TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (2) TMI 1007
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....given facts and circumstances of the case?" Ld. CIT-DR as well Ld. Counsel for assessee agreed that the facts and circumstances of both the appeals of revenue are identical and hence they argued from the facts of ITA No.223/Mum/2016 in the case of Reliance Utilities P Ltd and stated that the same can be adopted for the other appeal. Hence, the grounds as raised in the appeal in the case of Reliance Utilities P Ltd reads as under:- "1. "Whether on the facts & circumstances of the case and in law, the learned Commissioner of Income Tax(A) is correct in deleting the addition of unexplained cash credits of 700,00,00,000/- made by assessing officer u/s 68 of Income Tax. Act 1961" 2. "Whether on the facts & circumstances of the case and in law, the learned Commissioner of Income Tax(A) is correct in deleting the addition made u/s. 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 holding that the power of the AO to lift the corporate veil is not in question without appreciating the fact that on lifting the corporate veil it is clear that Biometrix has been created as a mere camouflage or shell or sham company deliberately created by the persons exercising control over the same for the purpose of a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Compulsorily Convertible Preference Shares (in short "CCPS") against which the assessee had allotted seven crores CCPS of Rs. 10 each at a premium of Rs. 90 per share to Biometrix. This transaction was investigated by the Investigation Wing of the Income Tax Department, Mumbai upon receipt of commercial intelligence report dated 10.08.2012 from the High Commission of India, Singapore. The AO has summarized the observations in the said report that the source of funds of Biometrix, which invested Rs. 700 crores in the CCPS issued by the assessee and also in other group companies (in all aggregating to USD 1627.24 millions),needs further investigation considering that the said company incorporated under the laws of Singapore had a paid-up capital of Singapore Dollars 1,10,000 only and its shares were held by two corporate entities, of which one entity in Singapore held 91% of the shares. The ultimate owner of the two companies in Singapore i.e. Biometrix and its shareholder entity is an individual based in Mumbai holding 100% of the capital. The quantum of investment made by Biometrix which was the largest FDI from Singapore to India, given its small capital base and other facts....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 143(2) of the Act on 20.09.2013. The Investigation Wing in Mumbai vide letter dated 10.09.2013 requested that the assessment be kept in abeyance till further communication is issued to the AO. The Investigation Wing forwarded another report dated 05.02.2014 to the AO, which apart from the findings in its first report dated 10.07.2012, carried the details of the subsequent transactions of the purchase of CCPS from Biometrix by the group companies of the assessee and that the purchasers of CCPS have explained that the consideration was paid out of the proceeds from sale of units of mutual funds. The report stated that Biometrix had entered into separate Investment Agreement with the assessee and other group companies. It also stated that a Put & Call Option Agreement was entered into by Biometrix with a group company of the assessee, which gave Biometrix the right to sell the CCPS and that the loan from ICICI Bank was secured by assigning the rights in the Investment Agreement, the Put and Call Option Agreement and the charge was filed with the authority in Singapore. The report also stated how ICICI bank had sanctioned a loan of USD 1.2 billion on 28.06.2007 and a further sum USD 0....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he acknowledgment for filing the same. The terms of the issue of CCPS were explained and the valuation report of S.R. Batliboi & Co was furnished. The assessee explained its understanding that Biometrix had obtained a loan from ICICI Bank, Singapore for making the investment in the CCPS and stated that it is not in possession of any correspondence in this regard. The bank statements of the assessee were furnished and credit entries for the receipt of Rs. 700 crores from Biometrix were identified in the bank statements. 6. The AO also made reference through FT & TR Division of the CBDT to Inland Revenue Authority in Singapore ("IRAS") on 13.03.2014. The reference was made as per requirement for exchange of information in relation to investments made by Biometrix in four reliance group companies including assessee. IRAS provided information pertaining to Biometrix, viz, the tax residency certificate, List of Directors and employees, Financial Statements and Income Tax Returns, Director's resolutions/KYC documents, ICICI bank statements with details of inward credits, disbursement related documents, loan principal and interest related documents, credit appraisal note and ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....inancing its long term investments and the Long Term Investments available for sale amounting to USD 1650,125,325. From the Facility Agreement entered into between Biometrix and ICICI Bank, the AO inferred that the loan has been advanced to Biometrix by ICICI Bank Limited through its overseas branches and ICICI Bank, Singapore Branch had also acted as an agent for facilitating the loan. In other words, ICICI Bank, Singapore Branch handled the disbursements, collection of interest and principal repayments. After examining various documents in relation to the loan, the AO found that ICICI Bank, Singapore Branch had not monitored the loan it granted to Biometrix strictly as per the terms of the contract. 7. Hence, the AO added the amount of Rs. 700 crores received by the assessee and invested by Biometrix in the CCPS issued by the assessee as income of the assessee as unexplained cash credit u/s. 68 of the Act. According to the AO the nature and genuineness of the transaction of investment in the CCPS of the assessee was not explained as required in Section 68 of the Act. The AO has stated that the assessee, the investor i.e. Biometrix, shareholders and directors of the investor, I....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ned the sources of money paid to M/s. Biometrix Marketing P. Ltd., for acquiring the CCPS. 5.6 Even as per the DDIT report dated 10.07.2012, the source of this investment is from Biometrix which was not out of the equity capital but borrowed as a loan of USD 1700 million from ICICI Bank, Singapore. Two things are clear. The source is Biometrix and the source of source is the loan sanctioned by ICICI Bank, Singapore to Biometrix. Secondly, ICICI Bank has secured this loan with Option Agreements to sell the shares to M/s. Ekansha, a group company of M/s. Reliance Industries Limited. 5.7 The report further finds that Biometrix is said to be filing income tax returns, goods and service tax returns and other regulatory returns with the authorities in Singapore and copies of acknowledgement were filed as proof of the same. The report also confirms that Biometrix had repaid the loan to ICICI Bank, Singapore through the money raised by sale of CCPS to Reliance Gas Transportation Infrastructure Limited, Reliance Ports and Terminals Limited and Ekansha Enterprises Private Limited. The report also concludes that Reliance Gas Transportation Infrastructure Limited, Reliance Ports and Term....