WISE PROPERTIES PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD - 1(1), KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1835/KOL/2024Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata27 November 2024AY 2012-2013Bench: SHRI RAJESH KUMAR (Accountant Member), SHRI SONJOY SARMA (Judicial Member)4 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that a significant portion of the amount (₹2,37,45,000/-) was share application money pending allotment from FY 2010-11, making Section 68 inapplicable for the current year. For the remaining amount, the Tribunal noted that the subscriber company was assessed and had sufficient capital and revenue, and the AO failed to prove the assessee's failure to establish the transaction's genuineness.

What were the facts?

The assessee received share capital/premium of ₹3,11,45,000/-. The Assessing Officer (AO) added this amount as unexplained cash credit under Section 68, as the subscribers' identity, creditworthiness, and genuineness of transactions were not proven, and summons were not complied with. The CIT(A) confirmed the AO's order.

What were the issues?

Whether the addition of share capital/premium under Section 68 was justified when a portion pertained to a prior financial year and the remaining transactions were adequately supported by evidence, despite non-compliance with summons by subscribers.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 68,Section 143(2),Section 142(1),Section 131,Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” BENCH, KOLKATA

Before: SHRI RAJESH KUMAR & SHRI SONJOY SARMA

For Appellant: Shri Miraj D. Shah, AR
Hearing: 29.10.2024Pronounced: 27.11.2024

Assessee by : Shri Miraj D. Shah, AR Revenue by : Shri Pradip Biswas, DR सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing : 29.10.2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 27.11.2024 आदेश/O R D E R PER RAJESH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:

The present appeal is directed at the instance of the assessee against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [hereinafter ‘ld. CIT (A)’], dated 05.08.2024, passed under Section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”), for Assessment Year 2012-13.

2.

In the appeal of the assessee has challenged the addition of ₹3,11,45,000/- made by the ld. AO u/s 68 of the Act, being share capital / share premium.

3.

Facts in brief are that the assessee filed the return of income on 22.08.2024, showing total income of ₹5,160/-. The case of the Wise Properties Pvt. Ltd.; A.Y. 2012-13 assessee was selected for scrutiny through Computer Assisted Scrutiny Selection (CASS) and statutory notices were duly served to the assessee u/s 143(2) and 142(1) of the Act. During the course of assessment proceedings, the ld. AO observed that the assessee has receipt of fresh subscription to its share capital and share premium of ₹3,11,45,000/-. During the assessment proceedings the assessee filed evidences before the ld. AO and also produced books of accounts to support its claim of receipt of share capital and share premium. The ld. AO also issued summon u/s 131 of the Act to the subscribers which were not complied with and finally the ld. AO came to the conclusion that the identity and creditworthiness of the subscribers and genuineness of the transactions were not proved and thus added the same to the income of the assessee u/s 68 of the Act as unexplained cash credit. Aggrieved assessee preferred the appeal before the ld. CIT (A) .

4.

In the appellate proceedings, the ld. CIT (A) confirmed the order of the ld. AO by holding that the assessee failed to prove the identity, creditworthiness and genuineness of the subscribers.

5.

After hearing the rival contentions and perused the records available on record ,we find that the amount of share capital / share premium of ₹3,11,45,000/-, which was stated to be received by the assessee during the financial year is a wrong finding of facts by the both the authorities below, which have occurred due to overlooking of the facts available on records furnished by the assessee before both the authorities. We note that out of the said amount assessee has received ₹2,37,45,000/- qua share application money pending allotment in the F.Y. 2010-11 from six parties namely; Abhijeet Projects Ltd. ₹25,00,000/-, Long Life Wise Properties Pvt. Ltd.; A.Y. 2012-13 Vanijya Private Ltd. 74,00,000/-, Arission Infrastructure P. Ltd. of ₹34,00,000/-, Mudrika Projects Pvt. Ltd of ₹1,03,50,000/-, Network Pvt. Ld. 1,25,000/- & Monitor Tie-up Pvt. Ltd of ₹73,70,000/- meaning thereby that the said money was not received in the current financial year and accordingly, the provisions of Section 68 of the Act could not be invoked to the money receipt in the earlier financial year. Therefore, we are inclined to delete the addition to the tune of ₹₹2,37,45,000/-.

6.

So far as, balance of share share capital and share is concerned ₹74.00 lacs is concerned we note that the same was received from Long Life Vanijya Private Limited during the year. We note that the said company has been assessed u/s 143(3) of the Act, vide order dated 14.07.2014 for A.Y. 2012-13, wherein the return of income was duly accepted after examining the books of accounts and the copy of the assessment order is placed at page nos.11 to 14 of the Paper Book. Besides, the assessee has filed all the evidences of the subscriber before authorities below and ld. CIT

(A) noted that the authorised capital of the said company i.e. Arission Infrastructure P. Ltd. was ₹10,30,00,000/- and its paid up capital is ₹9,07,13,000/- and its total Revenue from operation was disclosed at ₹74,53,77,715/-, however, the profit before tax has been disclosed at ₹(-) 2,72,665/-. In our opinion the authorities below have failed to comment as to how the assessee has failed to prove the identity and creditworthiness of these transactions. Moreover the addition cannot be made only on the basis of the fact that the summons issued u/s 131 of the Act to the subscribers company was not complied. We note that the assessee has placed all the evidences with the authorities as are available from page no 1 to 31 of the paper book. Considering these facts, we are inclined Wise Properties Pvt. Ltd.; A.Y. 2012-13 to set aside the order of ld. CIT (A) and direct the AO to delete the addition.

7.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed.

More judgments on Section 68

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →