Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2020 (5) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2020 (5) TMI 409 - AT - Income TaxAddition u/s 68 - Disallowance of “share premium” on the grounds that the assessee has not filed the valuation report pertaining to the value of the land for which share premium @ ₹ 90 /- per share has been received - HELD THAT:- Premium paid by the share holders is not without a proper reasons. The company is in possession of the land and also going ahead with development of residential complex which are reasons sufficient for payment of the premium. We are unable to concur with the finding of the Ao that the worth of the assessee at the time of issue of shares was negative - AO has ignored the fact on record that the assessee has purchased land at the cost of ₹ 3.19 crores at Village Khirki Daula which adequately supports the share premium raised by the assessee. There is no iota of evidence about the concealment or plough back of undisclosed income to the assessee - AO has not disputed the identity, genuineness and creditworthiness of the share holders. Hence, the invocation of the provisions of Section 68 for the simple reason of non filing the valuation report by the assessee and by not referring the cost of the land to the DVO, and without bringing any material on record to fulfill the criteria of Section 68, cannot be justified in this case.- Decided against revenue. Addition u/s 2( 22)(e) - Deemend dividend addition - substantial interest or not - HELD THAT:- As per the provisions of the Act it needs to meet the conditions in the instant case that Sh. Allimudin should have been a share holder in the companies paying the amount and also he should have been having a substantial interest in the assessee company. Section 2(32 ) refers to person who has a substantial interest in the company in relation to a company means a person who is the beneficial owner of the shares not being shares entitled to a fixed rate of dividend whether with are without a right to participate in profits carrying not less than 25 % of voting power. In order to tax the receipt, it has to be proved that the amounts received has been utilized by the assessee company could have been distributed as dividend by the lending company. We find that this is not the fact in the case of the instant assessee. Coupled with this fact, since, it has been proved that the advances are given for the business purpose, we hold that the provisions of Section 2(22)(e) of the Act are not attracted in the case of the assessee. - Decided against revenue.
|