9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (2) TMI 1007X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... terlinked or in fact interwoven, therefore, the same are being taken up and disposed off by way of a consolidated order. 2. We shall first take up the appeal filed by the revenue in IT(SS)A No.02/RPR/2022 for assessment year 2012-13, wherein the revenue has assailed the impugned order on the following grounds of appeal: "1 "Whether on the facts and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) is justified in deleting the addition of Rs.10,59,00,000/- made by the AO on account of unexplained cash credit u/s.68 of the Income-tax Act, 1961?" 2. "Whether on the facts and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) is justified in deleting the addition made u/s.68 of Income-tax Act, 1961 by plainly accepting the plea of the assessee ignoring the fact that identity, creditworthiness and genuineness of the transactions could not be proved by the assessee". 3. "Whether on the facts and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) is right in holding that the additions were made in non-abated assessment year i.e. A.Y.2012-13 and in absence of any incriminating material and is not justified as per provision of section 153A of the Act? 4. "Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, Ld. CIT(A) erred in ignoring decisio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... not justified to held the investor companies as dummy entities and the investments made by these companies are non-genuine even the directors of the share applicant companies have accepted in his statements that they have provided accommodation entries to the company in lieu of commission." 9. Whether on the facts and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) is right in deleting the addition of Rs.1,64,71,430/- made by the AO on account of cessation of liability u/s.41(1)(a) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 accepting the evidences of the assessee which was not produced before the AO knowing the fact that when assessment order passed u/s. 143(3) of the Act the liability was outstanding and payments were made later on". 10. "Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law in accepting fresh evidence/grounds in respect of addition made on account of cessation of liability u/s.41(1)(a) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 in complete disregard to rule 46A as condition prescribed under clause (a)-(d) of rule 46A(1) of IT rules 1964 were not satisfied." 3. Succinctly stated, the assessee company which is engaged in the business of real estate development an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e share allottees from whom share capital/premium was received by the assessee company for the aforesaid three years i.e. F.Y.2011- 12 to 2013-14 the A.O culled out the year wise details, as under: List of Allottees on 30.03.2012 : Sl. No. Name of Occupation Address residence/registered office Number of shares 1. Adhunik Delmark Pvt. Ltd. 11, Bysack Street, Kolkata-07 3750 2. Machinamastik Dealer (P) Ltd. 14, Rupchand Raoy Street, Kolkata-07 25000 3. Gajmush Tralink Pvt. Ltd. 6, N.G. Basak Road, Block-1st, Phase-II, Kolkata-080 2500 4. Anchal Credit Capital Pvt. Ltd. P-33, Mission Row Extension, 2nd Floor, Kolkata-013 20000 5. Bakratunda Distributors Pvt. Ltd. 54, Munshi Saddaruddin Lane, 2nd floor, Kolkata 22500 6. Bhumika Tracom Pvt. Ltd. 54, Munshi Saddaruddin Lane, 2ndfloor, Kolkata 22500 7. Brotex Sales Pvt. Ltd. 63, Radha Bazar Street Kolkata 1250 8. Chakra Deal Trade Pvt. Ltd. 105, Cotton Street, Kolkata 3750 9. Contra Vanijya Pvt. Ltd. 63, Radha Bazar Street Kolkata 5000 10. Dhanmuddra Suppliers Pvt.Ltd. 54, Munshi Saddaruddin Lane, 2nd floor, Kolkata 18750 11. Fastmove V fintrade Pvt. Ltd. 105, Cotton Street, Kolkata 2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t was observed by the A.O that the said investors clearly lacked creditworthiness which would justify the investments that were claimed by them to have been made with the assessee company, as under: S.No. Name of bogus shareholders PAN Income shown during F.Yr. 2009-10 (Rs.) Income shown during F.Yr. 2010-11 (Rs.) Income shown during F.Yr. 2011-12 (Rs.) Income shown during F.Yr. 2012-13 (Rs.) Income shown during F.Yr. 2013-14 Income shown during F.Yr. 2014-15 Income shown during F.Yr. 2015-16 1. Exten Vinimay Pvt. Ltd. AACCE4578J 13828 8568 12385 12240 0 2. Manali Tradecom Pvt. Ltd. AAGCM9089E 2638 0 10894 20317 27890 68620 3. Anchal Credit Capital Pvt. Ltd. AACCA5455E 0 0 99690 0 4944 18980 0 4. Bakratunda Distributors Pvt. Ltd. AAECB7046E 0 10950 22970 18320 207350 5. Bhumika Tradecom Pvt. Ltd. AAECB7047F 0 0 3410 10310 6. Mogra Delcom Pvt. Ltd. AAHCM5396D 0 0 0 0 Considering the nominal returned income of the share applicants and their weak financials, the A.O observed that they clearly lacked creditworthiness to make hug ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... After carrying out necessary verifications the DDIT(Inv.), Admn., Kolkata forwarded to the A.O the reports of the Inspectors of Income Tax attached to his office, wherein, they had stated that the investor companies in question were not found available at their respective addresses. 