2023 (1) TMI 1204 - AT - Income Tax

Tribunal upholds decision on bogus share capital addition for A.Y. 2009-10

Hrishikesh Mega Township (P) Limited Versus Income Tax Officer, Ward-9 (1), Kolkata

The Tribunal dismissed the appeal of the assessee concerning the addition of Rs.10,22,00,000/- on account of bogus share capital for A.Y. 2009-10. The ... Revision u/s 263 by CIT - Addition u/s 68 on account of bogus share capital - HELD THAT:- We are satisfied that the assessee has nothing to say in support of its alleged bogus share capital claim. Apart from the above, we also notice that impugned order was passed in 2016 by the ld. 1st Appellate Authority, whereas appeal has been filed in 2021. The only explanation taken by the assessee is that Certified Copy was obtained by the assessee on 03.12.2020. There is a huge gap of roughly four years, which has not been explained by the assessee, or no one has responded to the notices issued by the Tribunal. Accordingly we do not find any merit in this appeal, it is dismissed. Appeal of the assessee is dismissed. Issues:Appeal against order of ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Kolkata for A.Y. 2009-10 regarding addition of Rs.10,22,00,000/- on account of bogus share capital.Analysis:The assessee failed to appear before the Tribunal, resulting in an ex-parte hearing. The main grievance was the confirmation of the addition made by the ld. Assessing Officer under section 68 for bogus share capital. The initial return of income declared a minimal amount, leading to suspicion. Despite various opportunities, the assessee did not provide necessary evidence or details before the ld. CIT(Appeals) or the ld. Assessing Officer. The ld. Assessing Officer treated the share capital as bogus due to non-cooperation and lack of evidence from the assessee.Analysis:The appeal before the Tribunal reiterated the argument that details submitted during the section 263 proceeding should have been considered by the Revenue Authorities. However, the Tribunal found no merit in the appeal due to the lack of support for the alleged bogus share capital claim. Additionally, a significant delay of four years in filing the appeal without a proper explanation further weakened the assessee's case. The Tribunal dismissed the appeal based on the lack of substantiation and the unexplained delay.Conclusion:The Tribunal dismissed the appeal of the assessee due to the absence of any substantial evidence supporting the claim of bogus share capital and the unexplained delay in filing the appeal. The decision was based on the conduct of the assessee, lack of cooperation, and failure to provide necessary details throughout the proceedings. The dismissal was pronounced in an open court session on 16th December 2022.