SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(ITAT) 6159

INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH)
C.N. Prasad, Judicial Member, M. Balaganesh, Accountant Member
Bestech Hospitalities Pvt. Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
DCIT Faridabad – Respondent
ITA No. (not specified) AY 2011-12



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Sh. R. S. Ahuja, CA
For the Respondents:Sh. Push Deep Singh, Advocate, Smt. Kranti, CIT DR

Under s.68, assessee discharges onus for share capital by proving identity, genuineness via documents/banking, creditworthiness; burden shifts to revenue to disprove with evidence, not mere suspicion or reports. (32 words)

Headnote:(A) Income Tax Act, 1961 - Section 68 - Share capital/share application money - Assessee received share application money from NBFC investor company linked to alleged accommodation entry provider - Assessee discharged onus by providing PAN, ITR acknowledgments, bank statements, confirmations, board resolutions, balance sheets, and transactions through banking channels - AO verified via notices u/s 133(6) and summons u/s 131, with investor complying and directors appearing - No incriminating documents or money trail linking assessee to bogus transactions - Investor upheld as genuine by NCLT, appellate forums, and prior Tribunal/High Court decisions despite SFIO probe dismissal - High share premium justified by assessee's growth prospects; revenue failed to prove funds emanated from assessee - Addition u/s 68 deleted as revenue did not discharge burden to disprove genuineness after assessee's prima facie proof. (Paras 13-26)

(B) Section 68 - Onus and burden of proof - Assessee proves identity, genuineness (banking channels), creditworthiness (financials, net worth); onus shifts to AO to investigate and disprove, cannot rely solely on investigation reports without evidence - No need to prove source of source; revenue must show nexus to assessee's undisclosed funds - Presumption of genuineness for regulated NBFC investments absent contrary statutory findings. (Paras 7, 9, 14, 24-25)

Facts of the case:
Assessee company engaged in hotels/restaurants received share application money treated as bogus by AO u/s 68 due to investor links to entry provider, high premium, poor financial profile - CIT(A) deleted addition for one investor, sustained for NBFC - Tribunal examined documents, verifications, judicial precedents upholding investor.

Findings of Court:
Addition of share application money deleted; transactions genuine, assessee discharged onus u/s 68; revenue's suspicions unsubstantiated by evidence or investigation.

Issues: Whether assessee discharged onus u/s 68 for share capital from NBFC with entry provider director; validity of addition based on investigation reports, high premium, without money trail.

Ratio Decidendi: Once assessee proves identity, genuineness via documents/banking, creditworthiness via financials, AO must disprove with evidence, not presumption or general reports; regulated NBFC investments presumed genuine absent proof of illegality; onus shifts post-prima facie discharge.

Result: Assessee's appeal allowed; impugned addition deleted. (Para 27)

Table of Content
1. ao treats share capital from entry providers as bogus u/s 68. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5)
2. assessee proves identity, genuineness, creditworthiness of investors. (Para 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11)
3. ao must independently verify beyond investigation reports. (Para 12 , 13 , 14 , 15)
4. apoorva leasing upheld as genuine by nclt, courts, tribunals. (Para 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20)
5. once onus discharged, revenue bears burden to prove sham transaction. (Para 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26)
6. addition deleted; assessee's appeal allowed. (Para 27)

ORDER

PER C.N. PRASAD, JM,

This appeal is preferred by the Assessee against the order dated 30.10.2023 of the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-3 (hereinafter referred to as CIT(A)), Gurgaon for the Assessment Year 2011-12 in partly sustaining the addition made by the Assessing Officer U/s 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’).

2. The relevant facts emanating from the record and submissions are that the Assessee is a Private Limited company incorporated on 03-07-1995 and admittedly is engaged in the business of construction and running hotels and restaurants. Search and seizure proceedings were carried out in the group cases of M/s Bestech, Gurgaon. The assessee was also covered u/s 132(1) of the Act as a part of the said search proceedings. Accordingly notice u/s 153A of the Act was issued in this case on 18.03.2013. In response to the said notice the assessee filed its return of income on 22.08.2013 declaring NIL income. The AO had observed from the balance sheet of the assessee, that it has received following share capital/share application money during the financial year 2010-11 relevant to the assessment year 2011- 12 as under:

2.1 In the course of assessment proceedings the AO required the assessee to explain the source of the above share capital. Ongoing through the documents furnished by the Assessee in this respect and other material available on record, it was observed by the AO that M/s Apoorva Leasing Finance & Investment Co. Ltd was managed and controlled by one Shri S.K. Jain, an accommodation entry provider. Further M/s Micro Management Ltd has received share capital/ share premium from M/s Transnational Growth Fund Ltd and the said company M/s Transnational Growth Fund Ltd was also managed and controlled by Shri S.K. Jain.

2.2 As per the AO, independent search proceedings u/s 132 have also been carried out in the case of Shri S.K. Jain by the Investigation Wing, Delhi and it was alleged that Shri S.K Jain through various paper companies such as M/s Apoorva Leasing Finance & Investment Co. Ltd, M/s Transnational Growth Fund Ltd etc. were engaged in providing accommodation entries.

3. With regard to investment from M/s Apoorva Leasing Finance and Investment Co. Ltd it was found that it has applied for 10 lacs shares @ 1000/- i.e., total share application money of Rs.100 crores; out of which an amount of Rs.25 crores was received on 16.02.2011 (25% total share capital). However no further payment was received. Further, Shri S.K. Jain is one of the Directors of M/s Apoorva Leasing. During the course of assessment proceedings statement of one of Directors of M/s Apoorva Leasing was also recorded by the AO, copy of the same was provided to the Assessee. According to AO, M/s Apoorva Leasing has not shown any income it its return of income for AY 2011-12 and in its bank account there were credit entries immediately before date of giving share application money to the Assessee. Further in its balance sheet as on 31.03.2010, it has got share premium of Rs.94,99,90,500/- and fresh share capital introduced of Rs.9,99,99,900/- during FY 2009-10 itself. It was thus concluded by AO that it was beyond human probability that M/s Apoorva Leasing could mobilize such huge share premium in the ratio of 1:99 on the basis of such financial profile. It has no fixed assets and in it’s profit and loss account no business activities have been shown to have carried

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top