Income Tax

Book entry transfer of share application money to capital reserve account not benefit u/s 28(iv) – ITAT

Book entry transfer of share application money to capital reserve account could not be regarded as benefit or perquisite arising in course of business u/s.28(iv) – ITAT

 

Book entry transfer of share application money to capital reserve 

ABCAUS Case Law Citation:
ABCAUS 2047 (2017) (08) ITAT

The Grievance:
The present appeal was preferred by the Revenue against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)] deleting 

Assessment Year :  2012-13

Brief Facts of the Case:

The assessee company was engaged in the business of investment in shares, properties and finance related activities. The Assessing Officer (AO) perused the balance sheet filed by the assessee and observed that the assessee, during the relevant year, had transferred Rs.44,25,000/- from the Share application money account to Capital reserve account.

During the course of assessment proceeding, assessee filed written submissions stating that the share application money of Rs.44,25,000/- was received from one private limited company during Financial Year 2004-05 through banking channel and the assessee, during the year, had merely passed a Journal book entry on transferring the share application money account to Capital Reserve account.

The AO was not convinced with the submissions of the assessee and made the addition u/s.28(iv) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) holding that the benefit had arisen in the business of the assessee. The findings of the AO were as under:

(a) There was no evidence on record that the amount was received from the said private limited company in FY 2004-05.

(b) There was no evidence that the amount was towards share application money

(c) There was no evidence that the amount was forfeited due to non performance of action on the part of company giving the share application money

(d) Mere transfer of amount to capital reserve account did not ipso facto absolved the assessee from its onus to explain the transaction with corresponding evidences.

(e) When the amount was transferred to capital reserve account, it had resulted in benefit arising from the business carried out by it.

(f) Therefore the amount was squarely taxable u/s. 28(iv) of the Act

Matter carried to the CIT(A) and he deleted the addition made observing that the assessee had merely passed a book entry by transferring the share application account to Capital reserve account and as the share capital/premium was in nature of capital field, it could not be regarded that any benefit or perquisite had arisen to the appellant in course of business u/s.28(iv) of the Act.

Observations made by the Tribunal:

The ITAT observed that the controversy is covered by the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court wherein it was held that the amount on account of share capital received from the various shareholders ought not to have been treated as business income.

It was also noted that similar issue had been decided by the Tribunal in another case.

Held:
It was held that CIT(A) was justified in deleting the addition

Download Full Judgment

Share

Recent Posts

  • Income Tax

Non-deduction of TDS does not make transaction as unexplained in the hands of deductee – ITAT

Mere non-deduction of TDS by the deductor on a transaction does not change the character of the transaction to make…

11 hours ago
  • ICAI

Last date to submit MEF 2026-27 extended to 09.09.2026

ICAI has extended the last date to online submit Multipurpose Empanelment Form (MEF)- 2026-27 from 29th August 2026 to 9th…

14 hours ago
  • Income Tax

Validity of demand u/s 156 for default u/s 115-O, if assessment order u/s 143(3) has Nil demand

Can a demand notice be issued u/s 156 for non-payment of Dividend tax u/s 115-O, when as per assessment order…

2 days ago
  • Income Tax

Issue already examined and adjudicated by CIT(Appeals), can’t be reopened on same set of facts

The issue already examined and adjudicated by the quasi-judicial authority, i.e., CIT(Appeals), cannot be reopened on the same set of…

3 days ago
  • Income Tax

TDS can’t be denied for non deposit of tax deducted by the deductor – High Court

One TDS is deducted, credit has to follow, failure of deductor to deposit the amount to the credit of the…

4 days ago
  • Income Tax

Cash withdrawal from bank can’t be taxed u/s 69C as unexplained expenditure – ITAT

Merely because assessee did not explain purpose of cash withdrawal from bank, it can not be taxed u/s 69C as…

4 days ago