Provisions of Section 68 of the I.T. Act, 1961, towards share application money

This case involves an appeal by SAS Hospitality Private Limited against an addition of Rs. 7,50,00,000 made by the Income Tax Officer under Section 68 of the IT Act, 1961, related to share application money. The assessee also raised grounds regarding insufficient opportunity to be heard and other disallowances under Sections 14A and 43B. The tribunal is reviewing the order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals).

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
 DELHI BENCH ‘G’: NEW DELHI
 (Through Video Conferencing)

 BEFORE,
 SHRI R.K.PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
 AND
 SHRI SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER

 I.T.A No.6081/Del/2017
 (ASSESSMENT YEAR-2012-13)

SAS Hospitality Private
Limited
14D, 14th Floor
Hansalaya Building
Barakhamba Road
New Delhi- 110 001.
PAN–AAOCS 1815Q
(Appellant) 

Vs.

Income Tax Officer
Ward-22(3),
New Delhi
(Respondent)

Appellant By Sh. Kapil Goel, Adv.
Respondent by Shri Prakash Dubey, Sr. DR

Date of Hearing 25.03.2021
Date of Pronouncement 21.06.2021

ORDER

 PER SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JM:

 This appeal is preferred by the assessee against order dated 05.12.2016 passed by the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-17, New Delhi {CIT(A)} for Assessment Year: 2012-13.  

2.0 The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:

“1. The learned Income Tax Officer has erred in law as well as on fact, in making an addition of Rs.7,50,00,000/- under section 68 of the I.T. Act, 1961, towards share application money.

2. The learned Income Tax Officer has erred in law as well as on fact, in making a disallowance of Rs.17,365/-, under section 14A of the I.T. Act, 1961.

3. The learned Income Tax Officer has erred in law as well as on fact, in making an addition of Rs.1,28,093/- under section 43B of the I.T. Act, 1961.

4. The appellant craves leave to add, alter, amend, raise or delete any or all grounds of appeal.”

2.1 The assessee has also subsequently filed the revised grounds of appeal which are as under:

“1. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT (Appeals)-17, New Delhi, has erred in not providing sufficient opportunity to the appellant-Company of being heard.

2. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(Appeals)- 17, New Delhi, has erred in law as well as on fact, in confirming additions of Rs. 7,50,00,000/- made by AO u/s. 68 of the I.T. Act, 1961, towards share application money. 

To know more in details find the attachment file