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 38 held as follows: "the bank statement provided was containing entries from 01.01.2008 since the information pertaining to earlier period could not be provided as per Indo Singapore exchange of information protocol" (Para 35). "The crucia1.information in relation to this transaction that is the bank statement and other relevant documents is not on record" (Para 38). The Appellants had placed on record the swift messages dated 18.09.2007 issued by ICICI Bank, Singapore to OCBC Bank, Singapore and swift message dated 19.09.2007 issued by OCBC Bank, Singapore to HDFC Bank, Mumbai. It was also submitted that these swift messages were in fact forming part of the records in the files of the AO as obtained by the AO from IRAS, Singapore. Appellants had applied for the copies and the same had been duly furnished by the AO. These copies were again placed on record by the Appellants during the hearing. 5.13 Since, this evidence goes to the root of the matter, the same is dealt with first. The assessment order states that bank statements have not been furnished. However, the AO has secured the swift messages referred to above from IRAS, Singapore. A careful look at the swift messages sho....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ix cannot give rise to any adverse consequences. The swift messages refer to the bank account of Biometrix maintained with OCBC Bank, Singapore and also show the inward remittances by ICICI Bank, Singapore and the outward remittances to the bank account of the Appellants with HDFC Bank, Mumbai. These are evidences secured by the AO from IRAS Singapore, the genuineness of which is not doubted in the assessment order. When the Appellants placed these evidences once again during the hearing, the same was forwarded to the AO seeking a remand report and the remand report does not dispute the facts and evidences on record. Consequently, the sole reason or basis in the assessment order and remand report is the non-receipt of bank account which was beyond the capacity of the Appellant and IRAS, Singapore cannot stand scrutiny, and therefore should fail in the light of the bank account references of this very transaction under question as is available through the swift messages issued by ICICI Bank, Singapore and OCBC Bank, Singapore respectively. The purpose of seeking the bank statement is to track the transaction and to find the link. The very purpose for which the bank statements were s....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... No (2) any legal entity falling within the definition of resident with negligible or nil business operation or with no real and continuous business activities; No No No No Turnover (in USD) 121433 1 067 440 4 221 643 422 675 Cost of Sales (in USD) -121433 -1 064 580 -4 213 555 - 421 531 Other income (in USD) 896 910 15 045 208 369 3 123 231 (3) its total annual expenditure on operations is less than S$200,000 in the immediately preceding period of 24 months No No No No Salary & Employee benefits (in USD) 102 950 Administrative expenses & other operating expenses (in USD) 5 995 772 38 937 226 29 760 302 110 377 287 Annual expenditure (in USD) 5 995 772 39 040 176 29 760 302 110 377 287 Negative tests: An entity is deemed no to be a shell/conduit company if: (4) it is listed on a recognised stock exchange of the Contracting State; or No No No No (5) its total annual expenditure on operations is equal to or more then S$200,000 in the immediately preceeding period of 24 months from th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tions vide para 28, 82 and 100, as rightly pointed by the Appellant, cannot militate against the Appellant as these are observations without proof or evidence. In these circumstances the genuine existence of Biometrix during the relevant period under the laws of Singapore stands proved. The Loan transaction 5.22 The Appellants have submitted the following: "The credit committee of ICICI Bank giving an in-principle approval on 28.06.2007 for a loan of USD 1.2 billion. This In-principle approval has been given based on the list of investees, running projects, valuation of the equities in the -project and putting in place a Put/Call arrangement with a non-disposal undertaking permitting the borrower to enter into suitable hedging arrangements. Biometrix has passed a board resolution on 24.09.2007 to invest in CCPS of the Appellant. In line with the terms and conditions issued by ICICI Bank, Singapore a put and call option agreement was entered into between Ekansha Enterprise P Ltd and Biometrix on 31 .08.2007. The board of directors of Biometrix passed a resolution on 05.09.2007 to accept the facility from ICICI Bank for the borrowing of USD 1....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the Companies Act, 1956 and this was done by the Appellant on 2008.2007. This was followed by a board resolution on 20.08.2007 authorizing to issue 7 crore CCPS to Biometrix Entering of an investment agreement on 31.08.2007 between Biometrix and Appellant identifying the investment, subscription amount, warranties of promoters and investors. The Appellant passed special resolution on 20.08.2007 and the same was filed with the Registrar of Companies on 14.09.2007 The FIRC dated 21.09.2007 issued by HDFC Bank vide serial numbers 420599 evidencing receipt of INR 700 crore. On 25.09.2007, the board of directors of the Appellant authorised allotment of CCPS and on 20.10.2007 Appellants filed Form 2 with ROC upon allotment of CCPS to Biometrix thus satisfying the conditions under section 75 of the Companies Act, 1956. In compliance with section 84 of the Companies Act, 1956, on 25.09.2007 Appellants issued six preference share certificates for the value of Rs. 700 crores. On 18.12.2007, the RBI acknowledged the filings made by the Appellants with RBI for allotment of CCPS to Biometrix". 5.26 The movement of funds from ICICI Bank th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... correlating utilisation request, disbursement certificates, swift messages and FIRC to demonstrate the fact that the loan granted by ICICI Bank, Singapore to Biometrix has solely been invested by Biometrix in CCPS of the Appellant and other group entities of the Appellant. In the circumstances, I hold that the source and genuineness of the investment in the CCPS issued by the Appellant stands proved. 5.28 In fact, a similar analysis has been done by the AO in the assessment order. Para 48 to 55 very cogently appreciates these evidences in a sequence and para 55 gives a finding that the loan so availed by Biometrix has been utilised for investment in CCPS of the four Reliance group companies". For the sake of convenience paras 48 to 55 are extracted below: 48. ICICI Bank Singapore has disbursed a loan of USD 1.7 billion to Biometrix. As per information received from FT&TR division, the IRAS has provided swift messages showing that loan proceeds have been remitted to the Overseas Chinese Banking Corporation, Singapore, SG Bank Account No. 662001767301 of Biometrix. The date wise details of the disbursal are as under: S.No Date Amount in USD 1 18.09.2007 ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s/CCPS by the SPV. (b) Call Option: Subject to the applicable law, the promoter group company shall have the right to purchase CCDs/CCPS anytime post subscription of the CCDs/CCPS by the SPV. 54. Thereafter Facility Agreements were entered into between ICICI Bank Limited and Biometrix. As per the Facility Agreements of September, 2007 and December 2007 between ICICI Bank Ltd., and M/s. Biometrix Marketing Pvt. Ltd., (the Borrower) it is seen that the "Original Lender" is ICICI Bank Ltd., Singapore Branch. It is also mentioned that the original lender is a company organized and existing under the laws of India (ICICI Bank Ltd.). Therefore, it is clear that the loan has been advanced to the borrower by ICICI Bank Ltd., through its overseas branches and ICICI Bank Ltd., Singapore has acted as an "Agent" for facilitating the loan. 55. The loans so availed by Biometrix has been utilized for investment in the CCPS of four Reliance Group companies Monitoring of the loan transaction by ICICI Bank and valuation reports 5.29 Para 58 to 63 of the assessment order deals with this subject matter and to put it in a nut shell states that ICICI Bank had not m....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ix and Biometrix in turn took the higher of the two as per the terms of the Facility Agreement for ascertaining the debt cover. The Appellants in short submit that debt cover has been more than the requirement contemplated in the facility agreement. The AO in his remand report does not dispute this position. In the circumstances, the analysis by the AO in the assessment order does not in any manner dispute the source of funding and on the contrary concedes in a way that it is only ICICI Bank which funded Biometrix has no relevance to the dispute under question, especially when the entire loan has been repaid. Other reasons in the assessment order 5.32 The assessment order has provided few more reasons while confirming the addition. These are dealt with below: 1) The contention of the AO that Biometrix was yet to be formed when the loan was sanctioned by ICICI Bank is factually wrong. The submission of the Appellant that Biometrix was incorporated on 15-05-2007 whereas ICICI Bank sanctioned the loan only on 28-06-2007 is evidenced by the materials on record and is not disputed by the AO. 2) The observation of the AO that the money is only channelized th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nterestingly, the finding of the AO that interest on the loan by Biometrix to ICICI Bank, Singapore Branch is met by selling a portion of the CCPS only reaffirms the indebtedness of Biometrix to ICICI Bank, Singapore Branch for investing in the CCPS. 5) The observation that the loan has been sanctioned only by ICICI Bank, India and not by ICICI Bank, Singapore branch and the non-receipt of information from IRAS and ICICI Bank, Singapore relating to bank statements and KYC cannot work to the detriment of the Appellant. Biometrix is a non-resident. IRAS Singapore is governed by the provisions of DTAA and the connected protocols. ICICI Bank Singapore is governed by banking secrecy norms and regulations as per Singapore laws. Non receipt of information based on DTAA and bank secrecy constraints cannot go against the Appellants. In fact, there is more than adequate evidence to prove source and genuineness of the investment. I have already referred to various paras in the assessment order wherein the AO in unequivocal terms have acknowledged the source and genuineness of the investment especially vide para 48 to 55. After stating so, it is not open to the AO to hold that the inv....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... clear as reply from Singapore Authorities to the FT&TR Reference was awaited." 3) Para 4A(vii) of the remand report states "The ICICI Bank secured the loan by creating exclusive charge over all cash flows and assets excluding the CCPS and CCDs invested in from the proceeds of the loan; (ii) Non disposal undertaking on the shareholding of the borrower company in a form and manner acceptable to ICICI Bank and (iii) assignment of Put Option with respect of sale/transfer of CCPS/CCDs." 4) Para 4A(viii) of the remand report states "An understanding was also entered with ICICI Bank, agreeing that the outstanding Put Option obligation shall be backed by a Non Disposable Undertaking on equity shares of RIL such that the same gives a cover of at least 1.75 times of the outstanding Put Option obligation or face value of the outstanding CCPS/CCDs or the face value of the outstanding CCPS/CCDs, whichever is high." 5) Para 4A(ix) of the remand report states "Accordingly, on approval of the loan by the Credit Committee on 28.06.2007, Genemedix has set up a special Purpose Vehicle viz., Biometrix as subsidiary in Singapore for making investment in various infrastructure projects, whereb....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....of section 68 are as under:- (i) Existence of books of account; (ii) A credit of sum in the books of account of an assessee; and (iii) Absence of a satisfactory explanation or no explanation by the assessee about the nature and source of the sum credited. 5.36 Clearly, in the instant case, the conditions at (i) and (ii) above are existing. The appellant has offered extensive explanation. In addition there are several other pieces of evidence and documents available on record as discussed above. It is on the third condition that the A.O. has made the addition and concluded that the explanation is not satisfactory. It is this conclusion that needs to be objectively examined in this appeal. 5.37 Section 68 of the Act obligates an assessee to show evidence both on the nature and source of any sum credited in the books of the said assessee. It needs no elaboration that through a catena of decisions the Courts have laid down the following three fundamental tests which have to be established to discharge the burden under section 68 of the Act: * Identity of the creditor * Creditworthiness of the creditor, and * Genuineness of the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ITR 377 / 155 Taxman 289 (Raj.), Uma Polymers (P.) Ltd. v. Dy. CIT[2006] 101 TTJ 124 (Jodh.)(TM): Where the share application money is received by the assessee-company through banking channel the assessee has only to prove the existence of person in whose name share application money is received. Once the existence of investor is proved it is no further burden of assessee to prove whether the person itself has invested the said money or some other person has made investment in name of that person. The burden then shifts on the Revenue to establish that such an investment has come from assessee-company itself. vii. CIT v. Gangour Investment Ltd. [2009] 179 Taxman 1 (Delhi), CIT v. Victor Electrodes Ltd. [2010] 329 JTR 271 (Delhi), Dy. CIT v. Dolphine Marbles (P.) Ltd. [2011] 129 ITD 163/ 10 taxmann.com 75 (Jab.)(TM), Bharti Syntex Ltd. v. Dy. CIT 52 DTR 73 (Jp.): Assessee-company filed letters of the share applicant companies wrote to the ACIT confirming that they had applied for shares in the asses see-company, giving details of draft, copies of resolutions passed by BOO of applicant- companies besides their bank statement/copies of acknowledgement of ret....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... an investment. As regards the source, Biometrix has invested this fund into the Appellant and other group companies as CCPS and Biometrix had borrowed the said fund from ICICI Bank, Singapore and ICICI Bank, Singapore has lend the money as per the terms and conditions of the Facility Agreement. The twin requirements viz., nature and source as envisaged in section 68 of the Act stands fulfilled and therefore the order of assessment making additions on account of this transaction needs to be set aside." Aggrieved, now revenue is in second appeal before the Tribunal. 10. We have heard rival contentions and gone through facts and circumstances of the case. We have perused the case records and material placed before us. The facts not under dispute or controversy are that a sum of Rs. 700 crores was received from Biometrix. As against this amount, the assessee has allotted 7.0 crores CCPS (Series A, B & C) of Rs. 100 each (face value of Rs. 10 each and premium of Rs. 90 each).Biometrix had borrowed the said amount on a loan basis from ICICI Bank, Singapore. Biometrix had utilized the proceeds of the loan from ICICI Bank, Singapore to purchase the compulsorily convertible preferenc....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ure projects like RUL, RG TIL and RPTL. It factors the valuation report of Ernst & Young which had valued the equities in the project at about USD 8 Billion. The minutes further state that the SPV would invest CCPS/ CCDs of the infrastructure projects and also stipulates that the SPV would enter into anytime Put& Call arrangement for sale of CCPS/CCDs with Reliance MDA Group Company and the put option obligor would provide credit support for meeting its obligation by way of a Non-Disposal Undertaking ("NDU"). In essence the minutes conclude the following: It identifies the investees and projects; It takes into account the valuation report where the equities in projects are valued at USD 8 billion That the loan to be sanctioned to the SPV would be invested in CCPS/CCDs, thus identifying the end use restriction. It also mandated a Put & Call arrangement with one of the group entities and Biometrix and that the entity would provide a non-disposal undertaking of Reliance Industries Limited shares ("RIL shares") The proposed terms and conditions indicate the lender as ICICI Bank, Singapore, retaining their right to allocate the facility amongst its branches. It indicates the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....etrix, the quantum and price of allotment and besides stipulating the terms and conditions of the CCPS. 6 24.08.2007 Resolution by Board of Directors of Biometrix to invest in CCPS of RGTIL, RUL & RPTL Resolution passed at the Board Meeting of Biometrix is annexed as Exhibit 6 Assessing Officer - Vol 3, Page 164 The Board of Directors of Biometrix had given authority to invest by subscribing to the issue of CCPS up to an aggregate of Rs. 5000 crores in one or more of the following infrastructure companies incorporated in India viz. RUL, RGTIL and the Appellant, including the Put& Call agreement in respect of CCPS. 7 31.08.2007 Investment agreement between the Appellant & Biometrix executed Investment Agreement is annexed as Exhibit 7 Company Records This investment agreement has been entered into between the assessee and the investor Biometrix. Clause 2(a) identifies the investment as a subscription to CCPS of 7.0 crores at an aggregate subscription of Rs. 700 crores Clause 3 lays down the condition precedent for completion which includes company's warranties, promoter's warranties, investors ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....shares. Section 7 obligate a threshold maintenance value of the NDU shares which has to be 1.75 times of the loan borrowed by the investor viz. Biometrix. 9 05.09.2007 Board of Directors of Biometrix accept the term loan facility provided by ICICI Bank Singapore for USD 1.2 billion Resolution passed at the Board meeting of Biometrix is annexed as Exhibit 9 Assessing Officer - Vol 3, Page 166 Directors Resolution passed by The Board of Directors of Biometrix resolving to accept the facility from the ICICI Bank on the terms and conditions contained in the draft facility agreement for the borrowal of USD 1.2 Billion in three tranches. 10 07.09.2007 Facility Agreement between Biometrix and ICICI Bank was executed Facility Agreement is annexed as Exhibit 10 Assessing Officer - Vol 3, Page 269 Biometrix entered into a Facility Agreement with ICICI Bank Singapore and ICICI Bank Limited - Bahrain Branch (as Original Lenders) and with ICICI Bank Limited - Singapore (as Agent) for a single currency term facility of USD 1.2 billion. ICICI Bank has diversified the risk in this portfolio by sharing the facility betwe....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 18.4 of the Facility Agreement requires the higher of A Value and B Value shall be used by the agent for the purpose of determining whether the borrower has complied with the applicable provisions of this Agreement. Clause 18.5 of the Facility Agreement requires each set of financial statements delivered by the borrower pursuant to Clause 18,1 shall be certified by an authorised signatory and is prepared using applicable accounting policies on a basis consistent with earlier financial statements. As per Clause 18.9 of the Facility Agreement, prior to the completion of any sale of CCPS by the borrower under the Option Agreement, the borrower shall deliver to the agent a copy of the valuation report which have been prepared and delivered to it in connection with exercise pursuant to the terms of the Option Agreement. Clause 19 of the Facility Agreement lists the financial covenants. As per this clause, CCPS value means the higher of the A value and B value. A Value means the lower of the value determined by the statutory auditor and the valuation expert. B Value means the value of the CCPS as per FEMA pricing guidelines. Total debt cover means the proportion borne by the CC....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....UL from Biometrix Foreign Inward Remittance Certificate issued by HDFC Bank is annexed as Exhibit 16 Company Records As evidenced by the certificate of Foreign Inward Remittance issued by HDFC Bank Limited, Serial Number 420599 dated 21.09.2007, the assessee received INR 701.13 crores. As required by Section 84 of the Companies Act, 1956, the assessee Company issued six preference share certificate to Biometrix. 18 04.10.2007 Excess Amount received by RUL from Biometrix refunded Debit advise issued by HDFC Bank is annexed as Exhibit 18 Company Records As evidenced by the debit advise issued by HDFC Bank Limited dated 04.10.2007, the assessee refunded excess amount of INR 1 .13 crores back to Biometrix 19 15.10.2007 Valuation report issued by S.R.Batliboi & Co valuing the equity share at Rs. 5.25 per share as per FEMA regulations Valuation Report is annexed as Exhibit 19 Company Records Pricing guidelines under FEMA is applicable for issue of shares by resident to nonresident. Pricing guidelines vide RBI/2004-051207 A.P.(DIR series) circular No, 16 dated 0410.2004 issued by....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the Security document and enforce the Security created by the Security document. 22 18.12.2007 Acknowledgment from RBI accepting the forms upon allotment of CCPS to Biometrix Acknowledgment Letter is annexed as Exhibit 22 Company Records The form FC-GPR filed by the assessee Company with RBI upon issue of 70000000 was acknowledged by RBI on 18.12.2007. 23 20.10.2007 Filing of forms with ROC upon allotment of CCPS by RUL to Biometrix Form 2 is annexed as Exhibit 23 Company Records Pursuant to Section 75 of Companies Act, 1956, the company is required to file return of allotment with the ROC within 30 days of allotment enclosing the particulars of securities allotted and details of the allottee. Accordingly, the assessee company filed return of allotment consequent upon allotment of 70000000 CCPS on 20.09.2007. 24 15.03.2008 CCPS converted into dematerialised form in NSDL Company Records Biometrix dematerialized the physical preference share certificates issued upon allotment of CCPS 25 15.01.2008 Valuation Certificate submitted by Biometrix to ICICI Bank Valuati....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....by Biometrix to be a loan sanctioned by ICICI Bank, Singapore and it is claimed that the whole investment has come through proper banking channels and more than adequately documented. The respondent is taking objection to AO asking the source of the investment made by the company Biometrix. It is submitted that that the nature of enquiry undertaken by the income tax authorities would vary from case to case, depending on the nature of the material furnished to them by the assessee, when called upon to do so. In this case, the material in the form of addresses and documents pertaining to Biometrix were enquired into thoroughly by the AO. He found that what was the source of funds into the accounts of Biometrix was not known. Furthermore, the AO's efforts to get the information from Singapore Revenue Authorities through reference were unsuccessful. The assessee made no attempt to assist the AO in these proceedings and did not file the documents evidencing the source of money which had come into the books of the respondent. While it is true that the AO did look into the investigation report and other material so gathered during the course of assessment proceedings, the material pro....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....private limited company, the presumption is very strong against the assessee that subscription is available only to the closely connected persons of the assessee. . The view is supported by the decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court Cit vs. MIS. Neelkanth Ispat Udhyog Pvt. Dt. 30 July, 2012 ITA 427/2012 wherein the Hon'ble Court has observed: - "Once the inference is against the assessee that the issue is subscribed by its closely connected persons, the onus is upon the assessee to prove the identify (sic. identification) of the subscribers and their creditworthiness. Their Lordships of the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court in the case of Bola Shankar Cold Storage. Vs.. JCIT have examined the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Steller Investment Ltd. and that of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Sophia Finance Ltd. and have held that in the case of Steller Investment Ltd. the ratio laid down by the Full Bench of the Delhi High Court was not overruled and it still holds the field. Whenever the issue was subscribed by closely connected persons of the assessee and the assessee has failed to prove the identity and creditworthiness, the addition u/s 68 ca....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nd as noticed below are true and correct. They are undoubtedly relevant and material facts for ascertaining creditworthiness and genuineness of the transactions. Proof or evidence to show the circulation in money was clearly rejected in view of the statutory provision of Section 68 of the Act and on the question of doctrine of source of source or origin of origin it was observed:- "We are conscious of the doctrine of source of source or origin of origin and also possible difficulty which an assessee may be faced with when asked to establish unimpeachable creditworthiness of the share subscribers. But this aspect has to be decided on factual matrix of each case and strict or stringent test may not be applied to arms length angel investors or normal public issues. Doctrine of source of source or origin of origin cannot be applied universally, without reference to the factual matrix and facts of each case. The said test in case of normal business transactions may be light and not vigorous. The said doctrine is applied when there is evidence to show that assessee may not be aware, could not have knowledge or was unconcerned as to the source of money paid or belonging to the third pa....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... of the Act. In view of the aforesaid discussion, it is submitted that the unmistakably apparent, patent, and conspicuous facts regarding the onus to establish the identity, creditworthiness and genuineness of the transactions were ignored by the first appellate authority. In the facts of the present case, section 68 of the Act was rightly invoked by the AO. It is submitted that the grounds of appeal raised above may kindly be answered in favour of the appellant Revenue and the addition u/s 68 of the Act made by the AO be upheld and confirmed. 15. On behalf of the assessee ld. Sr. Advocate Shri N.Venkatraman argued. He, in view of the above facts, argued that section 68 of the Act obligates every assessee, if explanation is sought for, to show proof both on the "Nature" and the "Source" of any sum found to be credited in the books of the said assessee. A proviso was introduced to the said section w.e.f 01.04.2013 obligating not only the assessee but the resident person in whose name such credit is recorded in the books of the company to offer their explanation about the nature and source of the sum so credited. The proviso would apply only to such assessee company not bein....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nseparable link or connection of the loans advanced by ICICI to Biometrix which Biometrix in the capacity of an investor has invested in the assessee company as against which assessee had issued 7.0 crores of CCPS. The perfect linkage unfolds itself so naturally if one would go through the list of dates and events right from the proposal and issuance of letter of intent by CCIT, the nature, the tests clearly gets passed as the evidence on record would show that the loan facility to Biometrix is meant only for an investment in the assessee's company CCPS. The Bank has advanced it as a loan to Biometrix. The approval documents, utilization, disbursement certificates and the FIRCs would clearly evidence the fact that the sums provided as loans by ICIC Bank, Singapore to Biometrix had alone been invested in the assessee's company. In fact the letter of intent dated 28.06.2007 make it clear that the loans advanced shall solely be invested by Biometrix in assessee's company for issuance of CCPS. The special resolution in the EGM and the Board Resolution by the respective boards evidently convey that the loan sourced by ICICI Bank, Singapore by Biometrix is meant only for inve....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....od of 24 months No No No No salary & Employee benefits (in USD) 102 950 Administrative expenses & other operating expenses (in USD) 5 995 772 38 937 226 29 760 302 110 377 287 Annual expenditure (in USD) 5 995 772 39 040 176 29 760 302 110 377 287 Negative tests: An entity is deemed not to be a shell/conduit company if: (4) it is listed on a recognised stock exchange of the Contracting State; or No No No No (5) its total annual expenditure on operations is equal to or more than S$200,000 in the immediately preceding period of 24 months from the date the gains arise Yes Yes Yes Yes salary & Employee beneifts (in USD) 102 950 Administrative expenses & other operating expenses (in USD) 5 995 772 38 937 226 29 543 845 110 377 287 Annual expenditure (in USD) 5 995 772 39 040 176 29 543 845 110 377 287 It was stated that the financial statements of Biometrix provided by the AO for the periods 30.09.2008, 30.09.2009, 31.12.2010 and 31.10.2011 is being f....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Agreement on the basis of valuation reports obtained for the specific purpose of purchase of the RGTIL CCPS as detailed below: S.No Date Value per RGTIL CCPS as per FEMA Pricing Guidelines for transfer from non-resident to resident (Rs.) Price at which RPTL purchased the RGTIL CCPS from non-resident (Rs.) 1 29-12-2008 77.72 75.00 2 25-06-2009 88.00 81.55 3 24-12-2009 92.80 85.88 4 31.05.2010 123.63 90.24 It was explained that the entire analysis and finding on this issue is misconceived both on law and in facts. The issue under consideration for the purpose of section 68 of the Act is to explain the nature and source of the sums credited in the books of the assessee. This has been explained more than adequately in the above paragraphs. The sale and purchase of CCPS by Biometrix and RPTL respectively has no relevance and even the remotest connection to pass the contemplated tests under section 68 of the Act. Any reliance on this segment of the transaction is totally alien and extraneous and in no way would aid in finding out the nature and source of the sums credited. In fact, an analysis on this seg....