2009 (12) TMI 710 - AT - Income Tax

Tribunal dismisses Revenue's appeal, upholds deletion of unexplained investments under section 69.

The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner's decision to delete the Rs. 23.80 lakh addition under section 69 for unexplained investments, as the evidence showed ... - Issues involved: Appeal against order u/s 143(3) for assessment year 2000-01 regarding addition of unexplained investments under section 69 and ownership of shares and loans.Addition of unexplained investments under section 69:The Revenue appealed against the deletion of Rs. 23,80,000 addition made on account of unexplained investments towards loan and shares under section 69 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The assessee had obtained loans against pledge of shares belonging to Shri Gian Gupta and Smt. Usha Gupta. The Assessing Officer treated the investment in shares as made by the assessee, resulting in the addition. However, during the appellate proceedings, the assessee provided evidence that the shares were pledged by Shri Gian Gupta and Smt. Usha Gupta to raise a loan, and the real beneficiaries were not the assessee. The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) considered the submissions and evidence presented by the assessee, concluding that there was no sufficient ground for the addition in the absence of contrary evidence. The Commissioner held that the shares belonged to Shri Gian Gupta and Smt. Usha Gupta, and the assessee was not the owner of the shares. The addition of Rs. 23.80 lakhs was deleted based on the provided documents and explanations.Ownership of shares and loans:The assessee raised loans from HDFC Bank and Standard Chartered Bank against shares belonging to Shri Gian Gupta and Smt. Usha Gupta. Detailed submissions were made regarding the ownership of the shares and the utilization of the loan amounts by the actual owners. Documents including bank accounts, D-mat account details, agreements with banks, and balance-sheets were furnished to support the contentions. Affidavits of concerned persons were also submitted. It was clarified that the shares were pledged by Shri Gian Gupta and Smt. Usha Gupta, and they were the real beneficiaries of the loans. The Commissioner held that the assessee, Shri Hanuman Prasad Shukla, was not the owner of the shares and was merely an employee of Smt. Usha Gupta. The loans were utilized by the actual owners, who declared the investments and liabilities in their balance-sheets. The Commissioner concluded that the assessee had not made any investment in the shares and was not the beneficiary of the loans, upholding the deletion of the addition made under section 69.Decision:The Tribunal upheld the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), dismissing the Revenue's appeal. The Tribunal found that the assessee was not the owner of the shares in question, and there was no evidence to suggest that the investments were made from unaccounted money. The detailed discussion and evidence presented supported the conclusion that the shares belonged to Shri Gian Gupta and Smt. Usha Gupta, and the addition under section 69 was rightly deleted. The appeal filed by the Revenue was therefore dismissed on December 4, 2009.