Meramandali Finvest Ltd. Vs ITO (ITAT Delhi)
The appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench, arose from the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-NFAC dated 23.09.2025 relating to Assessment Year 2012-13. The assessee challenged the reassessment initiated under Sections 147 and 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the addition of ₹75 crore under Section 68 towards share capital and share premium, and the assessment on the ground that objections filed against reopening had not been disposed of.
The assessee had originally filed its return declaring nil income. Based on information received from the Investigation Wing that the assessee had received ₹75,00,00,000 from M/s Concise Exim Pvt. Ltd. as share capital at a premium, the Assessing Officer reopened the assessment under Sections 147 and 148. A notice under Section 148 was issued on 18.03.2019, and after reassessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer passed an order under Sections 143(3) read with 147 on 30.12.2019, making an addition of ₹75 crore under Section 68 on the ground that the assessee had failed to establish the identity, creditworthiness of the creditor, and genuineness of the transaction. The CIT(A) upheld the addition.
Before the Tribunal, the assessee primarily challenged the validity of the reassessment proceedings. It submitted that after receiving the reasons recorded for reopening, it had filed objections on 08.08.2019 against the notice issued under Section 148. However, the Assessing Officer proceeded with the reassessment without disposing of those objections by a separate speaking order. The assessee relied on the decisions in GKN Driveshafts (India) Ltd. v. ITO, Mphasis Ltd. v. ACIT, and Deepak Extensions (P) Ltd. v. DCIT.
