9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (6) TMI 1386X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... license over and above what has been stated in the books of accounts or the value of equipment and the cost of obtaining the license if so procured at the relevant point in time is higher than what has been stated in the books of accounts. Further, there is nothing on record which suggests these alleged investments have been made during the year under consideration. CIT(A) has also returned a finding that the channel has gone on air in the financial year 20010-11 pertaining to assessment year 2011- 12 and if any addition has to be made on account of unexplained investment, it has to be in A.Y. 2011-12 and not in the impugned assessment year. In light of the above discussions, we do not see any infirmity in the finding and order of the ld ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rom the factory premises of M/s Siyaram Exports India Pvt. Ltd. referred to as page 46 47 to exhibit-1 of Annexure-AS. As per e-mail, cost of equipment was of ₹ 5.5 crores and license fee was ₹ 2 crores as against the figures as recorded in the balance sheet which was seized from the same premises wherein the cost of equipment has been shown at ₹ 3,75,31,712 and license fee has been shown at ₹ 22,29,480/-. 3. During the course of assessment proceedings, a show cause notice was issued to the assessee seeking explanation regarding this discrepancy, however, in absence of any response from the assessee, the AO completed the assessment and an addition of ₹ 1,74,68,288/- on account of undisclosed investment in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s seized as per page 1 to 4 to Exhibit 11. In the seized Balance Sheet print out, the cost of fixed assets was shown at ₹ 3,75,31,711/- and license fee at ₹ 22,29,480/-. Without carrying out any investigation/enquiry, AO has made addition of ₹ 3,52,38,808/-, being the differential amount as mentioned in the e-mail and seized Balance Sheet print out, as under: Particulars Cost as per email Cost as per Balance Sheet Difference to be treated as undisclosed income Equipment 5,50,00,000 3,75,31,712 1,74,68,288 license 2,00,00,000 22, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d relied on the findings of the Assessing Officer. Per contra, the ld. AR supported the findings of the ld CIT(A) and has submitted that the e-mail communication which has formed confirmed the basis of addition by the Assessing officer is in respect of negotiation with a potential joint venture partner for investment in the assessee company and the said e-mail was sent by Shri Pratap Rao, CEO of the assessee company to Shri Virendra Chaudhary to give the latter the estimated cost for the purposes of determining the valuation. It was submitted that the cost mentioned in the e-mail communication was not the actual cost incurred and the actual cost incurred was dully reflected in the books of account. It was further submitted that the license ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e cost of equipment and the license fee can therefore be a starting point and the basis for further investigation by the Assessing Officer as to the actual investment made by the assessee company as against what has been recorded in the books of account. However, the same cannot be a sole basis for making the addition in hands of the assessee company. We find that there is nothing on record in terms of any enquiry/investigation which has been carried by the Assessing officer either during the assessment proceedings or even during the remand proceeding. The Assessing officer has not brought on record any credible verifiable evidence in terms of assessee company having incurred expenditure on purchase of equipments and grant of license over a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
