9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (3) TMI 174X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the shareholders is to be added, the assessment has to be carried out in their case and not in the hands of the appellant company. Thus the question as formulated does not even arise in this case because it remains settled with the consistent decisions of the Courts that even in case of doubt about subscribers to the increased share capital, the amount of share capital cannot be regarded as undisclosed income of the company - in favour of assessee. - Income Tax Appeal No. 11/2008 - - - Dated:- 11-1-2013 - Dinesh Maheshwari And Arun Bhansali,JJ. Mr. K.K. Bissa, for the appellant. Mr.Dinesh Mehta for the respondent JUDGMENT This appeal by the revenue under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [ the Act ], directed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sessee-company could not be held responsible to prove as to whether the person himself invested the money or some other person did so and the burden shifted on the revenue to establish that the investment came from the assessee company itself. It was also observed that if at all the investment made by the shareholders is to be added, the assessment has to be carried out in their case and not in the hands of the appellant company. The CIT(A), thus, deleted the additions made under Section 68 of the Act in the hands of the assessee-company. In the appeal filed by the revenue against the order aforesaid, the Tribunal referred to the fact that pursuant to the assessment order, action was taken under Section 263 of the Act by the Commissioner ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dvanced the money is sought to be reopened, that would have made some sense but we fail to understand as to how this amount of increased share capital can be assessed in the hands of the company itself. (emphasis supplied) The learned counsel for the appellant-revenue is not in a position to dispute the proposition aforesaid. In view of the above, we have no hesitation in upholding the objection of the learned counsel for the respondent that the question as formulated does not arise in this case because so far as the assessee company is concerned, the amount referable to the share application cannot be attributed to it; and cannot be assessed in its hands. Thus, answer to the question as formulated necessarily follows in the affirm ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
