Section 68 evidence and book rejection rules defeated additions on share capital and estimated profit in ITAT Delhi

Section 68 addition on share application money was deleted because the assessee produced income-tax returns, bank statements, confirmations and affidavits, while the revenue did not discredit the material, conduct meaningful enquiry or allow effective cross-examination of the adverse deponent. The burden shifted to the revenue once primary evidence on identity, creditworthiness and genuineness was furnished, and it was not discharged. Estimation of profit at 8% on gross receipts from finishing work was also deleted because the books of account were not rejected; income could not be estimated on an ad hoc basis without a legally sustainable rejection of the regular books. Interest was treated as consequential.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the addition made under section 68 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, in respect of share application money was sustainable when the assessee had filed primary documentary evidence and the adverse deponent was not subjected to cross-examination; (ii) Whether the estimated addition of profit at 8% on gross receipts from finishing work could be sustained without rejection of the books of account.

Issue (i): Whether the addition made under section 68 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, in respect of share application money was sustainable when the assessee had filed primary documentary evidence and the adverse deponent was not subjected to cross-examination.

Analysis: The assessee produced copies of income-tax returns, bank statements, confirmations and affidavits of the investor companies. The revenue authorities did not discredit the documents, conduct meaningful enquiry into the affidavits, or produce the entry operator for cross-examination. The burden under section 68 initially lies on the assessee to establish identity, creditworthiness and genuineness, but once primary material is furnished, the burden shifts to the revenue to rebut it with cogent evidence.

Conclusion: The addition under section 68 was not sustainable and was deleted in favour of the assessee.

Issue (ii): Whether the estimated addition of profit at 8% on gross receipts from finishing work could be sustained without rejection of the books of account.

Analysis: The books of account were not rejected, yet profit was estimated on an ad hoc basis. In the absence of rejection of the regular books, estimation of income was held to be impermissible.

Conclusion: The estimated addition was not sustainable and was deleted in favour of the assessee.

Final Conclusion: The appeal succeeded on the substantive additions, while the interest component was treated as consequential and left to be worked out under the law.

Ratio Decidendi: A section 68 addition cannot survive where the assessee furnishes primary evidence and the revenue fails to rebut it or afford effective cross-examination of adverse witnesses, and profit cannot be estimated unless the books of account are first rejected on legally sustainable grounds.

---