9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (2) TMI 663X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y merit in the argument of the Appellant. Questions of i) genuineness of investors who introduced share capital and premium; ii) accrued income on account of delayed completion of project by M/s Satya Developers Limited; iii) capacity of persons from whom loan was borrowed and genuineness of transactions, have been considered at length by First Appellate Authority as well Tribunal. Both the Authorities below have returned categorical findings on each issue and counsel for Revenue has failed to point out any infirmity in fact or law warranting interference of this Court. - INCOME TAX APPEAL No. 378 of 2016 ( O & M ) - - - Dated:- 11-2-2020 - HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASWANT SINGH And HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANT PARKASH Mr. Vivek Sethi, Advocate for the Appellant Ms. Radhika Suri, Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. Manpreet Singh Kanda, Advocate for the Respondent ORDER Jaswant Singh, J. 1. That Appellant-Principal Commissioner of Income Tax has filed instant appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short IT Act seeking quashing of order dated 03.02.2016 (Annexure A-3) passed by Ld. Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Amritsar Bench, Amri ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed audited accounts and investment in the assessee company has been made duly reflected in their respective balance sheets. We find that the investments in the assessee-company has been out of share capital and reserves of the investing Companies. For example, the net worth of M/s. Dhir Management Consultants (P) Ltd., (one of the investing companies) as on 31.03.2009 as per balance sheet placed at paper book page 8 (in short PB-8 ) is ₹ 99,34,843/- out of which it had made investments to the tune of ₹ 75,45,930/- in various companies as is apparent from Schedule-VI of balance sheet placed at PB-9. The Schedule reflects the name of assessee company where the investment has been reflected to the tune of ₹ 70,00,000/-. 14. Similar is the position with other investing company, M/s S.K.M. Securities (P) Ltd. The second investing company has net worth of ₹ 1,01,05,370/- as on 31.3.2009, out of which ₹ 65,00,000/- has been invested in the assessee company. This fact is verifiable from the copy of balance sheet of investing company placed at PB-13. 15. Similarly the third company M/s Singhal Securities (P) Ltd., as on 31.3.2009 had net worth of & ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... source of investments but the source of source has also been established. 19. In view of the above facts and findings, we find that all the three ingredients required for fulfillment of provisions of section 68 of the Act are met and therefore, the ld. CIT(A) has rightly deleted the addition made by the AO u/s 68 of the Act. Accordingly, keeping in view the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, Ground no. 1 (i) of the appeal is dismissed. 20. As regards Ground no. 1(ii), the ld. DR argued that per the agreement with M/s Satya Developers Pvt. Limited, the income had accrued to the assessee @ ₹ 10 lacs per month for 11 months and invited our attention to the agreement with M/s Satya Developers Pvt. Ltd. 21. The ld. Counsel for the assessee, on the other hand, submitted that the agreement with M/s Satya Developers Pvt. Ltd. was an exhaustive agreement containing 33 clauses and one of the conditions as per clause-14 says that if the delay is because of the force-majeure conditions, no compensation is payable. He submitted that the PUDA had not given possession for development of the property even till 11.9.2006 and therefore, the delay in the execution ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s rejected the loan of ₹ 1.20 Crore on the plea that the same does not appear in the bank statement of M/s Golden Laminates Ltd., whereas the ld. CIT(A) has made a finding of fact that the source of this ₹ 1.20 Crore was from HDFC Bank and the ld. CIT(A) had also forwarded a copy of Bank Account of HDFC to AO for his comments. The AO in the remand report has not objected to the documents and has requested the ld. CIT(A) to consider the case while disposing of the appeal. The ld. CIT(A) has further made a finding of fact that in the statement of HDFC, all the entries relating to advancing of loan of ₹ 1.20 Crores to assessee do appear. Therefore, keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case, we do not find any force in the arguments of the ld. DR. In view of the above, ground no. 1(iii) is also dismissed. 26. In nutshell, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed. 5. Ld. Counsel for the Appellant-Revenue vehemently contended that Ld. CIT (A) without granting opportunity to Assessing Authority to comment upon additional evidence; considered additional evidence which was not supplied to Assessing Authority inspite of proper opportunities to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
