2016 (3) TMI 1073 - AT - Income Tax

Tribunal upholds deletion of share application money addition to income citing sufficient documentary evidence

The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal, upholding the CIT(A)'s decision to delete the addition of share application money to the Assessee's total ... Unexplained share application money - Held that:- In the light of the factual position which is not disputed by the revenue, it cannot be said that the identity of the share applicants remained not proved by the assessee. Non production of directors of the investor company for examination by the AO it cannot be held that the identity of a limited company has not been established. For the reasons given above we uphold the order of CIT(A) and dismiss the appeal of the revenue. - Decided in favour of assessee Issues:Identification of share applicant companies and genuineness of share application money.Analysis:1. The appeal by the Revenue was against the order of CIT-XIX, Kolkata related to A.Y. 2005-06 concerning the receipt of share application money by the Assessee from three parties.2. The AO raised concerns about the identity and capacity of the three companies and the genuineness of the share application money transaction. The Assessee provided confirmations, income tax particulars, and financial statements of the companies, along with assessment orders completed by the respective ITOs.3. Despite documentary evidence, the AO conducted an inquiry where his Inspector reported non-existence of two companies at the given addresses. The Assessee requested time for directors' appearance, but they did not show up, leading the AO to add the share application money to the total income.4. On appeal, the CIT(A) deleted the addition, stating that the share applicant companies existed, as confirmed by their submissions, including PAN, bank statements, and assessment orders. The AO's inspector's report was questioned, and the CIT(A) found the Assessee's documentary evidence sufficient to prove the receipt of share application money.5. The Revenue appealed to the Tribunal, arguing the lack of proof of the share holders' identity. The Tribunal noted that the companies were assessed by the respective ITOs, supporting the Assessee's claim. Citing precedents, the Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, emphasizing that non-production of directors for examination does not negate the establishment of a company's identity.6. Ultimately, the Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal, affirming the CIT(A)'s decision based on the factual assessment of the companies by the ITOs and legal precedents cited.