2015 (8) TMI 604 - ITAT DELHI

Addition on issued capital u/s 68 - share application money - Held that:- In the present case, it is an admitted fact that the assessee received a sum of ₹ 1.70 crores from M/s Shalini Holdings Ltd. and ₹ 20 lacs from M/s Apoorva Leasing Finance & Investment Pvt. Ltd. on account of share capital. Both the above said companies were registered with ROC and were regularly assessed with the Income Tax Department,copy of assessment order of the assessment year 2010-11 of both the companies is placed which clearly established the identity of both the parties. The aforesaid parties applied in proper application form for allotment of the shares of the assessee company,the amount was paid to the assessee through account payee cheque/RTGS which is reflected in their respective bank account. After receiving the share application money, the shares were allotted to both the parties and copy of Form No. 2 was filed with Registrar of Companies with respective resolution, statement, copies of which are placed and the receipt of the Registrar of companies of the assessee’s compilation. From the above documents, it is clear that the companies who applied for the shares of the assessee were inexistence, those were assessed to tax and filing their regular return of income. The share application money was drawn from their respective bank account and deposited in the bank account of the assessee. Both the companies applied the shares in proper form, the shares were allotted and information was given to the Registrar of Companies after allotment of the shares on the basis of resolution of Board of Directors, therefore, the transaction was genuine. In the present case, the assessee discharged the onus cast upon it to prove the identity and creditworthiness of the share applicant and genuineness of the transaction. Therefore, the addition made by the AO and sustained by the ld. CIT(A) was not justified. - Decided in favour of assessee.

Addition of adhoc basis towards out car running & maintenance expenses and out of depreciation of the cars - Held that:- In the present case, it is an admitted fact that the assessee maintained the books of accounts which were duly audited and no discrepancy was pointed out in those books of accounts which had also been accepted by the AO. In the instant case, the AO although presumed that the personal use of the vehicle was not ruled out, however no specific instance was pointed out where the vehicles were not used for business purposes or those were used for personal purposes. In the instant case, the assessee is a juristic person which cannot use the vehicles itself and if at all the vehicles were used for the personal purposes by the Directors or the employees then the expenses can be considered as the perquisite in their respective hands but no disallowance can be made in the hands of the assessee. Moreover, no specific instance of personal use was pointed out either by the AO or by the ld. CIT(A) and the vouchers maintained for the expenses had been accepted. Therefore, the disallowance made by the AO and sustained by the ld. CIT(A) was not justified. Accordingly, the impugned addition is deleted. - Decided in favour of assessee.