Case Law Details
ITO Vs M/s Megasun Merchants Pvt. Ltd. (ITAT Kolkata)
Conclusion: Since assessee had discharged its onus to prove the identity, creditworthiness and genuineness of the share applicants by filing sufficient evidences and accordingly, the onus shifted to AO to disprove the materials placed before him and as AO failed to do so, addition of share application money based on conjectures and surmises was to be deleted.
Held: AO added back the entire share application money raised from the share applicants by assessee during the year under consideration primarily on the premise that directors of the shareholder companies failed to appear before him and assessee company failed to prove identity, creditworthiness and genuineness of the transaction. In the facts of the present case, both the nature & source of the share application received was fully explained by assessee. Assessee had discharged its onus to prove the identity, creditworthiness and genuineness of the share applicants. The PAN details, bank account statements, audited financial statements and Income Tax acknowledgments were placed on AO’s record. Accordingly all the three conditions as required u/s. 68 i.e. the identity, creditworthiness and genuineness of the transaction was placed before the AO and the onus shifted to AO to disprove the materials placed before him. Without doing so, the addition made by AO under section 68 was based on conjectures and surmises could not be justified.
FULL TEXT OF THE ITAT JUDGEMENT
The captioned appeal filed by the Revenue, pertaining to assessment year 2012-13, is directed against an order passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-Siliguri, (in short the ld. CIT(A)], which in turn arises out of anassessment order passed by the Assessing Officer under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ( in short the ‘Act’) dated 30.03.2015.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
