das, CIT, D/R
Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 147Section 250Section 263Section 68

confirming the addition made by the Assessing Officer u/s 68 of the Act of Rs.20,66,00,000/- on account of unexplained share application money. 4. Facts is brief are that, the assessee is a company engaged in the business of trading. It e-filed its return of income ... Officer, the assessee failed to furnish any other details including confirmations from the parties from whom the assessee claimed to have raised the share application money. Thus, in absence of any evidence furnished by the assessee to explain the genuineness of share application money amounting to Rs.20

Dreamtech Constructions Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT Circle-7(1), New Delhi

In the result, Appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 91/DEL/2021[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Feb 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: or at the time of hearing of the appeal.”

Section 143(3)Section 68

participated in the assessment proceedings, produced the documents on service of notice and questionnaires issued by the A.O. regarding the receipt of share application money and also the M/s Dreamtech Vs. DCIT unsecured loans availed by the Assessee. The Ld. A.O. made additions only on the subject matter ... burden as required u/s 68 of the Act, the authorities below have failed to appreciate that the assessee has proved the source of share application money and also the loans. The year under consideration being assessment year 2011-12, the assessee need not prove source of source

Dreamtech Constructions Pvt Ltd., Delhi vs. DCIT Circle-10(1), New Delhi

In the result, Appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 90/DEL/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Feb 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: or at the time of hearing of the appeal.”

Section 143(3)Section 68

participated in the assessment proceedings, produced the documents on service of notice and questionnaires issued by the A.O. regarding the receipt of share application money and also the M/s Dreamtech Vs. DCIT unsecured loans availed by the Assessee. The Ld. A.O. made additions only on the subject matter ... burden as required u/s 68 of the Act, the authorities below have failed to appreciate that the assessee has proved the source of share application money and also the loans. The year under consideration being assessment year 2011-12, the assessee need not prove source of source

Bhoomia Buttons Pvt Ltd, New Delhi vs. ACIT Circle-4(2), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal is dismissed

ITA 6150/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Feb 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Vice- & Shri Challa Nagendra Prasadassessment Year: 2010-11

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

Income- Tax(Appeals) has erred in law in upholding the addition of Rs.15 lacs made u/s. 68 of the Act on account of share application money received.” 2. Several notices were issued through speed post with the acknowledgement due posting the case for hearing

ITO, Ward- No. 4(4), New Delhi vs. Bharat Power Tech Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Revenue and Cross Objection filed

ITA 5226/DEL/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Feb 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Challa Nagendra Prasadआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.5157/Del/2019 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2011-12 बनाम M/S Bharat Power Tech Ltd., The Income Tax Officer, E-21, Lower G/F, Kalkaji, Vs. Ward-2(4), Room No.381, New Delhi. New Delhi. Pan No.Aaacb1314P अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent आ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.5226/Del/2019 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2011-12 बनाम The Income Tax Officer, M/S Bharat Power Tech Ward-4(4), New Delhi. Vs. Ltd., E-21, Lower G/F, Kalkaji, New Delhi. Pan No.Aaacb1314P अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent & Cross Objection No. 65/Del/2022 (In I.T.A No.5226/Del/2019) िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2011-12 बनाम M/S Bharat Power Tech Ltd., The Income Tax Officer, E-21, Lower G/F, Kalkaji, Vs. Ward-4(4), New Delhi. New Delhi. Pan No.Aaacb1314P अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 68

credits appearing in the bank statements and the receipts shown in the profit and loss I.T.A.Nos.5157, 5226/Del/2019 & CO No. 65/Del/2022 account plus share application money raised during the year and the unsecured loans received during the year as addition on account of unexplained credits. We observed that ... confirming the I.T.A.Nos.5157, 5226/Del/2019 & CO No. 65/Del/2022 addition made by the AO of Rs.19,81,000/- & Rs.1,87,800/-, received as share application money and loan respectively, without appreciating the fact that AO has brought no evidence on record to controvert the submissions of the assessee and the creditors

Bharat Power Tech Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward- No. 2(4), New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Revenue and Cross Objection filed

ITA 5157/DEL/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Feb 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Challa Nagendra Prasadआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.5157/Del/2019 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2011-12 बनाम M/S Bharat Power Tech Ltd., The Income Tax Officer, E-21, Lower G/F, Kalkaji, Vs. Ward-2(4), Room No.381, New Delhi. New Delhi. Pan No.Aaacb1314P अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent आ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.5226/Del/2019 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2011-12 बनाम The Income Tax Officer, M/S Bharat Power Tech Ward-4(4), New Delhi. Vs. Ltd., E-21, Lower G/F, Kalkaji, New Delhi. Pan No.Aaacb1314P अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent & Cross Objection No. 65/Del/2022 (In I.T.A No.5226/Del/2019) िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2011-12 बनाम M/S Bharat Power Tech Ltd., The Income Tax Officer, E-21, Lower G/F, Kalkaji, Vs. Ward-4(4), New Delhi. New Delhi. Pan No.Aaacb1314P अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 68

credits appearing in the bank statements and the receipts shown in the profit and loss I.T.A.Nos.5157, 5226/Del/2019 & CO No. 65/Del/2022 account plus share application money raised during the year and the unsecured loans received during the year as addition on account of unexplained credits. We observed that ... confirming the I.T.A.Nos.5157, 5226/Del/2019 & CO No. 65/Del/2022 addition made by the AO of Rs.19,81,000/- & Rs.1,87,800/-, received as share application money and loan respectively, without appreciating the fact that AO has brought no evidence on record to controvert the submissions of the assessee and the creditors

Subhlaxmi Chem Pvt. Ltd, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-12(4), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 992/KOL/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Feb 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumari.T.A. No. 992/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2011-2012 Subhlaxmi Chem Private Limited,...........Appellant R. No. C452, 71, B.R.B,B. Road, Bagri Market, Kolkata-700001 [Pan: Aahcs1598R] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,.................................Respondent Ward-12(4), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata-700069 Appearances By: Shri B.C. Jain, Fca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri Vijay Kumar, Addl. Cit, Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing : December 20, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : February 15, 2024 O R D E R

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

Assessment Year: 2011-2012 Subhlaxmi Chem Private Limited assessee was reopened for the reason that the assessee has received Rs.45,00,000/- as share application money which is nothing but an accommodation entry from M/s. Ajanta Vanijya Pvt. Limited. The ld. Assessing Officer recorded the reasons for reopening the assessment ... during financial year 2010-11, the assessee has received a total amount of Rs.45,00,000/- from M/s. Ajanta Vanijya Pvt. Limited as share application money and on 18.03.2015, the application of share allotment of shares was rejected and the said amount was converted into unsecured loan. in page

Deeptti Ispat Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO Ward-7 (1), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1570/DEL/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Feb 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri Nitin Gulati, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Kumar Upadhyay, Sr.DR
Section 143(3)Section 2(22)(e)Section 68

circular 19/2017 issued by the board and judicial pronouncements of various Courts. 2. That the appellant duly furnished the evidence in support of share application money received by it during the year but the Ld. CIT(A) has wrongly and illegally confirmed the unwarranted action of the A.O. of making ... Ground No.1 of the appeal of the assessee is allowed. 10. Ground No.2 concerns addition of Rs.9,67,000/- towards share application money under Section 68 of the Act. 12. The ld. counsel pointed out that the aforesaid amount of Rs.9,67,000/- was obtained from five persons tabulated hereunder

M/S. Lifeline Medicare Hospitals Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. NFAC, Mumbai

In the result ground number 3 of the appeal is dismissed

ITA 74/MUM/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Feb 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm The Income Tax Officer Vs. M/S Next Avenue Ventures Ward- 12(3)(1), Pvt. Ltd. Mumbai-400020 (Earlier Known As Kbj Ventures Pvt. Ltd.) 3Rd Floor, Raheja Chambers, Link Road Main Avenue, Santacruz (W), Mumbai-400 054 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aagck8343R

For Appellant: Shri Satyaprakash Singh, ARFor Respondent: Shri S Srinivasu, CIT DR
Section 143Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 144BSection 68

which are accepted by the AO is undisputed. Therefore, he submitted that the identity, creditworthiness of the amount of share application money of ₹ 249,999,000/– deposited by one of the director of the assessee company with the assessee is completely proved. The shares have been allotted to the director ... order of the learned CIT – A in deleting the above addition as assessee has conclusively proved the identity, creditworthiness and genuineness of the share application money of the directors and also proved source of the funds available with a direction the internal invested in the assessee company. He referred

ITO 12(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Next Avenue Ventures Private Limited(Earlier Known As Kbj Ventures Private Limited), Mumbai

In the result ground number 3 of the appeal is dismissed

ITA 2420/MUM/2023[A.Y. 2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Feb 2024

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm The Income Tax Officer Vs. M/S Next Avenue Ventures Ward- 12(3)(1), Pvt. Ltd. Mumbai-400020 (Earlier Known As Kbj Ventures Pvt. Ltd.) 3Rd Floor, Raheja Chambers, Link Road Main Avenue, Santacruz (W), Mumbai-400 054 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aagck8343R

For Appellant: Shri Satyaprakash Singh, ARFor Respondent: Shri S Srinivasu, CIT DR
Section 143Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 144BSection 68

which are accepted by the AO is undisputed. Therefore, he submitted that the identity, creditworthiness of the amount of share application money of ₹ 249,999,000/– deposited by one of the director of the assessee company with the assessee is completely proved. The shares have been allotted to the director ... order of the learned CIT – A in deleting the above addition as assessee has conclusively proved the identity, creditworthiness and genuineness of the share application money of the directors and also proved source of the funds available with a direction the internal invested in the assessee company. He referred

ITO, Ward-5(1), Kolkata vs. M/S Express Tradelink Pvt. Ltd, Kolkata

ITA 43/KOL/2021[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata08 Feb 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg, Hon’Ble & Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 43/Kol/2021 Assessment Year: 2009-10 Income Tax Officer, Ward -5(1), M/S. Express Tradelink Pvt. Ltd. Kolkata Vs 64, Bentinck Street 3Rd Floor Kolkata - 700001 [Pan: Aacce0887C] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Somnath Ghosh, Advocate & Shri Asim Panda, A/R Revenue By : Shri Abhijit Kundu, Cit, D/R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 28/11/2023 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 08/02/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Dr. Manish Borad: The Above Captioned Appeal Is Directed At The Instance Of The Revenue Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Kolkata – 7, (Hereinafter The “Ld. Cit(A)”) Dt. 23/09/2023, Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act”) For The Assessment Year 2009-10. 2. The Registry Has Pointed Out That There Is A Delay Of 36 Days In Filing The Present Appeal By The Revenue. Petition For Condonation Of Delay Is Placed On Record Explaining The Reasons. On Perusing The Same, We Are Convinced That The Revenue Was Prevented By Sufficient Cause From Filing This Appeal In Time. Accordingly, We Condone The Delay & Proceed To Admit The Appeal For Hearing. 3. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:-

For Appellant: Shri Somnath Ghosh, Advocate and ShriFor Respondent: Shri Abhijit Kundu, CIT, D/R
Section 250Section 68

before the ld. CIT(A) challenging only the addition made u/s 68 of the Act by the Assessing Officer on account of unexplained share application money amounting to Rs. 7,26,50,000/- and filed complete details of the share subscribers, their net worth as on the date of applying ... providing details to the Assessing Officer. He thus claimed that assessee has explained the nature and source of the share application money received during the year and has discharged the primary onus casted upon it u/s 68 of the Act and even the source of source has also been explained

Lovely Promoters Private Limited, Kolkata vs. ACIT, Central Circle, Ajmer

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 770/JPR/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur08 Feb 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: him regarding non mentioning of Document Identification Number (DIN) in the body of the order u/s. 127 of the Act dated 08-09-2021 and various other technical pleas raised in grounds of appeal regarding validity of notice u/s. 148 of the Act, thereby appellate order passed by the CIT(A) is non-speaking order and deserves to be quashed. 4. On the facts and in circumstances of the case and in law, the AO erred in issuing notice u/s. 148 of the Act as it was a search related case u/s. 132 r/w

For Appellant: Shri Mayank Taparia (Adv.)For Respondent: Shri A.S. Nehra (Addl.CIT) a
Section 127Section 127(1)Section 132Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151Section 153C

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”A” JAIPUR Mk0 ,l- lhrky{eh