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

TMI Blog

Home

2023 (4) TMI 372

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... has successfully demonstrated that almost the entire amount received was invested in Rockland Hospitals Ltd. and the AO made addition u/s 68 of the Act in the hands of M/s Rockland Hospitals Ltd. on account of two investments including the investment made by the assessee. These documents only establish the use of amount received by the assessee, but, these facts are not capable to discharge the onus lay on the shoulders of the assessee in this regard under provisions of section 68. The theory of conduit company is not acceptable as, for being a conduit company, the assessee is duty bound to establish that the company from whom it received the amount and the company in which it invested the same amount were of the same group and it was .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Placing reliance on the order of ITAT Delhi dated 23.07.2018 in ITA No.6070/Del/2017 for AY 2014-15 in the appeals filed by M/s Sukumar Enterprises Ltd. and M/s Sanskriti Tradex Pvt. Ltd., the ld. Counsel submitted that under identical facts and circumstances, the Tribunal has deleted the addition made in the hands of conduit companies, who, after receiving the amount on behalf of M/s Rockland Hospitals Ltd., invested the same in the shares of M/s Rockland Hospitals Ltd., who was the ultimate beneficiary during immediately preceding assessment year AY 2014-15. Therefore, the addition made by the AO and confirmed by the ld.CIT(A) in the present appeal may kindly be deleted. Placing reliance on the judgement of the Hon ble Bombay High Court i .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... nd submitted that as per the requirement of section 68 of the Act, the onus was on the shoulders of the assessee to show and substantiate the identity and credit worthiness of the investor Technicare Biomed India Pvt. Ltd. and genuineness of the transactions, but, the assessee is merely submitting a sole baseless contention that it is a conduit company and after receiving the amount from M/s Technicare Biomed Pvt. Ltd., almost the entire amount was reinvested in M/s Rockland Hospitals Ltd., and the AO has made addition in the hands of M/s Rockland Hospitals Ltd., hence, no addition is required to be made in the hands of conduit assessee company. The ld. Sr. DR vehemently submitted that the proposition relied on by the ld. Counsel in the cas .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Pvt. Ltd., and genuineness of the transaction to discharge the onus lay on its shoulders u/s 68 of the Act. Secondly, the assessee has only shown that the addition has been made in the hands of M/s Rockland Hospitals Ltd., but, what is the ultimate status of that addition is not clear from the submissions as well as the paper book filed by the assessee. Therefore, the theory of conduit company being afterthought may kindly be dismissed confirming the addition. 6. Placing rejoinder to the above, the ld. Counsel submitted that when the addition of identical amount has been made in the case of the ultimate beneficiary M/s Rockland Hospitals Ltd., then, no addition is required to be made in the case of the present assessee being a conduit co .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... demonstrated that almost the entire amount received from M/s Technicare Biomed India Pvt. Ltd. was invested in Rockland Hospitals Ltd. and the AO made addition u/s 68 of the Act in the hands of M/s Rockland Hospitals Ltd. on account of two investments including the investment made by the assessee. These documents only establish the use of amount received by the assessee, but, these facts are not capable to discharge the onus lay on the shoulders of the assessee in this regard under provisions of section 68 of the Act. The theory of conduit company is not acceptable as, for being a conduit company, the assessee is duty bound to establish that the company from whom it received the amount and the company in which it invested the same amount w .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates