Just a moment...

Top
Help
🎉 Festive Offer: Flat 15% off on all plans! →⚡ Don’t Miss Out: Limited-Time Offer →
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / RSS

2021 (4) TMI 762

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ue of shares at such high premium by assessee company whose net worth is negative and purchase of the same by M/s. Anyushka Investments Pvt. Ltd. (both assessee company and AIPL has common directors) is unacceptable. 3. The appellant prays that the order of the CIT(A) on the grounds be set aside and that of the Assessing Officer be restored. Apropos ground No. 1 3. Brief facts during the relevant previous year, the assessee received a loan of Rs. 1,18,00,000/- from one M/s. Anyushka Investments Private Limited (AIPL). The Assessing Officer found that AIPL was a related company. The shareholding of the assessee and AIPL were as under (as at 1.4.2009):- Company Name of the share holder Share holding M/s. Anyushka Investments Private Limited Suyash Pandey 51%   Bhavna Pandey 49% M/s. Everglades Minerals & Reserve Pvt. Ltd. Suyash Pandey 50%   Bhavna Pandey 50% The Assessing Officer observed that both Suyash Pandey and Bhavna Pandey held more than 20% voting power in the payer Company (AIPL) and more than 20% in the payee company (assessee). The Assessing Officer was of the view that the loan of Rs. 1,18,00,000/- advanced by AIPL to the assessee-company fe....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he precedent as above, we do not find any infirmity in the order of learned CIT(A), accordingly this ground raised by the revenue stands dismissed. Apropos ground No. 2 10. Brief facts are that during the relevant previous year, the appellant credited Rs. 2,00,00,000/- in its books. The assessee claimed that the sum represented share application money; that out of that sum, Rs. 400,000/- represented share capital and the remaining sum represented share premium that shares of Rs. 10 each had been issued a premium of Rs. 490/- each. The assessee claimed that the sum of Rs. 2 crores was received from AIPL. The course of the assessment proceedings, notice under section 133(6) of the Act was issued to AIPL calling for details pertaining to its transactions with the assessee. In its reply, AIPL confirmed having invested the sum of Rs. 2 crore in shares in the appellant company. As regards the source, AIPL submitted that the source was accumulated reserve & surplus of the company. The Assessing Officer observed that the onus to establish the identity of the person from whom the money was received, his capacity to pay the money and the genuineness of the transaction was on the assessee. ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....fact the AR pointed out, in para 5.2 of the assessment order, the AO has mentioned that the AIPL had in response to notice issued u/s. 133(6) confirmed the transaction. 13. He further noted that assessee has filed following documents in support of genuineness of the money received from AIPL. Copies of Balance Sheet, Profit And Loss A/c. and Directors Report of the appellant of A.Y. 2007-08 to A.Y. 2010-11:- a) Copies of Balance sheet, profit and loss account and directors report of the appellant for A.Y. 2007-08 to A.Y. 2010-11 b) Copies of Income Tax Return, Balance Sheet, Profit And Loss A/c. and Directors Report of AIPL of A.Y. 2007-08 to A.Y. 2010-11 c) Copies of ROC Returns of AIPL for A.Y. 2008-09 to A.Y. 2011-12 d) Copies of ROC Returns of the appellant for A.Y. 2008-09 to A.Y. 2011-12 He noted that assessee has pleaded that AO did not call for these documents specifically hence assessee did not have the opportunity to submit the same before assessing officer. The learned CIT(A) noted that these documents were sent to the AO as required under rule 46A of the Act but despite several reminders the assessing officer did not comment upon the additional evidence. Hence,....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....records. Learned Counsel of the assessee made following submission:- "1. During the year under consideration, the Appellant has received equity share application money from the following Investor's companies: S. No. Name of investor's companies Date of incorporation PAN Qty. Amount of Share capital Amount of Premium Total Amount 1 M/s. Anyushka Investments Private Limited 08/08/1996 AACCA8423E 40,000 4,00,000 1,96,00,000 2,00,00,000   Grand Total     40,000 4,00,000 1,96,00,000 2,00,00,000 a. During the assessment proceedings, the AO asked the Appellant to give the certain information/explanations as stated in the notice dated February 19, 2016 (refer page No. 12 to 20 of PB-II). In response to the said notices, the Appellant has filed the following information/documents during the assessment proceedings vide letters dated March 30, 2016 (refer page No. 1 to 4 of PB-I). b. Company's Master Data like company name, Company Identification Number (CIN), date of incorporation, registered address, e-mail ID, etc. of Investor's companies downloaded from www.mca.gov.in c. Name, Address, PAN, Income-tax Jurisdiction, etc. of ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....c. of the Investor's companies; iv. Certificate of Incorporation of the Investor's companies; v. Form of application for equity shares filled by the Investor's companies, vi. Copies of Allotment Advices given by the Appellant to the Investor's companies; vii. Copy of Director Report, Audit Report and Balance Sheet of the Investor's b. The company's Master Data, Income Tax Jurisdiction details and financials of the Investor's companies proved the identity as well as financial capacity i.e. creditworthiness of the Investor's companies. Hence, the aforesaid document has proved the identity of the shareholders. ii) As regards the Genuineness of the transaction; The Appellant has received the share application money through proper banking channels as the funds were received through account payee cheques. Please see bank statements filed with the AO. The Appellant submit that the bank statement and other documents submitted before the AO proved the genuineness of the transactions. (Refer PB-II page No. 22-28). iii) As regards creditworthiness of the shareholders; The financials of the Investor's companies proved the identity as well a....