Tribunal upholds deletion of Rs. 120 crores addition under Income Tax Act

The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) decision to delete the addition of Rs. 120 crores under section 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Tribunal found that the assessee had adequately proven the identity, creditworthiness, and genuineness of the transactions, while criticizing the Assessing Officer for lacking substantial evidence to support the addition. Consequently, both appeals of the revenue were dismissed, with the Tribunal issuing the final judgment on 20/02/2019.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Justification of the addition made under section 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 towards share capital and share premium.

Issue-Wise Detailed Analysis:

1. Justification of the Addition Made Under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961:

Background:
The assessee company, engaged in the business of power and energy generation, filed its return of income for the Assessment Year (AY) 2012-13 declaring a total loss. During the relevant period, the company issued equity shares with a premium, totaling Rs. 120 crores through private placement. The Assessing Officer (AO) observed that the share subscribing companies had either no income or meager income, leading to the conclusion that these were merely paper or shell companies, thus treating the share capital and premium as bogus under section 68 of the Act.

Assessee’s Defense:
The assessee argued that it had set up a Solar Power Generating Plant under the Gujarat Solar Policy 2011 with an investment of Rs. 400 crores, funded through a mix of debt and equity. The equity contribution was facilitated by M/s Shree Ganesh Jewellery House (I) Ltd (SGJHL) and its subsidiaries. The assessee provided detailed documentation to substantiate the identity, creditworthiness, and genuineness of the transactions involving the share subscribing companies.

AO’s Findings:
The AO, despite the detailed submissions and evidence provided by the assessee, concluded that the investment was not substantiated beyond doubt. The AO added the entire share capital and share premium of Rs. 120 crores as unexplained cash credit under section 68 of the Act.

CIT(A)’s Findings:
The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)] examined the evidence and concluded that the assessee had duly proved the identity of the shareholders, creditworthiness of the shareholders, and genuineness of the transactions. Consequently, the CIT(A) deleted the addition made by the AO.

Tribunal’s Analysis:
The Tribunal reviewed the submissions and evidence, including various documents such as bank statements, ITR acknowledgements, and audited financial statements of the shareholder companies. The Tribunal noted the following key points:

- The shareholder companies were regularly assessed to income tax, proving their identity.
- The transactions were recorded in their respective books of accounts and routed through regular banking channels, proving the genuineness of the transactions.
- The high net worth and creditworthiness of SGJHL and its subsidiaries were substantiated through their financial statements.

The Tribunal emphasized that the AO had not conducted any specific enquiries to disprove the documentary evidence provided by the assessee. The AO’s conclusions were based on general assertions without substantial material evidence. The Tribunal also noted that the summons issued under section 131 of the Act to the director of the company were not relevant to determining the genuineness of the share capital and share premium transactions.

Conclusion:
The Tribunal concluded that the assessee had successfully discharged the onus of proving the identity, creditworthiness, and genuineness of the transactions. The addition made by the AO was based on surmises and conjectures without proper appreciation of the facts. The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)’s decision to delete the addition of Rs. 120 crores under section 68 of the Act.

Final Judgment:
Both appeals of the revenue were dismissed, and the Tribunal pronounced the order in the open court on 20/02/2019.

---