IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “RAJKOT” BENCH, RAJKOT [Conducted through E-Court at Ahmedabad] BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMEBR & SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMEBR आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 171/Rjt/2016 ( Assess ment Ye ar : 2012-13) De pu ty C o mmi ss io ner o f In co me T ax Cir cl e- 2, Ja mn ag ar ब म/ V s . Sh ree Sw a min ar ay an Inf ra st ru ct ur e Pri vat e Li mit ed Pra mu k h Co mp le x, Na gna th G at e, Ne ar Ha la r Ho us e, Ja mn ag ar यी ल सं./ ीआ आर सं./P A N / G IR N o . : A A J C S 6 5 4 9 N (अपील Appellant) . . ( य / Respondent) अपील र स /Appellant by : Shri S. S. Rathi, Sr. D.R. य क र स / Respondent by : Sh ri Me hu l Ra np ur a, A. R. स क र D a t e o f H e a r i n g 14/03/2022 !"# क र /D a t e o f P r o n o u n c e m e n t 25/03/2022 ORDER PER MAHAVIR PRASAD, JM: The captioned ap peal has been filed at th e instan ce of the Rev enue ag ainst the ord er of the Co mmissioner of Inco me Tax ( Ap peals), J amn ag ar (‘CIT( A)’ in sh ort), dated 17.02.2016 arising in the assess ment order dated 17.03.2015 ITA No. 171/Rjt/2016 [DCIT vs. Shri Swaminarayan Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd.] AY 2012-13 - 2 - passed by th e As sessing Officer ( AO) under s. 143(3) of the Inco me Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) co ncerning AY. 20 12-13. 2. The grounds of appeal r ais ed by Rev enue r ead as under: “ 1 . T h e L d . C I T ( A ) e r r e d i n l a w a n d o n f a c t s i n d e le t i n g t h e a d d i t i o n o f R s . 2 , 9 2 , 0 0 , 0 0 0 / - m a d e b y t h e A s s e s s i n g O f f i c e r u / s . 6 8 o f t h e I n c o m e T a x A c t , 1 9 6 1 . 2 . T h e L d . C I T ( A ) e r r e d i n l a w a n d o n f a c t s i n t r e at i n g t h e s h a r e s u b s c r i p t i o n a m o u n t i n g t o R s . 2 , 9 2 , 0 0 , 0 0 0 / - r ec e i v e d b y t h e a s s e s s e e c o m p a n y a s g e n u i n e . 3 . O n t h e b a s i s o f t h e f a c t s a n d c i r c u m s t a n c e s o f th e c a s e , t h e l e a r n e d C I T ( A ) o u g h t t o h a v e u p h e l d t h e o r d e r o f t he A s s e s s i n g O f f i c e r . ” 3. The f acts of the cas e ar e th at the ass essee is a contractor and machin er y hirer for infrastructur e projects. The AO has dis cussed in th e as sess ment order that during the year ass essee co mp an y has issu ed shares of Rs.2 ,92,00,000/- being 7300 equity sh ares of Rs .10/- each at a premiu m of Rs .3990/- per shar e and thus ther e is incr eas e in shar e capital of Rs .73,000/-. Ov er and abov e th at the co mp an y has collected premium of Rs .2,91 ,27,000/-. Ther efor e, th e as sess ee was ask ed to establish the identity of the persons , genu ineness of tr ans action and cr editworthiness as p er section 68 of the Act. In r esponse to th e n otices u/s. 133(6) to the concern ed person s they h ave filed copy of inco me tax r eturn. On p erusal o f inco me tax r eturn, it was found that these people are not cr editworth y to invest such ITA No. 171/Rjt/2016 [DCIT vs. Shri Swaminarayan Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd.] AY 2012-13 - 3 - larg e amount in a Pvt. Ltd. Co mp any. Th er efore, the ass essee was ag ain asked to establish the cr editworthiness of thes e persons so that provisions of Section 68 of the Act ar e not attr acted . The AO was no t satisfied with ass essee's explan ation. Th erefore, th e amou nt of Rs.2 ,92,00,000/- was added to th e total inco me of ass ess ee. 4. Ther eafter, th e assess ee pr ef erred first statutory appeal before th e CIT( A) who partly allowed th e appeal of the ass essee. 5. Now, Revenu e came b efore us. 6. We h ave gon e through the relevant r ecord and impugned order and heard both the parties . In this case, ass essee co mp an y h as issued sh ar es of Rs .2,92,00,000/- being 7300 equity shar es of Rs.1 0/- each at a premiu m of Rs.3990/- per s hare and thus there is in cr ease in share capital of Rs .73,000/-. Over an d above that th e comp any has collected premiu m of Rs .2,91,27,000/-. Before th e lowers authorities, ass ess ee has filed cop y of the inco me tax return, P AN nu mb ers of th e co ncern ed p ersons and also filed bank statements . But learned AO doubted the cr editworthin ess of the con cern ed persons. In support of its contention , the assess ee/person s have not filed all the relevant details before the lower authorities , meaning ther eby, the assessee has not discharg ed his onus. In our ITA No. 171/Rjt/2016 [DCIT vs. Shri Swaminarayan Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd.] AY 2012-13 - 4 - consider ed opinion, the aboves aid details do not prove the cr editworthin ess of the persons those have p aid premiu m. So, in view of th e above, we set aside this matter back to the file of the AO to revisit the issue and ass essee is directed to file r elev ant d etails of th e p ersons those hav e p aid premiu m to the extent th at th ey h ad cr editworthiness of s uch huge payment. Th e learned CI T(A) h as not passed r eas oned and detailed ord er. Ther efor e, the captioned app eal filed b y the Revenu e is allowed for statistical purposes. 7. In the result, the captioned appeal filed by th e Rev enue is allowed for statistical purposes. Sd/- Sd/- ( WASEEM AHMED) (MAHAVIR PRASAD) ACC OUNTANT MEMB ER JUDICIAL MEMBER Ahmedabad: Dated 25/03/2022 True Copy S.K.SINHA आदेश े / Copy of Order Forwarded to:- $. र / Revenue 2. आ दक / Assessee '. सं(ं)* आयकर आय + / Concerned CIT 4. आयकर आय + - अपील / CIT (A) .. / 0 1ीय 2 2 )*3 आयकर अपील य अ)*कर#3 अ45द ( द / DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad 6. 1 78 9 ल / Guard file. By order/आद श स 3 D e p u t y / A s s t t . R e g i s t r a r I T A T , R a j k o t This Order pronounced in Open Court on 25/03/2022