Tribunal affirms addition of share application money as unaccounted income under Section 68

The Tribunal upheld the addition of share application money under Section 68 of the Act in the case. Despite the assessee's contentions and evidence of some payments by cheques, incomplete information and suspicious nature of transactions led to the conclusion that the share application money could be unaccounted income. The Tribunal found it implausible that agriculturists would invest without future benefits, and emphasized the failure to prove the identities of share applicants. As previous decisions were distinguished, and with unserved notices and absent share applicants, the appeal was dismissed, affirming the addition of share application money.

---

---

Issues:
Addition of share application money u/s. 68 of the Act.

Analysis:
The appeal was against the order of the Ld. CIT(A)-I, Baroda for A.Y. 2002-03, regarding the addition of Rs. 1,46,98,600 under section 68 of the Act. The assessee, a public limited company in the business of manufacturing industrial oils, faced scrutiny for accepting share application money from 273 parties, mostly in cash. Despite requests for details, the A.O. found incomplete information and issued notices under section 133(6) which were returned unserved. The A.O. made the addition as the assessee failed to prove the credit of share application money as per Section 68.

The assessee contended before the ld. CIT(A) that some amounts were received by cheques, providing photocopies of share application forms and claiming to have established the identities of the applicants. However, the A.O.'s remand report showed incomplete addresses on summons, leading the ld. CIT(A) to believe the assessee failed to prove the identities of the share applicants. The ld. CIT(A) noted cheques from the same series issued by different applicants in different villages, casting doubt on the genuineness of the transactions.

The Tribunal considered the facts, noting the incomplete information provided by the assessee and the suspicious nature of the share application money. It was observed that the share application money might be unaccounted income brought into the books. The Tribunal found it improbable that agriculturists, as claimed by the assessee, would invest in an unlisted company without future benefits. Concluding that the assessee failed to discharge the burden under Section 68, the Tribunal upheld the addition.

The ld. counsel for the assessee cited a previous decision by the ld. CIT(A) for A.Y. 1990-91 where similar additions were deleted. However, the Tribunal distinguished the cases, emphasizing the failure to establish identities of share applicants in the present case. As the share applicants were not produced, and notices were unserved, the Tribunal dismissed the appeal, upholding the addition of share application money.

In summary, the Tribunal dismissed the appeal, confirming the addition of share application money under Section 68 of the Act, as the assessee failed to establish the genuineness of the transactions and the identities of the share applicants.

---