2010 (4) TMI 99 - HC - Income Tax

Share application money - applicants had been identified and evidence in the form of share application as well as the balance sheet revealed such investment in the shares of the assessee company - . The Tribunal observed that the assessee in the present case has furnished all the evidence that was expected of it - ITAT followed the decision in CIT v. Divine Leasing and Finance Limited 2008 -TMI - 3703 - DELHI HIGH COURT held that - the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) noted that the summons had been issued to the share applicants and had been responded to by sending replies along with supporting evidence except in a few cases. In those cases where there was no response to the summons it had been ascertained that the company existed in the record of the Registrar of Companies. Genuineness of share application money stands proved

Summary

Issues:
- Appeal against order of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal for assessment year 2001-2002.
- Addition of unexplained income under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
- Deletion of addition by Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) and Income Tax Appellate Tribunal.
- Evidence provided by the assessee regarding share application money from different companies.
- Identification of share applicants and establishment of share allotment basis.
- Response to summons by share applicants and verification of their existence.
- Conclusion by lower authorities regarding established identity of share applicants.
- Confirmation of lower authorities' decision by Income Tax Appellate Tribunal.

Analysis:
The judgment pertains to an appeal against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal for the assessment year 2001-2002. The Assessing Officer had added a sum of &8377; 42,60,000/- as unexplained income of the assessee under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, received from 23 different companies as share application money. However, both the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) and the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal had deleted this addition. They relied on precedents and observed that the assessee had provided all the expected evidence. The Tribunal noted that the share applicants were identified, and evidence such as share application forms and balance sheets indicated genuine investment in the shares of the assessee company, establishing the basis for share allotment.

Furthermore, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) highlighted that summons were issued to share applicants, and most responded with supporting evidence. Even in cases where there was no response, it was verified that the companies existed. Specific instances, such as M/s Rubicon Associates Private Limited and Reena Oil Industry Private Limited, were mentioned where identities were established through various documents and the presence of company representatives during proceedings. The Commissioner concluded that the identity of all share applicants was established. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal upheld these findings, noting no perversity in the lower authorities' conclusions and dismissing the appeal as no substantial question of law arose for consideration.

In summary, the judgment showcases a detailed analysis of the evidence provided by the assessee regarding share application money, the verification of share applicants' identities, and the subsequent deletion of the addition of unexplained income by the lower authorities. The decision emphasizes the importance of furnishing necessary evidence and the verification process carried out by tax authorities to establish the legitimacy of transactions, ultimately leading to the dismissal of the appeal by the High Court.