9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (10) TMI 1894X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... SR. DR For The Respondent : Sh.R. C. Rai, CA ORDER PER SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JM This appeal is filed by Revenue against order dated 23/11/2012 passed by CIT(A) New Delhi. The main ground of appeal raised herein, is as follows:- 1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition of ₹ 2,78,57,082/- made by the AO u/s 68 of the Income tax Act, 1961. 2. During the year under consideration the assessee dealt with shares. During the course of assessment proceeding, the assessee was asked to furnish the copy of the cash book, bank pass book for the F.Y 2008-09 and to explain the sources of credit entries there in, proving the identity and creditworthiness of the credit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hat the fresh evidences need not be admitted under Rule 46A of the I.T Rules as assessee company did not produce the supporting documentary evidence to establish credit worthiness of the creditors during assessment proceedings, though sufficient opportunity was provided to produce the details. 6. The remand report was handed over to the assessee for filing rejoinder. The assessee filed rejoinder dated 21/11/2012 and submitted that documents filed during appellate proceedings are noting but documents submitted during assessment proceeding, therefore, the A.O s objection that fresh evidence should not be admitted was irrelevant. Further assessee contended that the addition made by A.O in assessment order represented either sale considerati ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... its in question were sale proceeds of investment of return of loan advanced earlier as the assessee was in the business of financing and trading also accepted by the assessee in Para No.2 of the assessment order. Hence, the assessee had thus discharged its primary onus to establish the claim. The onus was thereafter shifted upon the Assessing Officer to rebut those explanations and evidence filed by the assessee to justify the addition in question. Since the Assessing Officer has failed to rebut the above submissions and to dislodge the evidence filed by the assessee in support of the claim, the Ld. CIT(Appeals) in our view has rightly deleted the addition. The First Appellate Order in this regard is thus upheld. The ground is accordingly r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
