2017 (11) TMI 1635

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... COURT OF INDIA] - No additions - Decided against the revenue.
Hon'ble Mr. Justice K.S. Jhaveri Hon'ble Mr. Justice Vijay Kumar Vyas For Appellant(s) : Mr. Anuroop Singhi with Mr. Aditya Vijay For Respondent(s) : Mr. Mahendra Gargeiya Judgment 1. By way of this appeal, the appellant has assailed the judgment and order of the Tribunal whereby the Tribunal has dismissed the appeal of the department. 2. This Court while admitting the matter framed following questions of law:- ""1. Whether the Tribunal was justified in deleting the addition of ₹ 1,80,00,000/- made on account of unexplained share application money u/s 68 of the Act, ignoring that the share applications alongwith premium were merely accommodation entries .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ent made was received by account payee cheque and the same was refunded by an account payee cheque when the company dropped its project. In the considered opinion of this court, in absence of any cogent evidence on record establishing that the money shown to have received as share application money, was as a matter of fact, unaccounted money belonging to the assessee company, the finding arrived at by the AO, which is based on suspicion, has rightly been held not sustainable in the eyes of law. Suffice it to say that the finding arrived at by the CIT(A), affirmed by the ITAT, which remains a finding of fact, cannot be said to be capricious or perverse." 4.1. He has also relied upon the judgment in case of CIT vs. Supertech Diamond Tools Pv .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ssa Corporation (P) Ltd.: (1986) 159 ITR 78 (SC), the Hon'ble Supreme Court held as under:- "13. In this case, the assessee had given the names and ad- dresses of the alleged creditors. It was in the knowledge of the Revenue that the said creditors were income-tax assessees. Their index numbers were in the file of the Revenue. The Revenue, apart from issuing notices under s. 131 at the instance of the assessee, did not pursue the matter further. The Revenue did not examine the source of income of the said alleged creditors to find out whether they were creditworthy or were such who could advance the alleged loans. There was no effort made to pursue the socalled alleged creditors. In those circumstances, the assessee could not do any th .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X