TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (6) TMI 219
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r section 143(3) read with section 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 pertaining to Assessment Year 2018- 19. The word 'Act' herein this order would mean Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. The Revenue has raised following grounds of appeal:- 1 Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition on account of Share capital with premium received from M/s Energen Infra (Mauritius) Ltd treated as unexplained cash credit u/s 68 amounting to Rs. 6,30,09,585/-. 3. The only issue raised by the appellant revenue in this case is regarding the deletion of addition of Rs. 6,30,09,585/- under Section 68 of the Act by the ld. First Appellate Authority. The ld. DR Smt. Ankush Kalra, took us t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the addition made by the AO. 4. Ld. Sr. DR, Ms. Kalra, vehemently argued alluding towards the same set off incorrect and incomplete documents. It was argued that the said documents cannot be deemed as fulfilling the requirement of section 68 and hence the relief accorded was excessive and erroneous. 5. The ld. Counsel for the assessee reiterated the same set of argument taken before the Ld. First Appellate Authority submitting that as the RBI has approved its transaction of inward remittances qua the share application money, no blame of incomplete compliance can be placed upon its shoulders. 6. We have heard the rival submissions in the light of material placed on record. The principal issue under consideration is appropriateness ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
...., being a resident in whose name such credit is recorded in the books of such company also offers an explanation about the nature and source of such sum so credited; and (b) such explanation in the opinion of the Assessing Officer aforesaid has been found to be satisfactory: Provided also that nothing contained in the first proviso or second proviso shall apply if the person, in whose name the sum referred to therein is recorded, is a venture capital fund or a venture capital company as referred to in clause (23FB) of section 10." 7. A perusal of the above shows that an assessee is required to explain the AO, the troika conditions prescribed in section 68 vis of identity of the lender, his creditworthiness and the genuinen....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... because the purpose of the two set of rules is different. At the outset, it is not known whether the RBI had approved inward remittances of shares considering the same set of documents produced before the ld. AO or on the basis of some other documents. No arguments have been adduced to allude that same set of documents were given to R.B.I. Notwithstanding the same, merely because the RBI had approved inward remittances considering a particular set of documents would not constitute compliance to provisions of section 68. Within the meaning of section 68 of the Act, a taxpayer is required to unequivocally prove the identity of the lender, his creditworthiness and the genuineness of the transaction. It is settled principle of law that a docum....