9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (11) TMI 192X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y details to explain the source of alleged cash credit and also unable to prove identity creditworthiness of the cash creditors as well as genuineness of the transaction as per section 68 - The assessee 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 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 rightly invoked ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dge of the management and proceeded on leave. The assessee submitted that it was only on 19.03.2020 that the impugned order came to their knowledge. It is stated that the delay was caused due to the change in the working system of the Income Tax Department, from physical to faceless. After the impugned order of the Ld. CIT(Appeal) came to their knowledge, it is found out that the Appeal preferred by them against the Order of the Ld. AO had been upheld by the Ld. CIT, inasmuch as my returned income had been enhanced by Rs. 1,22,00,000/- under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act 1961. It is a fact that there is a delay of 803 days, out of which delay due to covid-19 scenario has been for 740 days for which an application under Section 5 of t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r the facts circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in passing order ex parte without considering the grounds of natural justice under the law. 02) That under the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition of a sum of Rs. 1,22,00,000/- under sec. 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the share capital along with premium raised by the assessee during the year. The addition is whimsical, arbitrary, unjustified and hence need to be deleted. 03) That the appellant craves leave to add, alter, amend or withdraw any ground or grounds of appeal before or at the time hearing. 5. When the case was called for none appeared on behalf of the assessee. Perusal of records shows that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at the assessee is only trying to prolong the proceeding and has nothing to place on record. On the other hand, the ld. DR vehemently argued supporting the orders of lower authorities and prayed for confirming the order of ld. CIT(A). 9. We have heard the ld. DR and perused the material placed on record before us. The assessee has challenged the finding of the ld. CIT(A) confirming the addition made u/s. 68 of the Act at Rs. 1,22,00,000/- by the ld.AO for unexplained share capital/premium received during the year. We notice that the assessee company had offered Nil income for the AY 2012-13. The assessee company has been able to procure share capital/share premium at Rs. 1,22,00,000/-. Statutory notices u/s. 143(2) 142(1) of the Act du ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
