Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2023 (2) TMI AT This

  • Login
  • Cases Cited
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

2023 (2) TMI 565 - AT - Income Tax


Issues Involved:
1. Addition of Short-Term Capital Gains on account of premium received for transferring Redeemable Cumulative Convertible Preference Shares (RCCPS) and Fully Compulsory Convertible Preference Shares (FCCPS) to equity shares.
2. Addition of Rs. 1,16,64,751/- as unrealized foreign exchange gain.

Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

1. Addition of Short-Term Capital Gains:
The first issue pertains to the addition of short-term capital gains arising from the premium received by the assessee for transferring RCCPS and FCCPS to equity shares. The assessee, a private limited company engaged in manufacturing, trading, and exporting aroma chemicals, issued preference shares at a face value of Rs. 10,000 each to two entities. These shares were later transferred to another entity, M/s Satguru Construction. During the assessment year, the preference shares were redeemed by issuing equity shares and crediting Rs. 22,06,90,470 to the Security Premium Account. The AO treated this amount as short-term capital gains, citing the decision of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in Anarkali Sarabhai vs CIT (1982) 138 ITR 437 (Guj.), and added it to the total income of the assessee.

However, the learned CIT(A) allowed the appeal filed by the assessee, stating that the transfer of preference shares is in the hands of the shareholder, M/s Satguru Constructions, and not the assessee. The learned CIT(A) noted that the conversion of preference shares into equity shares is considered a transfer as per the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Anarkali Sarabhai, 224 ITR 422. The AO's decision to treat the conversion as capital gains was deemed erroneous, leading to the deletion of the addition of Rs. 22,06,91,000.

Upon appeal, the Tribunal upheld the findings of the learned CIT(A), emphasizing that the gain from the conversion of preference shares into equity shares is taxable in the hands of the shareholder, not the assessee. The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal on this ground.

2. Addition of Unrealized Foreign Exchange Gain:
The second issue concerns the addition of Rs. 1,16,64,751/- as unrealized foreign exchange gain. The assessee had a gain on foreign exchange valuation due to loan transactions with a foreign entity. During the assessment proceedings, the AO added this gain to the total income, arguing that the transactions were not completed as of 31st March and that the loss accrued on loan transactions is on capital account, not a revenue deduction.

The learned CIT(A) allowed the appeal filed by the assessee, referencing the amended provisions of section 43A of the Act, which state that the increase or decrease in liability due to foreign exchange fluctuation should be adjusted only on actual payment of the loan. The CIT(A) also cited the Hon'ble Supreme Court's decision in CIT vs. Woodward Governor India Pvt. Ltd., 312 ITR 254, which supports this interpretation. The CIT(A) concluded that the unrealized gain on foreign exchange fluctuation should not be considered as income, leading to the deletion of the addition.

The Tribunal, upon review, found no infirmity in the CIT(A)'s order. It noted that the foreign exchange fluctuation gain resulted from the reinstatement of accounts at the year-end and should not be considered for computing the cost of fixed assets or as income for the year under consideration. Consequently, the Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal on this ground as well.

Conclusion:
In conclusion, the Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal on both grounds, upholding the CIT(A)'s decision to delete the additions related to short-term capital gains and unrealized foreign exchange gain. The judgment emphasized the proper interpretation of tax liability concerning the conversion of preference shares and the treatment of foreign exchange fluctuations under the Income Tax Act.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates