9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (1) TMI 653X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the ground of appeal of the revenue is dismissed. - ITA No. 1751/MUM/2022 - - - Dated:- 30-12-2022 - SHRI ABY T VARKEY (JUDICIAL MEMBER) AND SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) For the Assessee : Mr. Vijay Mehta, AR For the Revenue : Mr. Satyapal Kumar, DR ORDER Per Om Prakash Kant , AM The present appeal is filed by the Revenue against the order dated 08/04/2022 passed by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) - 48, Mumbai [in short, 'the Ld. CIT(A)'] for A.Y. 2008-09. 2. The grounds of appeal raised by the Revenue are reproduced as under: 1. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A), is justified in deleting the addition of Rs. 1,99,75,000/- made ws 68 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he assessee. Being aggrieved by the order passed by the ld. CIT(A), the Revenue is in appeal. 4. The ground of appeal of the Revenue relates to the deletion of the addition of Rs. 1,99,75,000/- made u/s. 68 of the Act as unexplained cash credit on account of sum credited in the books of accounts of the assessee who received share capital and share premium from Jaycee Pvt. Ltd. without appreciating the fact that the said entity did not have required creditworthiness. 5. Briefly, the facts qua the issue related to the share capital and premium received from M/s. Jaycee Pvt. Ltd. are that the assessee had received share application money of Rs. 1,99,75,000/- from the said party in A.Y. 2007-08. The assessee had submitted complete cheque ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... licant itself is not proved, the assessee has not discharged its onus casted u/s.68 of the Act and hence, the addition of Rs. 1,99,75,000/- be confirmed. 6.1. In rebuttal, the ld. Counsel of the assessee explained that the amount of share application money amounting to Rs. 1,99,75,000/- was received from M/s. Jaycee Industries Ltd. in F.Y. 2006-07 relevant to A.Y. 2007-08 and complete scrutiny u/s. 143(3) was also carried out in respect of the receipt of the said funds by the then Assessing Officer and no adverse inference was drawn. Further, even in the present reassessment proceedings, the said party had duly responded to the notice u/s. 133(6) of the Act confirming the transaction done with the assessee company. In the year under cons ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... allotment were received in earlier assessment years and only allotment has been made in the Assessment Year under consideration, there is no question of any addition u/s. 68 in the impugned AY. 2008-09. Hence, additions related to share monies and share premium, which were received in the form of loans in earlier assessment years i.e., in the cases of M/s. Bandana Sangeet Paper Private Limited, M/s. Bishnauth Tea Company Limited, M/s. Bismarak Exim Private Limited, M/s. Mahacol Trexim Private Limited, M/s. Brijdham Developers Private Limited, M/s. Kilburn Engineering and M/s. Naviplast commerce P. Ltd. will not survive. 10.12 As far as addition in respect of M/s. Jaycee Industries Limited, I find that M/s. Jaycee Industries Limited ha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
