M/S FARISTA VANIJYA PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O.,WARD-2(2), KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 142/KOL/2020Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata12 August 2020AY 2012-133 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal set aside the issue to the Assessing Officer to verify the assessee's claim regarding the share capital and premium. The assessee was to be given an opportunity to present evidence.

What were the facts?

The assessee received share application money and premium. The Assessing Officer made an addition of Rs. 1,66,50,000/- under Section 68 for unexplained cash credit. The CIT(A) confirmed an addition of Rs. 12,50,000/- pertaining to AY 2012-13.

What were the issues?

Whether the addition of Rs. 12,50,000/- as unexplained cash credit for AY 2012-13 is justified, considering the assessee's claim that a larger amount was received in the previous year and deleted by the CIT(A).

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 68,Section 131,Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “C”, BENCH KOLKATA

Before: SHRI J. S. REDDY, HON’BLE&

For Appellant: Shri Soumitra Choudhury, Advocate & Shri Joydeep Chakraborty, Adv
For Respondent: Shri Supriyo Pal, Addl. CIT
Hearing: 10/08/2020Pronounced: 12/08/2020

आदेश / O R D E R

Per Smt. Madhumita Roy, JM:

1.

The instant appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 03.12.2019 passed by the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-6, Kolkata arising out of order dated 10.03.2015 issued by the ITO, Ward-2(2), Kolkata under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) whereby and whereunder addition to the tune of Rs. 12,50,000/- on the ground of unexplained cash credit u/s 68 of the Act for assessment year 2012- 13 has been challenged.

M/s Farista Vanijya Pvt. Ltd. Assessment Year:2012-13 2. The brief facts leading the case is this that the assessee is a manufacturer of saline water electronically filed its return of income for A.Y. 2012-13 on 28.09.2012. During the course of assessment proceedings, it was found that during the previous year the assessee company received large share application money along with premium. Whereupon summons u/s 131 was served on the director of the assessee company with a request to explain the reason with complete details of share premium money receipt. Since no compliance was made on behalf of the assessee, addition of Rs. 1,66,50,000/-u/s 68 of the Act as unexplained cash credit was made. In appeal before the Ld. CIT(A), it was submitted on behalf of the assessee that the appellant during the A.Y. 2012-13 only a part of share capital and premium was received and the entire Rs. 1,66,50,000/- does not pertain to A.Y. 2012-13. The amount of Rs. 1,54,00,000/- received during the A.Y. 2011-12 cannot be considered for addition during the A.Y. 2012-13 as also the case made out by the assessee. However, the amount of Rs. 12,50,000/- received on 05.04.2011 from M/s Vickey Fincom Pvt. Ltd as share application and premium pertaining to A.Y. 2012-13 has not been allowed by the First Appellate Authority and the addition to that amount was confirmed.

3.

At the time of hearing of the instant appeal, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted before us that the share capital and premium of Rs. 1,54,00,000/- received during the A.Y. 2011-12 though initially added u/s 68 of the Act by the Ld. Assessing Officer, subsequently, the same was deleted by the ld. CIT(A) upon which no appeal was preferred by the revenue. In that event, the addition to the tune of Rs. 12,50,000/- towards the share capital and premium received for the year under consideration which is far less than Rs. 1,54,00,000/-, cannot be added against the income of the assessee u/s 68 of the Act. He, therefore, prays for setting aside the issue to the file of the Ld. Assessing Officer to verify the claim of the assessee. Such contention made by the Ld. A.R. was, however, not objected by the Ld. D.R with all his fairness.

M/s Farista Vanijya Pvt. Ltd. Assessment Year:2012-13 4. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions made by the respective parties, we are of the considered opinion to set aside the issue to the file of the Ld. Assessing Officer to verify the case of the assessee, upon affording an opportunity of being heard to the assessee and upon taking into consideration the evidence on record or any other evidence which the assessee may choose to file at the time of hearing of the matter and to pass a reasoned order in accordance with law. We therefore pass order accordingly.

5.

In the result, the assesse’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the Court on 12.08.2020

More judgments on Section 68

All 29,931 judgments and leading authorities on Section 68 →

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →