9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (8) TMI 1086X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he assessee upon cancelation of their application for allotment of shares. This refund of money to them was made in the next financial year and the same has been accepted by the Assessing Officer in the assessment of the next year. It is also an important aspect of this category of share applicants that during the course of assessment proceedings, they had appeared before the Assessing Officer and had confirmed of paying and receiving back their respective share application money from the assessee. We are thus of the view that the assessee had discharged its primary onus to establish genuineness of this category of the share applicants. Thereafter, the onus was shifted upon the Assessing Officer to dislodge the claim of the assessee by disp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cer ought to have examined the source of money of those shares subscribers. We thus find that the Assessing Officer in this regard also has failed to discharge his onus to justify the above addition of share application money paid through cheques. The Assessing Officer is thus directed to delete the addition of ₹ 7,84,000. In total, the addition of ₹ 16,11,500 (Rs.8,27,500 + ₹ 7,84,000) is directed to be deleted. - Decided in favour of assessee. - ITA No. 3789/Del/2013 - - - Dated:- 26-7-2016 - SHRI I.C. SUDHIR AND SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI For The Assessee : Shri P.C. Yadav, Adv. For The Department : Shri T. Vasanthan, Sr. DR ORDER PER I.C. SUDHIR: JUDICIAL MEMBER The assessee has impugned first ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... upheld the same. 4. In support of the ground, the Learned AR submitted that the assessee company is duly registered with Reserve Bank of India as a non-banking financial company and is authorized to accept cash from public at large. The transaction in question is pure and simple case of receipt of share application money during the normal course of business. There is no material on record even to assume that any dubious method are applied for injecting unaccounted money in the form of the share capital in the company. It is not the case of the authorities below that assessee has received bogus accommodation entries in the garb of share application money. The Learned AR submitted that the assessee had received an amount of ₹ 30,03,5 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ted by the assessee vis- -vis refund of share application money are false. The Assessing Officer very conveniently ignored the affidavits of the parties and also their statements while making the addition even in the next assessment year no adverse inference vis- -vis repayment of the money to the share applicants has been made by the Assessing Officer. 4.1 So far as second category of persons who had paid the amount by cheque against the share application money, are concerned, their details have been made available as page No. 20 of the paper book. In support of payment made by these persons, the assessee had furnished affidavits of those parties, their income-tax returns and bank statements. The assessee had also allotted shares to the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fore issuance of notice under sec. 143(2) of the Act by the share applicant. The assessee was asked by the Assessing Officer to produce share applicant to prove their creditworthiness. He submitted that the case laws relied upon by the Learned AR having distinguishable facts are not helpful to the assessee. The Learned Senior DR contended that most of share applicants are not assessed to tax and they are having meager income. He submitted that out of 19 share applicants, only in seven cases, income-tax returns were given. HE submitted further that identical amount was deposited in the accounts of share application before issuance of cheques by them to the assessee. He placed reliance on the following decisions: i) CIT v. P. Mohanakala [2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... been accepted by the Assessing Officer in the assessment of the next year. It is also an important aspect of this category of share applicants that during the course of assessment proceedings, they had appeared before the Assessing Officer and had confirmed of paying and receiving back their respective share application money from the assessee. We are thus of the view that the assessee had discharged its primary onus to establish genuineness of this category of the share applicants. Thereafter, the onus was shifted upon the Assessing Officer to dislodge the claim of the assessee by disproving those evidences and submissions made by the assessee discussed above. In absence of conducting such exercise by the Assessing Officer, the Assessing O ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
