2016 (1) TMI 565 - AT - Income Tax

Unexplained cash credit - assessee has failed to prove that how he received such share application money and has booked the same only by way book entry - CIT(A) deleted the addition - Held that - CIT(A) agreed with the plea of assessee that since said sums were credited in the books of account of assessee in A.Ys. 2006-07. In 2008-09, these cannot be treated as unexplained cash credits u/s. 68 in A.Y. under consideration. Assessee is at liberty to take legal argument at any stage in support of his case even if he has admitted the same before Assessing Officer as discussed above. In view of above, the addition of said amounts aggregating to ₹ 1,30,20,026/- could not be held as unexplained under the provisions of Section 68 of the Act and same were rightly deleted by CIT(A) with a direction to Assessing Officer to initiate necessary steps to bring the relevant amounts to tax u/s. 68 in respective assessment years - Decided against revenue

Summary

Issues:
- Addition of unexplained cash credit as share application money
- Assessment of income and various additions made by the Assessing Officer
- Appeal against the order of the Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals)
- Disallowances and deletions of additions made by the Assessing Officer
- Confirmation of deletions by the CIT(A) and the Appellate Tribunal

Analysis:
1. The appeal was filed by the Revenue against the Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals) order for the assessment year 2009-10 regarding the addition of unexplained cash credit of Rs. 7,20,20,026 as share application money. The assessee company, engaged in the film industry, filed its return declaring a loss. The Assessing Officer processed the assessment under section 143(1) and later under section 143(3) determined the total income after various additions and disallowances.

2. The Assessing Officer treated the share application money as not genuine and added Rs. 7,20,20,026 as unexplained cash credit. The assessee failed to provide sufficient proof and documents to establish the genuineness of the transactions. However, the CIT(A) found that the share application money received from a related entity was genuine and deleted the addition. The Appellate Tribunal upheld this decision.

3. Regarding share application money from other individuals, the CIT(A) found that necessary confirmations had been submitted, establishing the identity, financial capacity, and genuineness of the transactions. The onus on the assessee was considered discharged, and the additions made by the Assessing Officer were deleted by the CIT(A) and upheld by the Appellate Tribunal.

4. For the remaining share applicants, the Assessing Officer pointed out deficiencies in providing PAN and address details. The CIT(A) agreed with the assessee that these sums were credited in previous assessment years and could not be treated as unexplained cash credits for the current assessment year. The CIT(A) directed the Assessing Officer to initiate necessary steps for taxation in the respective assessment years.

5. The Appellate Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal, upholding the decisions of the CIT(A) regarding the deletions of additions made by the Assessing Officer. The Tribunal pronounced the judgment on October 23, 2015, confirming the relief granted to the assessee.