ITAT INDORE-RAJSHREE
FINSEC PRIVATE LTD. VS ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 5(1)
ITA NO.545/ IND /2010
6TH FEBRUARY 2012
ITA NO.545/ IND /2010
6TH FEBRUARY 2012
Core Fact of the Case:……. During the course of assessment proceedings, after
examining the submissions of the assessee and the balance sheet, the Assessing
Officer observed that during the year under consideration, the assessee has
shown receipt of share application money from various companies.
Summarised Judgment:….. In the present appeal, since the identity of such share subscribers, as we have discussed above, was established, therefore, no addition u/s 68 is warranted in the case of the assessee company. So far as the decision from Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. Rathi Finlease Limited (2008) 215 CTR (MP) 249 is concerned, in that case, despite several opportunities, the assessee was unable to provided confirmations from the concerned parties, therefore, the Hon'ble Court reached to a particular conclusion, whereas in the present appeals, the identity of share applicants, namely, M/s. Shrilal Traders Private Limited, M/s Lakeview Vinimay Private Limited, M/s Saharsh Suppliers Private Limited and M/s Ambitions Tie Up Private Limited was established, therefore, in view of the decision from Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Lovely Exports Private Limited (supra), this judicial decision from Hon'ble High Court may not help the revenue………………. In view of these facts, the decision from Hon'ble Apex Court in Lovely Exports (supra) and uncontroverted fact that the summons issued to the impugned share applicants were duly received by them with further filing of confirmation by such share applicants, at least their identity is proved, therefore, this appeal of the assessee deserves to be allowed. Finally, the appeal of the assessee is allowed.
Analysis: Although the summonses were returned un-served, the case has been favorably decided in the favor of the Assessee because the confirmations were filed to prove the identity of the share holding companies.
Summarised Judgment:….. In the present appeal, since the identity of such share subscribers, as we have discussed above, was established, therefore, no addition u/s 68 is warranted in the case of the assessee company. So far as the decision from Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. Rathi Finlease Limited (2008) 215 CTR (MP) 249 is concerned, in that case, despite several opportunities, the assessee was unable to provided confirmations from the concerned parties, therefore, the Hon'ble Court reached to a particular conclusion, whereas in the present appeals, the identity of share applicants, namely, M/s. Shrilal Traders Private Limited, M/s Lakeview Vinimay Private Limited, M/s Saharsh Suppliers Private Limited and M/s Ambitions Tie Up Private Limited was established, therefore, in view of the decision from Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Lovely Exports Private Limited (supra), this judicial decision from Hon'ble High Court may not help the revenue………………. In view of these facts, the decision from Hon'ble Apex Court in Lovely Exports (supra) and uncontroverted fact that the summons issued to the impugned share applicants were duly received by them with further filing of confirmation by such share applicants, at least their identity is proved, therefore, this appeal of the assessee deserves to be allowed. Finally, the appeal of the assessee is allowed.
Analysis: Although the summonses were returned un-served, the case has been favorably decided in the favor of the Assessee because the confirmations were filed to prove the identity of the share holding companies.
* As the detailed judgment runs into several pages, it is not printed.
No comments:
Post a Comment