9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (10) TMI 535X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssessee company has miserably failed to explain the source of alleged cash credit. If the assessee had sufficient details to explain the alleged sum, it could have certainly filed those details. Consistently escaping from appearing before the ld. AO and the appellate authority (ld. CIT-A) indicates that the assessee has no plausible explanation to explain the source of alleged sum of share capital and security premium. If the assessee is unable to explain the alleged cash credit and consistent escaped, the provisions of section 68 of the Act are attracted. Thus, it is held that the assessee has routed its unaccounted income in the books of account in the form of share capital and security premium by arranging bogus share capital and shar ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ding back huge share premium amounting to Rs. 29,91,50,000/- as cash credit of the appellant. ii. That in the facts and circumstances of the case, the ld. AO is not justified in treating share premium, which is a capital receipt, as income on the grounds that the company does not have a significant earning per share/book value. iii. That in the facts and circumstances of the case, the ld. AO is not justified in disallowing expenses u/s 14A as the assessee has not earned any exempt income. iv. That the appellant craves leave to add, amend or withdraw any ground or grounds of appeal either before or at the time of hearing of appeal. 4. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a private limited company. The sour ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (3) of the Act making addition u/s. 68 of the Act for unexplained cash credit of Rs. 29,91,50,000/- and assessed assessee s income at Rs. 29,94,10,240/-. 5. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred appeal before the ld. CIT(A) challenging the impugned addition made u/s. 68 of the Act. Apart from filing appeal, the assessee made no further efforts before the ld. CIT(A) did not file any other documentary evidence in support of its claim. As the assessee failed to do so,Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the addition. 6. Aggrieved, now the assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal. Again the assessee failed to appear before us on any of the dates of hearing. Except filing this appeal before us. It clearly indicates that the assessee is only trying to delay ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ad sufficient details to explain the alleged sum, it could have certainly filed those details. Consistently escaping from appearing before the ld. AO and the appellate authority (ld. CIT-A) indicates that the assessee has no plausible explanation to explain the source of alleged sum of share capital and security premium. If the assessee is unable to explain the alleged cash credit and consistent escaped, the provisions of section 68 of the Act are attracted. Thus, it is held that the assessee has routed its unaccounted income in the books of account in the form of share capital and security premium by arranging bogus share capital and share premium through accommodation entry provider. 8. Therefore, under these facts and circumstances, w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
