9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (10) TMI 319X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that the assessee company did not submit bank statements before the Assessing Officer during the course of assessment proceedings to prove the genuineness of the transactions and the creditworthiness of the persons contributing to the share capital. (2) On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the CIT(A) has erred in ignoring the fact that as per the bank statements filed before him, there were many entries of cash deposit and it is seen that money was withdrawn on the same date or the very next date before the issuance of cheque which shows that the alleged share applicant is an entry operator." 2. According to Assessing Officer , the assessee could not produce the bank statement of the share applicant, therefore, the addition ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... her the assessee's bank account for that period has been credited by the same instruments and the same amount and whether these were received by way of share application money especially since share application forms do not contains these payment details." 2.2. Assessee in reply contended that assessee received share application money from 25 different applicants out of which amount of Rs. 14 lacs wer received in A.Y. 2004-05 and 1 lac in impugned year i.e. A.Y. 2005-06. Details of all the share applicants containing their PAN & ITR, affidavits & confirmations by share applicants were submitted before Assessing Officer. Reply to notices u/s 133(6) from various share applicants were also furnished. Assessing Officer made the additio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... teel Centre) have been provided. As is evident from the bank statements and as accepted by the AO in the remand report, out of addition of Rs. 15,00,000/- the major portion i.e. 14,00,000/- has been received in the previous assessment year i.e. A.Y 2004-05. Also the appellant has provided all the details and has thus established the identification and genuineness of transaction with respect to all the share applicants. As regards creditworthiness of the share applicants the appellant has placed reliance on the ratio of the judgment of Delhi High Court in the case of Value Service P. Ltd. (supra). Further reliance has been placed by appellant on the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Lovely Exports (P) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nk statements. The assessment was framed without considering the explanations and facts on record, therefore, assessee has to file additional evidence which was admitted by CIT(A). Revenue has not challenged the same. It was incumbent for the assessee to supply proper facts before the CIT(A) including receipt of 14 l;acs in A.Y. 2004-05 as the Assessing Officer has not considered the same. The Assessing Officer has not controverted these facts during the course of remand proceedings disputing the years and receipt of amounts the fact that all the ingredients of sec. 68 remain satisfied. Order of CIT(A) is relied on. 5. We have heard rival contentions and gone through the relevant material available on record. The assessment order in ques ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
