2025 (1) TMI 804 - AT - Income Tax

Addition u/s 68 - share capital money received treating the same as unexplained - HELD THAT - Addition made on the basis of identity and creditworthiness of the investor company by the AO and from the record, we observed that the assessee has proved the existence of the company as well as bringing on record reasonable capacity in their hands to make the investment in the assessee s company and further the assessee has received the abovesaid investment through bank and utilised the same in its business as capital receipt. Therefore, the addition made by the AO is accordingly deleted. Appeal filed by the assessee is allowed.

Summary

1. ISSUES PRESENTED and CONSIDERED

The core legal issues considered in this judgment are:

• Whether the addition of Rs. 60,00,000/- made by the Assessing Officer under Section 68 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, treating the share capital and premium received by the assessee as unexplained cash credits, was justified.
• Whether the assessee successfully demonstrated the identity, creditworthiness, and genuineness of the transaction with the investor company, M/s. Karda Traders Pvt. Ltd.

2. ISSUE-WISE DETAILED ANALYSIS

Issue 1: Justification of Addition under Section 68

• Relevant legal framework and precedents: Section 68 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, deals with unexplained cash credits. The burden is on the assessee to prove the identity, creditworthiness of the creditors, and the genuineness of the transaction.
• Court's interpretation and reasoning: The Tribunal examined whether the assessee provided sufficient evidence to prove the identity, creditworthiness, and genuineness of the transaction with the investor company.
• Key evidence and findings: The assessee submitted various documents, including bank statements, income tax returns, and corporate records, to establish the identity and creditworthiness of M/s. Karda Traders Pvt. Ltd. The Tribunal noted that the investor company had substantial shareholder funds and was actively engaged in trading activities.
• Application of law to facts: The Tribunal applied the principles under Section 68 to the facts, determining that the assessee had sufficiently demonstrated the identity and creditworthiness of the investor company, and the genuineness of the transaction.
• Treatment of competing arguments: The Revenue argued that the investor company lacked sufficient funds and was merely a paper company. The Tribunal, however, found that the investor's financial statements and trading activities indicated otherwise.
• Conclusions: The Tribunal concluded that the addition of Rs. 60,00,000/- under Section 68 was not justified as the assessee had adequately demonstrated the necessary elements to rebut the presumption of unexplained cash credits.

3. SIGNIFICANT HOLDINGS

• Preserve verbatim quotes of crucial legal reasoning: "The addition made on the basis of identity and creditworthiness of the investor company by the AO and from the record, we observed that the assessee has proved the existence of the company as well as bringing on record reasonable capacity in their hands to make the investment in the assessee's company."
• Core principles established: The judgment reinforces the principle that the onus is on the assessee to prove the identity, creditworthiness, and genuineness of transactions to rebut assumptions under Section 68. The existence of substantial shareholder funds and active trading activities can establish creditworthiness.
• Final determinations on each issue: The Tribunal allowed the appeal filed by the assessee, deleting the addition of Rs. 60,00,000/- made by the Assessing Officer under Section 68, as the assessee successfully demonstrated the identity, creditworthiness, and genuineness of the transaction with M/s. Karda Traders Pvt. Ltd.