SHARE

| Oct-13-2021

Genuine issue of Shares to Shareholders not to be considered under Anti-Abuse Provisions of the IT Act

In Income Tax Officer v. Shri Rajeev Ratanlal Tulshyan [I.T.A. No.5748/Mum/2017 A.Y. 2014-15 dated October 01, 2021] [along with cross objection filed by Shri Rajeev Ratanlal Tulshyan (“the Respondent”)], the Income Tax Officer ("the Appellant") filed an appeal for the Assessment Year (“AY”) 2014-2015 arising out of an Order passed by Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Mumbai [“CIT (A)”] dated July 16, 2017 in the matter of the assessment framed by the Learned Assessing Officer (“AO”) under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ("the IT Act") on December 30, 2016.

In the case, the Appellant raised the following grounds:

  1. The CIT (A) erred in restricting the addition of ₹ 42,87,75,000/- to ₹ 1,50,87,320/- under section 56(2)(vii)(c)(ii) of the IT Act, without appreciating the fact that the addition was made as income from other sources totaling to ₹ 42,87,75,000/-.
  1. The CIT (A) erred in restricting the addition without appreciating the fact that the Respondent had failed to discharge its onus of explaining the charging at ₹ 10.85 per share.

In the cross-objection filed by the Respondent, the following grounds were raised:

  1. The CIT (A) erred in not appreciating that the Respondent had applied for and was allotted shares in right issue only to the extent to which he was entitled to in proportion of his existing-shareholding and therefore section 56(2)(vii)(c)(ii) of the IT Act ought not have been invoked.
  1. The CIT (A) erred in not appreciating that the Respondent had been in fact "allotted" the right shares on creation which cannot be equated to as "received" as envisaged under Section 56(2)(vii)(c)(ii) of the IT Act.
  1. The CIT (A) erred in facts and law in not appreciating that the rise in shareholding of the Respondent is substantially due to inaction on part of his relatives to exercise the right issue of shares offered to them and that the addition made to that extent ought to have been excluded from the rigors of section 56(2)(vii)(c)(ii) of the IT Act.

After taking all the facts and evidences in perusal, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (“ITAT”), Mumbai Bench pronounced its judgment in line with the intent of legislatures, the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) issued an Circular No. 10/2018 on December 31, 2018 clarifying that keeping in view the legislative intent to apply anti-abuse measures, Section 56 (2) of the IT Act shall not be applicable in case of receipt of shares as a result of fresh issuance of shares, including by way of issue of bonus shares, rights shares and preference shares. Inferring from these observations, the Tribunal held that the anti-abuse provisions under section 56(2) of the IT Act shall not be applicable to genuine issue of shares to the existing shareholders.

(Author can be reached at info@a2ztaxcorp.com)

DISCLAIMER: The views expressed are strictly of the author and A2Z Taxcorp LLP. The contents of this article are solely for informational purpose and for the reader’s personal non-commercial use. It does not constitute professional advice or recommendation of firm. Neither the author nor firm and its affiliates accepts any liabilities for any loss or damage of any kind arising out of any information in this article nor for any actions taken in reliance thereon. Further, no portion of our article or newsletter should be used for any purpose(s) unless authorized in writing and we reserve a legal right for any infringement on usage of our article or newsletter without prior permission.

Similar reads

TDS Credit shall be given for the assessment year for which income is assessable

The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi (“the ITAT”) in Archana Airways Ltd v. ITO [I.T.A. No. 8755/DEL/2019 dated November 2, 2022] held that Tax Deduction at Source (“TDS”) credit shall be given to

Oct-13-2021

Read More

Interest paid on belated payments of service tax is allowable for deduction u/s 37(1) IT Act

The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai (“the ITAT”) in Prince Holdings Madras (P) Ltd v. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax [ITA No.: 524/Chny/2021 dated November 2, 2022] held that the interest

Oct-13-2021

Read More

In case of change of AO, newly appointed AO shall continue proceeding from the stage where they were left by earlier AO

The Hon’ble Supreme Court ("the Supreme Court”) in the case of Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax New Delhi v. M/s Mastech Technologies Pvt. Ltd. (Civil Appeal No. No. 8077 OF 2022) dated November 03, 202

Oct-13-2021

Read More

TDS credit to be allowed to Employee even if not deposited by the Employer

The Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in Kartik Vijaysinh Sonavane v. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax [R/Special Civil Application No. 6193 of 2021 dated November 15, 2021] directed the Income-Tax

Oct-13-2021

Read More

ITAT directed AO to delete the additions made on account of capitalization of royalty expenses as they were revenue in nature

The Hon’ble Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi (“ITAT”) in the matter of Honda Motorcycle and Scooter India Pvt. Ltd. v. ACIT, Circle: 4 (1) New Delhi [ITA. No. 477/Del/2021 dated November 09, 2021

Oct-13-2021

Read More