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ith the FEMA Pricing Guidelines prescribed by RBI whereas the valuation report and valuation certificate submitted by Biometrix to ICICI Bank are as per the requirement of the Facility Agreement. 21. In view of the above undisputed facts Ld. Counsel explained that the AO wrongly presumed the ownership of Biometrix as referred to in paragraph 6 of the assessment order. The balance sheet of Biometrix as furnished by the AO to the assessee indicates that the Reliance Genemedix Plc owns 99% and Strasbourg Holdings P Ltd owns 1% but not mentioned in the assessment order. Again the details furnished vide paragraph 7 is factually wrong as they do not relate to Biometrix as is evident from the balance sheet of Biometrix furnished by the AO. He argued that paragraph 10 of the assessment order refers to the investigation conducted by the investigation wing and the report furnished by DDIT (lnv)-Unit-11(1) dated 10.07.2012. The extract of the report as reproduced in paragraph 10 are enough to drop the present proceedings in toto as the report concedes the following facts: "That Biometrix had secured a loan of USD1.7 million from ICICI Bank, Singapore for investing in shares in the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... is a tax resident of Singapore and information provided by IRAS, Singapore does not dispute the legal and genuine existence of Biometrix. Unless the Protocol tests envisaged vide Article 1 and 3 of the India Singapore DTAA are passed, IRAS would not have approved the tax residency and legal existence of Biometrix. The Revenue officials of Singapore had not drawn any adverse inference against Biometrix as is evident from the list of documents and records furnished. The genuineness of a non-resident entity, if at all, can be doubted or proved by the Revenue officials who have legal superintendence over such entity. Vide paragraph 39 concedes that whatever possible documents that could be provided under due process of law have been provided by ICICI Bank and expressed inability to provide the bank account statement as per the Banking Act of Singapore, it is surprising that vide paragraph 38, the assessing officer holds that the investee companies including the assessee ought to have provided these bank statements of Biometrix. In spite of the fact that (i) the executed loan agreement between ICICI Bank and Biometrix, (ii) copies of disbursement notices, (iii) copies of actual swift r....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ction. In fact, once the identity of the party and the source of funding is known, it would automatically lead to the inference that the transaction is only genuine. The presumption vide paragraph 58 that the SPV is yet to be formed based on the extract of the minutes of the Credit Committee dated 28-06-2007 is factually incorrect. Biometrix has come into existence with effect from 15-05-2007 and therefore on the date of preparing of the minutes of the credit committee, the SPV was in fact in existence. The prudent commercial decision taken by the contracting parties cannot be questioned especially in a scenario where unless the loan transforms into an investment and necessary CCPS are issued, collaterals being the very instrument invested i.e. CCPS cannot be placed as a security. The observation vide paragraphs 103 and 104 are strange and overlooks the actual transactional pattern. It is not possible to give collateral without creating the instrument of CCPS in the first instance. CCPS can be issued only when investment flows into the Appellant entity and investment has flown in this transaction against a loan sanctioned by ICIC Bank, Singapore. The findings vide paragraph 105 is ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....vidence in support of the same which were already on record. My predecessor permitted the Appellant to file further submissions on the clarification sought for during the hearing. In pursuance of the same, the Appellants filed further submissions on 29/05/2015 and the same are extracted below: This Appeal was heard today (29.05.2015) by the Hon'ble Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Mumbai - 8. The matter was argued extensively and the Appellants placed on record written submissions along with Annexures and Support Documents and an executive summary in two sets. The Annexed Documents are all documents and records furnished by the Assessing Officer obtained from the IRAS, Singapore and ICICI Bank. Appellants filed an application dated 15.04.2015 seeking copies of all these documents and the same was furnished to the Appellants by the assessing Officer on the strength of this application. A copy of the said application dated 15.04.2015 filed before the assessing officer is hereto annexed as EXHIBIT-A. During the hearing Appellants placed reliance on the opinion dated 26.06.2001 to Overseas Indians Economic Forum issued by Mr. P. Chidambaram, former Finance Minister of ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ix to which the credit has been given i.e. Overseas Chinese Banking Corporation Limited (OCBC). Since it is a Dollar transfer, the same is done through Correspondent Banks viz. Bank of New York and J.P. Morgan Chase Bank as intermediaries. Copy of the FIRC (Page 276 Page 275-276 of the written submissions of RUL and RPTL respectively) issued by HDFC Bank Ltd. (Appellant's Bankers) confirming the receipt of the amount credited by Biometrix towards investment against which CCPS were issued. The Appellants also place on record a complete matrix co-relating utilization request, disbursement certificate, swift message and the FIRCs to demonstrate the unassailable fact that the loan granted by ICICI Bank, Singapore to Biometrix has been invested by Biometrix with the Appellants and other group entities of Reliance Mukesh Dhirubhai Ambani Group against which corresponding CCPS had been issued. A compilation of the utilisation request, disbursement letters, wire transfer swift messages and the FIRCs is hereto annexed as EXHIBIT-C. During the Hearing, the Appellants referred to the Assignment of Contract Rights Agreement dated 07.09.2007 entered into between Biometrix and ICICI....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ide above referred letter, your goodself has forwarded copies of written submissions and other documents filed by the assessee, with a direction to make further enquiry u/ s.250(4) of the Act on the addition of 700,00,00000 made under Sec.68 of the I.T Act; 1961 in the assessment order dated 31.03.2015. Your goodself has also asked this office to give reasonable opportunity to the assessee before finalizing the remand report. Before considering the documents, your kind attention is drawn to the fact that the AO had provided ample opportunity to the assessee vide order sheet notings dated 29.12.2014 & 27.03.2015 etc., to submit all the details and documentary evidences etc., in relation to the investment of 700 crores made by Biometrix Marketing Pvt. Ltd., Singapore in Compulsorily Convertible Preference Shares of the assessee company. All relevant information and explanations offered by the assessee company have been duly considered by the Assessing Officer during the assessment proceedings and also mentioned said fact in the assessment order. Thus, the assessee has availed sufficient opportunity to make its submissions in the matter, hence, it is not a case, where the assessee ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ion, the Assessing Officer reopened the assessment for A.Y.2008-09 on 04.01 .2013, after recording his satisfaction that income to the tune of 700 crores has escaped assessment. Subsequently, the Investigation Wing vide its letter dated 05.02.2014 forwarded its report, informing that Biometrix has taken a loan of