9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (2) TMI 1292X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the directors of the assessee and the subscriber companies. We draw our force from the decision of Paradise Inland Shipping Pvt. Ltd. [ 2017 (11) TMI 1554 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT] wherein it was held that once the assessee has produced documentary evidence to establish the existence of the subscriber companies, the burden would shift on the revenue to establish their case. From the perusal of the paper book and the documents placed therein, it is vivid that all the share applicants are (i) income tax assessees, (ii) they are filing their income tax returns, (iii) share application form and allotment letter is available on record which were filed in response to notice u/s 133(6), (iv) share application money was made by account payee cheques, (v) details of the bank accounts belonging to share applicants and their bank statements, (vi) all the share applicants are having substantial creditworthiness represented by their capital and reserves. We find that assessee has discharged its onus to prove the identity and creditworthiness of the share subscribing companies and the genuineness of the transactions towards sum received during the impugned year. Accordingly we set aside the order ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ith the details and explanation any by applying the test of human probability, Ld. AO made the addition of Rs. 4,78,50,000/- u/s. 68 of the Act. Aggrieved, assessee went in appeal before the Ld. CIT(A), who confirmed this addition. Aggrieved, assessee is now in appeal before the Tribunal. 4. Before us, Shri Narendra Kedia, Advocate represented the assessee and Shri Subhrajyoti Bhattacharjee, CIT, DR represented the department. 5. Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that all the relevant details and evidence to explain the identity, creditworthiness and genuineness of the transactions were placed on record and the assessee had fully discharged its initial burden casted u/s. 68 of the Act. Ld. Counsel stated that the nature of these receipts is towards share capital and share premium which is by cheques from allottee companies who are income tax assessees. He further stated that assessee has explained the source and nature of receipts of fund and has brought on record all the documentary evidence in this respect. All these documents and evidence forms part of the paper book placed on record. Index of the paper book containing the listing of the same is reproduced as under for ease ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... en accepted by the Assessing officer of the creditor but instead of adopting such course, the Assessing officer himself could not enter into the return of the creditor and brand the same as unworthy of credence. 6.3. He placed further reliance on the decision of Hon ble jurisdiction High Court of Calcutta in the case of CIT Vs. Sagun Commercial P. Ltd. (ITA No. 54 of 2001 dated 17.021.2011) wherein it was held as under: After hearing the learned advocate for the appellant and after going through the materials on record, we are at one with the Tribunal below as well as the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) that the approach of the Assessing Officer cannot be supported. Merely because those applicants were not placed before the Assessing Officer, such fact could not justify disbelief of the explanation offered by the assessee when details of Permanent Account Nos. payment details of shareholding and other bank transactions relating to those payments were placed before the Assessing Officer. It appears that the Tribunal below has recorded specifically that the Assessing Officer totally failed to consider those documentary evidence produced by the assessee in arriving at such conclu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to him, they are all registered companies under the Companies Act, 1956 and are active companies on the MCA portal. 8. Ld. Counsel also submitted that mere non-appearance of directors is no basis for invoking provisions of section 68 of the act for which he placed reliance on the decision of Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Orissa Corporation (P) Ltd. (1986) 159 ITR 78 (SC) wherein it was held as under: In this case the assessee had given the names and addresses of the alleged creditors. It was in the knowledge of the revenue that the said creditors were the income-tax assessees. Their index number was in the file of the revenue. The revenue, apart from issuing notices under section 131 at the instance of the assessee, did not pursue the matter further. The revenue did not examine the source of income of the said alleged creditors to find out whether they were credit-worthy or were such who could advance the alleged loans. There was no effort made to pursue the socalled alleged creditors. In those circumstances, the assessee could not do any further. In the premises, if the Tribunal came to the conclusion that the assessee had discharged the burden that lay on him, then ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... or insufficiency in the evidence and details furnished in his office and also as to get further investigation was needed by him by way of recording of statement of the directors of the assessee and the subscriber companies. We draw our force from the decision of the Hon ble Bombay High court in the case of PCIT v. Paradise Inland Shipping Pvt. Ltd. [2017] 84 taxmann.com 58 (Pan) wherein it was held that once the assessee has produced documentary evidence to establish the existence of the subscriber companies, the burden would shift on the revenue to establish their case. We also draw our force from the decision of Hon ble Jurisdictional High Court of Calcutta in the case of Crystal Network Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT (supra) which held as under: We find considerable force of the submissions of the learned counsel for the appellant that the Tribunal has merely noticed that since the summons issued before assessment returned unserved and no one came forward to prove. Therefore it shall be assumed that the assessee failed to prove the existence of the creditors or for that matter creditworthiness. As rightly pointed out by the learned counsel that the CIT(Appeals) has taken the trouble of examin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tter is available on record which were filed in response to notice u/s 133(6), (iv) share application money was made by account payee cheques, (v) details of the bank accounts belonging to share applicants and their bank statements, (vi) all the share applicants are having substantial creditworthiness represented by their capital and reserves. 12. As far as the decision of Coordinate bench of ITAT, Kolkata in the case of Bishakha Sales Pvt. Ltd. in ITA No. 1493/Kol/2013 referred by the ld. AO in sustaining the addition, in our view, it does not support the addition as the said decision is delivered in the context of proceedings u/s 263 of the Act on the issue of enquiry regarding huge premium received on share application. 13. We further observe that provision for examining the source of source under the provisions of section 68 of the Act has been brought in by Finance Act 2012 w.e.f. 01.04.2013 as per which where an assessee is a company (not being a company in which public are substantially interested), and the sum so credited consists of share application money, share capital, share premium or any such amount by whatever name called, any explanation offered by such assessee com ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
