2012 (12) TMI 170 - HC - Income Tax

Reopening Assessment - bogus share application money - Undisclosed Income - assessee stating that documentary evidence regarding identity and creditworthiness of the share applicants and the genuineness of the transactions were produced - AO Concluded on the basis of enquiry report of Investigation wing - Held that - Where the assessee adduces evidence in support of the share application monies, it is open to the assessing officer to examine it and reject it on tenable grounds. In case he wishes to rely on the report of the investigation authorities, some meaningful enquiry ought to be conducted by him to establish a link between the assessee and the alleged hawala operators - Decided in favor of assessee.

Summary

Issues involved:
1. Whether the Tribunal erred in confirming the deletion of addition made under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act in the reassessment proceedings.
2. Whether the assessing officer failed to conduct a proper enquiry into the share application money received by the assessee.

Analysis:
Issue 1:
The revenue challenged the ITAT's order confirming the deletion of the addition made under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act in the reassessment proceedings for the assessment year 2002-03. The revenue contended that the Tribunal and the CIT(Appeals) erred in setting aside the addition based on technicalities, such as the failure to cross-examine a key witness, Mr. Mahesh Garg. The revenue relied on an investigation report implicating the assessee in accommodation entry transactions. However, the CIT(Appeals) sought a remand report and observed discrepancies in the assessing officer's calculations, leading to a reduced amount for the addition. The appellant provided extensive documentation to prove the genuineness of the transactions, including share application forms, bank statements, PAN details, and affidavits from directors of share applicant companies. The Tribunal upheld the deletion of the addition, emphasizing that the assessing officer failed to conduct a proper enquiry and relied solely on the investigation report without verifying the evidence provided by the appellant.

Issue 2:
The assessing officer's failure to conduct a thorough enquiry into the share application money received by the assessee was a crucial aspect of the case. The CIT(Appeals) noted that the appellant had submitted substantial evidence to establish the authenticity of the transactions, including affidavits, bank statements, and certificates from auditors. Despite this, the assessing officer primarily relied on the investigation report and the statement of Mr. Mahesh Garg. The ITAT upheld the CIT(Appeals) decision, highlighting that the assessing officer should have examined the evidence presented by the appellant and conducted a meaningful enquiry to establish a direct link between the assessee and alleged hawala operators. The Court found that the assessing officer's conclusions based solely on the investigation report were inadequate and emphasized the importance of conducting a proper enquiry before making additions under Section 68. The Court dismissed the appeal, stating that no substantial question of law arose in this case and affirmed the Tribunal's decision based on the principles established in previous judgments, particularly the case of Lovely Exports Pvt. Ltd.