USD 1.7 billion from ICICI Bank, Singapore and the same was routed to India through FDI by way of investment in Compulsorily Convertible Preference Shares {CCPS) issued by four unlisted private limited companies of Mukesh Ambani's Reliance Group. It has also been informed that said loan was repaid by Biometrix out of sale proceeds/remittances from Mukesh Ambani's group companies. However, the information on source of interest payment on the loan by Biometrix was not clear as reply from Singapore Authorities to the FT&TR Reference was awaited. It has been noticed from the details filed ICICI Bank Ltd., that Mukesh Ambani's Reliance group had approached the ICICI Bank for financial assistance by way of foreign loan for the purpose of expansion and diversification of various RIL group cases. The Credit Committee of ICICI Bank sanctioned the disbursal of USD ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....received, another reference seeking further information has been sent to the FT&TR Division, CBDT, New Delhi. However, in response to said request, the IRAS provided the bank statement only from the period 01.01.2008 onwards, citing that the information pertaining to earlier period could not be provided as per Singapore Exchange of Information Protocol. During the assessment proceedings, the AO noticed that the directors of Biometrix viz., Shri Dipesh Pramod Kumar Modi and Shri Ranade Vinay Arvind are residents of India and accordingly summons UI s.131 of the Act were issued, in response to which no-one attended, but Shri Ranade Vinay Arvind informed that he is residing in Singapore, hence it is not possible for him to attend. Thus, the Assessing Officer appears to have left with no option, but to summon the Competent Authority of ICICI Bank, Mumbai. However, the bank has also expressed its inability to produce the crucial bank account statement of Biometrix i.e., OCBC Bank Account and/or ICICI Bank account reflecting disbursal of loan. The Assessing Officer, after taking into consideration the entire facts of the case including the submission of the assessee and informati....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d all possible sources for enquiry for deciding the issue under consideration. While remanding the matter, no directions are given for making any specific enquiry by your goodself. In the light of the above, it is requested that this office may kindly be, given suitable directions with regard to further investigation, if any, to be carried out by this office so that further necessary action can be taken." 25. We find that the assessee filed reply in receipt of the remand report no. Dy.CIT-3(3)(1) /Remand Report/RULI2015-16 dated 4th August 2015 filed by the DCIT- 3(3)(1), Mumbai. We find that a sum of Rs. 700 crores was received by the assessee from Biometrix, a non-resident and a tax resident of Singapore by way of subscription to the Compulsorily Convertible Preference shares ("CCPS") issued by the assessee during the relevant assessment year and against the above remittance by Biometrix, the assessee has allotted 7.0 crore CCPS (Series A, B & C) at Rs. 100 each (face value Rs. 10 + premium Rs. 90 per CCPS). That for the purpose of the above investment, Biometrix had in turn sourced the funds from ICICI Bank, Singapore by way of a loan. That Biometrix had invested the loan so ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....07, the Board of Directors of Biometrix passed a resolution to accept the facility from ICICI Bank for the borrowal of USD 1.2 billion in 3 tranches. On 07.092007 Biometrix and ICICI Bank entered into a facility agreement. That Section 2 of the above referred Facility Agreement allowed to provide to the borrower, a loan in 3 tranches of USO 275 million USD 200 million and USD 225 million and for the specific purpose of investing in the CCPS of RGTIL, RPTL and RUL(assessee) in the ratio of approximately 33:8.5:7. On 07.09.2007, a deed of assignment of contract rights between Biometrix and ICICI Bank was entered into as a security for the company's liability to the Bank. On 14.09.2007, the special resolution passed by the assessee was filed with the Registrar of Companies vide Form 23. On 15.09.2007, Biometrix raised utilization request for USD 402,702,500 to ICICI Bank Singapore. On 19.09.2007, the above loan amount was disbursed by ICICI Bank, Singapore. The FIRC (Foreign Inward Remittance Certificate) dated 21.09.2007 issued by HDFC Bank, serial No. 420599 dated 2 1.09.2007 evidence receipt of INR 701.13 crores by the assessee and on 20.09.2007, the Board of Directors of....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e, lending only credence to the fact that Biometrix borrowed money for the purpose of investment in the CCPS issued by assessee. Further para 4(A)(xiii) and (xiv) of the remand report observes that ICICI Bank has expressed its inability to produce the bank account statement of Biometrix i.e. Overseas Chinese Banking Corporation ("OCBC Bank") account and/ or ICICI Bank account reflecting disbursal of the loan. The remand report has failed to take cognizance of the following evidence already on record. This is nothing but an additional piece of document or evidence in the light of documentary evidences such as facility agreement between Biometrix and ICICI Bank Singapore, utilization request made by Biometrix to ICICI Bank Singapore, disbursement letter issued by ICICI Bank Singapore to Biometrix, swift messages upon disbursement of loan by ICICI Bank Singapore to Biometrix approving, sanctioning and disbursing the said loan. However, even the expected evidence stated vide Para 4(A)(xiii) about proof of reflection of disbursement of loan in OCBC Bank account of Biometrix from ICICI Bank Singapore is also on record. The assessee have already filed the swift message issued by ICICI Ban....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nk is also on record. Consequently, even the remotest presumption will be legally not maintainable. As regards safeguards of the loan by the lender viz., ICICI Bank, Singapore, the bank has taken more than abundant care in ensuring that its risk is covered and mitigated through various clauses in the Facility Agreement which at this point in time is not relevant in the light of the express concession both vide para 10 of the assessment order and vide Para 4(A)(iii) of the remand report conceding the fact that Biometrix had in fact taken a loan and repaid the same in full. 28. Now the transaction under question is an investment of Rs. 700 crores by Biometrix into the assessee Company in the form of Compulsory Convertible Preference Shares ("CCPS"). We are of the view that the assessee has shown the relevant materials on records for the AO to get satisfied on the nature, source and genuineness of the investment transaction. In our view it remains undisputed that it is Biometrix which had invested into the assessee in the form of CCPS. Admittedly assessee has placed on record the complete sequence of transaction including the transfer of funds from the bank account of Biometr....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nese Banking Corporation, Singapore, SG Bank account No. 662001767301 of Biometrix. The date wise details of the disbursal are as under: (page 711 of the paper book) SL No. Date Amount in USD 1. 18.092007 38,35,00,000 2. 03.10.2007 22,00,00,000 3. 16.10.2007 57,66,25,325 4. 