ITAT Deletes Share Capital & Share Premium Additions; Upholds DCF Valuation and Business Expense Claim

ITAT holds Section 68 conditions satisfied, quashes Section 56(2)(viib) addition, and sets aside CIT(A)’s income enhancement for lack of notice

ITAT Quashes Section 68 and Section 56(2)(viib) Additions in Share Premium Case

Meetu Kumari | Jan 23, 2026 |

ITAT Deletes Share Capital & Share Premium Additions; Upholds DCF Valuation and Business Expense Claim

ITAT Deletes Share Capital & Share Premium Additions; Upholds DCF Valuation and Business Expense Claim

Rivet Health Club Pvt. Ltd. filed its return for AY 2015-16, declaring income of Rs. 2.15 lakh. In the relevant year, it issued 2.35 lakh equity shares at Rs. 40 per share (face value of Rs. 10 + a premium of Rs. 30), raising Rs. 94 lakh from five corporate investors. During a limited scrutiny assessment under Section 143(3), the Assessing Officer treated the share capital and premium as unexplained under Section 68, made a protective addition under Section 56(2)(viib) by rejecting the DCF valuation, disallowed business expenses, and added interest income based on Form 26AS.

The CIT(A) partly upheld the additions and enhanced income without issuing a specific show-cause notice, prompting the assessee’s appeal before the Tribunal.

Issue Before Tribunal: Whether share capital and premium received from corporate investors were liable to addition under Section 68 and Section 56(2)(viib), and whether the CIT(A) could enhance income and sustain disallowances without following due process.

Tribunal’s Decision: The Bench allowed the appeal in full. It held that the assessee had discharged the onus under Section 68 by furnishing complete evidence establishing the identity, creditworthiness, and genuineness of the investors. In the absence of any contrary material, the addition under Section 68 was deleted.

The Tribunal further held that the DCF valuation carried out by a qualified expert could not be rejected merely on subjective grounds or hindsight, and therefore, the protective addition under Section 56(2)(viib) was unsustainable. The disallowance of business expenses was deleted on the ground that once a business is set up, routine expenses are allowable even during periods of low activity. The addition based on Form 26AS mismatch was also deleted.

To Read Full Judgment, Download PDF Given Below

StudyCafe Membership

Join StudyCafe Membership. For More details about Membership Click Join Membership Button
Join Membership

In case of any Doubt regarding Membership you can mail us at [email protected]

Join Studycafe's WhatsApp Group or Telegram Channel for Latest Updates on Government Job, Sarkari Naukri, Private Jobs, Income Tax, GST, Companies Act, Judgements and CA, CS, ICWA, and MUCH MORE!"




Author Bio
My Recent Articles
ITAT Quashes Rs. 1.50 Lakh Penalty Where No Books of Account Were Maintained Supreme Court Declines to Condone 320-Day Delay in Revenue’s SLP Supreme Court Dismisses SLP Challenging Allahabad High Court Order ICAI: CA Guilty of Misconduct for Referring Clients in Fake Political Donation Scheme ITAT Upholds Deletion of Rs. 1,735 Crore Penalty on Sahara India; Penalty Held Time-BarredView All Posts