TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Join Channel
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: (i) Whether addition made under section 68 on account of share capital and share premium arising from swapping of shares without cash consideration was sustainable. (ii) Whether disallowance under section 14A read with Rule 8D was justified in the absence of exempt income.
Issue (i): Whether addition made under section 68 on account of share capital and share premium arising from swapping of shares without cash consideration was sustainable.
Analysis: The share transactions were found to be in the nature of swapping of shares and barter arrangements, with no cash, cheque, or draft having been received in the assessee's books or bank account. The assessee had furnished incorporation particulars, PAN details, and financial statements of the share subscribers. The Tribunal followed the view that section 68 applies to a credited sum of money and does not extend to mere transfer of shares under a non-cash swap arrangement.
Conclusion: The addition under section 68 was not sustainable and was rightly deleted; the issue was decided in favour of the assessee.
Issue (ii): Whether disallowance under section 14A read with Rule 8D was justified in the absence of exempt income.
Analysis: The record showed that no exempt income had been received by the assessee. The Tribunal applied the settled principle that, where no exempt income is earned, no disallowance under section 14A can be made merely because an investment-related transaction is present.
Conclusion: The disallowance under section 14A read with Rule 8D was not justified and was rightly deleted; the issue was decided in favour of the assessee.
Final Conclusion: The Revenue's challenge failed on both counts, and the deletion of the additions and disallowance was affirmed.
Ratio Decidendi: Section 68 is attracted only to a credited sum of money and not to share allotments or transfers settled through a non-cash share-swap, and section 14A cannot be invoked in the absence of exempt income.
TaxTMI 