12.12.2007 49,25,70,000 Total 1,67,26,95,325 As per the financial statements of Biometrix for the period ending September 2008 shows secured term loan of USD 1,70,00,00,000 has been obtained to finance the purchase of Company's Long term investment. (page 712 of the paper book) The remand report also details out facts as under:- "4(A)(vii) The ICICI Bank secured the loan by (i) creating exclusive charge over all cash flows and assets excluding the CCPS and CCDs invested in from the proceeds of the loan; (ii)Non disposal undertaking on the shareholding of the borrower company in a form and manner acceptable to IC/CI Bank and (iii) assignment of Put Option with respect of sale/transfer of CCPS/CCDs. " (page 170 of the paper book) (emphasis supplied) We have also raised a query as to whether Biometrix had repaid the loan to ICICI Bank e....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rials on record is not in dispute before us. No new materials were relied upon either by the Revenue or by the assessee before us. The assessee argued before us and filed detailed submissions and brought out various aspects of the case based on the very same materials on record which stands undisputed during the entire proceedings viz., a) That Biometrix invested in the CCPS issued by the assessee; b) That Biometrix borrowed from ICICI bank, Singapore; c) That Biometrix secured the loan given by ICICI Bank, Singapore by assigning the investment agreement and put and call option agreement entered into with the investee companies and option obligors respectively; d) That Biometrix has repaid the loan to ICICI Bank out of remittance from Mukesh Ambani group; e) That the transaction in question can never be construed as bogus transaction; f) That complete financial flow commencing from ICICI Bank finding its way to the assessee disclose the nature source and genuineness of the transaction; g) That contemporaneous transactional documents also disclose the nature source and genuineness of the transaction; h) That Biometrix genuinely existed in Singapore and was no....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... bank statement of Biometrix from ICICI Bank was actually invested in the CCPS issued by the assessee. The ld. Counsel for the assessee on the other hand furnished a chart showing the flow of funds from ICICI Bank, Singapore to Biometrix and from Biometrix to the assessee based on evidence in the form of utilization requests, disbursal certificate, swift messages and foreign inward remittance certificate. It was also brought to our notice the AO in the assessment order has recorded reasons for the non-availability of bank statements of Biometrix viz., ICICI Bank has not furnished the statements due to banking secrecy laws under the Banking Act of Singapore and Inland Revenue Authority of Singapore has not furnished the bank statements since the exchange of information protocol was effective only for periods staring 01-01-2008 and not for earlier periods. The ld. CIT(A) has also linked the flow of funds from ICICI Bank, Singapore to the bankers of Biometrix viz., OCBC Bank, Singapore and from OCBC Bank, Singapore to the bankers of the assessee viz., HDFC Bank, India based on the swift messages and held that what can be ascertained by bank statements can as well be satisfactorily asc....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....go through precedents cited before us. We find that the burden of proving the source of cash credit is on the assessee. When a cash credit entry appears in the assessee's books of accounts, it is assessee's legal obligation to explain the source of such credit entry. This has been clearly held by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case Sreelekha Banerjee vs. CIT (1963) 49 ITR 112 (SC). But, if the assessee offers an explanation about the cash credit, the department can put the assessee to proof of his explanation and if assessee fails to tender evidence or brukes an enquiry, then the AO is justified in the rejecting the explanation and holding the income from undisclosed sources or unexplained cash credit. But, Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case Parimisetti Seetharamanna vs. CIT (1965) 57 ITR 532 (SC) has held that the burden of proof casted upon the assessee to prove the source, the nature and the character and the credit would apply to a case where the source of receipt is disclosed by the assessee and there is no dispute about the truth of that disclosure and, in such event, the revenue would not be entitled to raise any inference that the receipt is assessable to tax as undisclosed in....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the findings of fact and the material on record must support the claim of the revenue. Moreover there should be some direct nexus between the confusion of fact arrived at by the revenue and the primary facts upon which that conclusion is based. This view is taken by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case CIT vs. Daulat Ram Rawatmull (1973) 87 ITR 349 (SC). But in the present case this is not the case of revenue rather the assessee able to prove conclusively that the CCPS issued by it to Biometrix is directly financed by ICICI Bank, Singapore. In view of these facts and circumstance and precedents cited above, we are of the considered view that the Assessing Officer has made this addition of unexplained cash credit without any basis and CIT (A) has rightly deleted the same on the basis of evidences and facts. We confirm the order of CIT(A) and the appeal of Revenue is dismissed. 35. As conceded by both the sides, the facts are exactly identical in the appeal of Reliance Ports & Terminals Ltd in ITA No.223/M/2016 for the AY 2008-09 and hence taking a consistent view, we confirm the order CIT(A) in this appeal also and the appeal of Revenue is also dismissed. 36. In the result, both ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....01 1 Notification (Transmission] of Original sent to SWIFT (ACK) Notwork Delivery Status : Network Ack Priority/Delivery Message Input Reference Swift Input Sender ICICSGSGXXX ICICI BANK LIMITED : Normal 1424 071016ICICSGSGAXXX1549068432 Message Header : FIN 103 Single Customer Credt Transfer 4 SINGAPORE SG Receiver IRVTUS3NXXX BANK OF NEW YORK NEW YORK, NY US" 20: Sender's Reference BIOMETRIX 238: Bank Operation Code CRED Message Text 32A: Val Dte/Curr/Interbnk Settld-Amt Date Currency Amount 16 October 2007 #576625325, #" : USD (US DOLLAR) : 50K: Ordering Customer-Name & Address BIOMETRIX MARKETING PRIVATE LIMITED 20 CECIL STREET, 14-01 EQUITY PLAZA," SINGAPORE-049705 /851019740 56A: Intermediary Institution - BIC CHASUS33 JPMORGAN CHASE BANK; N.A." NEW YORK, NY US" 57A: Account With Institution - BIC OCBCSGSG " OVERSEA-CHINESE BANKING CORPORATION LIMITED SINGAPORE SG 59: Beneficiary Customer-Name & Addr /662001767301 BIOMETRIX MARKETING PRIVATE LIMITED 7LA: Details of Charges OUR 72: Sender to Receiver Information /B....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....KY NADIA SLDO HUA! Document 5 27 HDFC BANK HDFC BANK LTD. HDFC Bank House Senapati Bapet Meta Lower Parel (West) Mumbai 400 013. Certificate of Foreign Inward Remittance Serial No.: 427679 "PLEASE PRESERVE THIS CAREFULLY AS NO DUPLICATE WOULD BE ISSUED UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES" Date: 12/10/2007 Our Reference No. 540119 We airtify that we have received the following remittance and proceeds thereof were paid a) to the beneficiary (name and addres): RELIANCE PORT AND TERMINALS LIMITED on 11/10/2007. By credit to a/o number: 0800310008701, with our FORT, office for beneficiary's sccount. Remarks INVR546110 Nanie and place of residence of remitter Blometrix Marketing Pvt Limited Singapore, Name end eddire bank Ovens Chinese Be DO./TT./NRE A/a. No,::.6438000282FS/ Foreign currency amount USD 210000000.00/ teh Limited Eg dated. 11/10/2007 Rupee equivalent 8303295000.00 (Rupees eight billion three hundred three million bio! dred ninety five thousand and peise zero only.). Favouring: RELIANCE PORT AND TERMINALS LIMITED Rate applied Purpose of remittance as stated by Remitter ....