9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (1) TMI 607X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , which would be 31.03.2013 in the present case. For a company, it is impossible to get it accounts audited on 31st March and present the same for approval in the Annual General Meeting on March 31st. In the case in hand, when the Bench asked the ld. counsel for the assessee about the unaudited balance sheet as on 31.03.2014, the ld. counsel for the assessee could not reply and instead, referred to the certificate of the auditors wherein nowhere says that the valuer has considered the audited balance sheet as on 31.03.2014 which was approved and adopted in the Annual General meeting by the shareholders for the simple reason that it is practically impossible for any company to present the audited balance sheet of the F.Y. before the An ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cts of the case are that the appellant company was incorporated in the year 1995 and since then, till date, is not doing any business but is only engaged in providing accommodation entries, as admitted by the ld. counsel for the assessee before the Bench. 4. The more peculiar fact is that during the year, in spite of zero business activities, the assessee company issued 8 lakhs shares, each of face value of Rs. 10/- to two companies, namely, M/s. Elecon Securities Pvt. Ltd. and M/s. Ordinary Financial Services Pvt. Ltd. 5. This transaction becomes more scarier when we find that this issue of 8 lakhs shares was in consideration of 60,000 shares received by the assessee from the two companies to whom shares were allotted. These two comp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ITA No. 222/Chd/20221(sic) and also on the decision of the co-ordinate bench at Chennai in the case of Vaani Estates Pvt. Ltd. in ITA No. 1352/Chny/2018 supported by referring to the speech of the Hon'ble Finance Minister while making the amendment. 11. The ld. counsel for the assessee also referred to the Valuation Certificate, which is at page 51 of the Paper Book. 12. Per contra, the ld. DR strongly supported the findings of the Assessing Officer and vehemently stated that the Assessing Officer has rightly valued the shares as per the relevant rules of the IT Rules, rightly confirmed by the ld. CIT(A) and there is no error or infirmity. 13. We have given thoughtful consideration to the orders of the authorities below. The p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n approved and adopted in the Annual General Meeting of the share holders of the company, which would be 31.03.2013 in the present case. 16. For a company, it is impossible to get it accounts audited on 31st March and present the same for approval in the Annual General Meeting on March 31st. 17. The Chandigarh Bench of ITAT had the occasion to decide whether it would be justifiable to accept the unaudited balance sheet as on the valuation date when the same has been audited at a later date with no material variance in the financials. 18. But in the case in hand, when the Bench asked the ld. counsel for the assessee about the unaudited balance sheet as on 31.03.2014, the ld. counsel for the assessee could not reply and instead, refe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Hon'ble Finance Minister goes against the assessee, in as much as, the Hon'ble Finance Minster had emphatically, inter alia, said: I propose a series of measures to deter the generation and use of unaccounted money. To this end, I propose: XXXX Increasing the onus of proof on closely held companies for funds received from shares holders as well as taxing share premium in excess of fair market value. 21. This shows that even the Legislators put the onus of proof on the companies and in the case in hand, the assessee has miserably failed in discharging the onus. 22. The Assessing Officer found that the audited balance sheet of 31.03.2013 was approved by the shareholders in the Annual General Meeting and, a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
