9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (12) TMI 588X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssessing Officer (AO) u/s. 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short 'Act'). 3. The assessee filed the return of income declaring total income of Rs. 14,59,785/- which was set off against the loss of earlier years. During the course of assessment proceedings, the AO found that the assessee has allotted 3,00,000 equity shares of Rs. 10 each at a premium of Rs. 90 per share to M/s. Charansheela Consultants P. Ltd., 2, Haralal Das lane, Jorabagan Park (W), Kolkata, West Bengal. The share capital of Rs. 3,00,00,000/- comprises of share capital of Rs. 30,00,000 and the share premium of Rs. 2,70,00,000/-. The said amount of Rs. 3.00 crores was received by the assessee in the Financial Year (F.Y.) 2008-09 and shares were allotted during th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assessee made detailed argument in their written submissions challenging the taxability of the sum in the impugned assessment year instead of 2008-09. The submissions made by the assessee before the Ld. CIT(A) reads as under: "The papers before the LAO clearly show that the actual funds were received in the financial year FY 2008-09 relevant to the assessment year 2009-10. It is also clear from the LAO's own observation in para-2 of the assessment order where he observed that 'The said amount is received in FY 2008-09 and the shares have been allotted only during the financial year 2011-12 relevant to the Assessment Year 12-13" Section 68, as it was in the assessment year 2012-13, is reproduced below "68-Cash Credits: Where ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tment or cash credit generated during the relevant year 1993-1994. This alone is sufficient to sustain the order of the Tribunal in deleting the amount of Rs. 1,55,316/- from the assessment for AY 1993-94." (CIT Vs. Parmeshwar Bohra) (Annexure-6). 21. In another case decided by the jurisdictional Bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Visakhapatnam (reported in 2016 (8) TMI 469, ITA No. 594/Vizag/2014) has upheld the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) in a case where the addition was in respect of credits transferred by way of journal entries of amounts received in earlier year and where no fresh borrowings were there in the subject assessment year. Copy of the judgment is enclosed as Anuexu-7. The impugned addition requires to be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s called for in the orders of the lower authorities and hence requested to uphold the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and dismiss the appeal of the assessee. 7. We have heard both the parties and perused the material placed on record. The short issue involved in the case is the year in which the addition u/s. 68 required to be made. In this connection it is relevant to extract section 68 of Income Tax Act which reads as under: "Cash credits. 68. Where any sum is found credited in the books of an assessee maintained for any previous year, and the assessee offers no explanation about the nature and source thereof or the explanation offered by him is not, in the opinion of the Assessing Officer, satisfactory, the sum so credited may be charged to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the transactions and creditworthiness of the parties in respect of these 5 creditors out of 9 creditors. The A.O. further observed that the creditors have admitted that they themselves have invested the money in the partnership firm out of the borrowings from their friends and relatives in last 6 months that too in cash. The assessee claims that it has accepted loans from various individuals during the financial year 2008-09 and during this financial year it has re-grouped the loans standing in the name of various individuals into these 5 persons' accounts by passing necessary journal entries in the books of accounts of the firm. There is no fresh loan accepted during the current financial year, therefore, the A.O. was not correct in c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... al year. Therefore, we are of the view that the A.O. was not correct in making additions towards brought forward credits during the financial year 2009-10. The CIT(A) after considering the relevant details deleted the additions made by the A.O. We do not see any error or infirmity in the order passed by the CIT(A). Hence, we inclined to uphold the CIT(A) order and dismiss the appeal filed by the revenue." The department has not brought any other decision of superior court to controvert the submission and case laws relied upon by the assessee. Therefore, since, the facts are identical, respectfully following the decision of this Tribunal we hold that there is no case for making addition for the A.Y. 2012-13 since, the amount was found credi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
