2014 (1) TMI 1087 - HC - Income Tax

Unexplained cash credits - Held that - Decision in COMMR. OF INCOME TAX Versus M/s LOVELY EXPORTS(PVT) LTD 2008 (1) TMI 575 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA followed - If the share application is received by the assessee from the alleged bogus shareholders, whose names are given to the AO, then the department is free to proceed to reopen their individual amounts in accordance with law, but it cannot be regarded as income of the assessee company - During the course of the assessment proceedings, the assessee made a detailed submission explaining source of the money and had furnished details of the PAN besides examining some of the shareholders on oath - The CIT (A) noted that all the aforesaid persons were assessed to tax and their identity had been established - Decided against Revenue.

Summary

Issues:
1. Appeal under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 regarding an order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal for A.Y. 2004-05.
2. Questions raised by the revenue regarding dismissal of appeal without appreciating facts.
3. Addition of unexplained credits under Section 68 for share capital subscribed.
4. CIT (A) deletion of addition based on Supreme Court judgment in Lovely Exports.
5. Tribunal's affirmation of CIT (A) finding.
6. Application of Lovely Exports judgment to the present case.

Analysis:

1. The High Court dealt with an appeal under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, arising from an order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal for the assessment year 2004-05. The revenue raised questions regarding the dismissal of the appeal without appreciating the facts presented, specifically related to the capacity of investors in share capital and the alleged tax evasion through colorable transactions.

2. The Assessing Officer had made an addition of Rs.34.81 lacs as unexplained credits under Section 68 for a part of the share capital subscribed to in the financial year. The CIT (A) considered detailed submissions by the assessee, including explanations on the source of money and examination of shareholders on oath. CIT (A) noted that the identities of the shareholders were established through tax assessments. CIT (A) relied on the Supreme Court judgment in Lovely Exports, emphasizing that share application money cannot be considered the income of the assessee company if received from alleged bogus shareholders.

3. The Tribunal upheld the CIT (A)'s decision, affirming the deletion of the addition based on the principles established in the Lovely Exports case. The Court acknowledged the application of the Supreme Court judgment to the present case, stating that no substantial questions of law arose, leading to the dismissal of the appeal with no order as to costs.

In conclusion, the High Court's judgment focused on the application of legal principles established in previous Supreme Court rulings to determine the treatment of share capital and unexplained credits under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act, ultimately leading to the dismissal of the revenue's appeal based on the findings of the CIT (A) and the Tribunal.