7. Considering the aforesaid facts the A.O held a strong conviction that there was no justification as to why the companies based at Kolkata would have invested substantial amounts with the assessee company, i.e an unrelated entity which neither had any past performance nor future plans that would have attracted investments at a substantially high premium. It was further observed by the A.O that though some of the companies of the assessee's group were either showing no business or were carrying out business at a miniscule scale but they were still in receipt of substantial amount of share capital a/w. hefty premium from the aforementioned Kolkata based paper companies. It was observed by the A.O that Shri Ashok Jain, a key person of Lal Ganga group had in his statement recorded on oath u/s.132(4) of the Act admitted to the fact of introduction of unaccounted money in the guise of share capital/premium ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... es whose address was other than that of Kolkata had their origin in Kolkata; (iii). that there were common directors in multiple companies; (iv). that the directors of the assessee company were also in certain instances directors of the investor companies, which, thus, revealed a circuitous nature of set up; (v). that some of the directors were either operators or were being controlled by some operator; (vi) shareholders of the investor companies typically had the same pattern as that of paper companies, viz. low share capital, high reserves and surplus, matching investments, low or no income, equivalent expenditure resulting in low or no profit and insignificant financials. It was also observed by the A.O that the reserves and surplus of the aforementioned investor companies would match with equivalent investments in beneficiary companies or other shell companies. Considering the nature of expenditure booked by the investor companies in their profit & loss accounts, which was very nominal and was claimed to have been incurred under limited heads, the A.O held a strong conviction that the same did not reveal a case of a going concern. Apropos the bank statements of the aforemention ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that as the said retraction which was made after two years (approx.) lacked any supporting basis and was only a result of an afterthought, thus, no cognizance of the same could be drawn. The A.O was of the view that though the assessments in the case of the assessee company for A.Y. 2012-13 and A.Y. 2013-14 had earlier been framed u/s.143(3) of the Act, but the new facts which had emerged consequent to the search operation necessitated visiting the concluded assessments and making of necessary additions. 9. Also, it was observed by the A.O that as the issue of laundering of unaccounted money of the assessee company in the guise of share capital/premium was detected just prior to the passing of the assessment order for the aforementioned years, therefore, while framing the reassessment for the aforementioned unabated years he was well within his jurisdiction to make additions on the basis of fresh information that was gathered by him. Considering the statement of Shri Ashok Jain (supra) that was recorded u/s.132(4) of the Act, the A.O was of the view that as he had disclosed and offered a sum of Rs.19 Crore as the unaccounted income of the assessee company, therefore, the concluded ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... form of share application money, share premium or share capital was applicable retrospectively. In support of his aforesaid conviction the A.O had relied on the order of the ITAT, Kolkata in the case of Subhalakshi Vanijya Pvt. Ltd., 60 taxmann.com 60 (Kol.). On the basis of his aforesaid deliberation the A.O was of the view that the assessee company had failed to discharge the onus that was cast upon it u/s. 68 of the Act i.e proving the nature and source of the amounts which were claimed to have been received as share capital/premium from the aforementioned investor companies. The A.O after deliberating at length on the modus-operandi that was adopted by paper/shell companies for providing accommodation entries, and referring to a catena of judicial pronouncements, was of the view that the assessee company had routed its unaccounted money by camouflaging the same as share capital/premium received from the aforementioned paper/shell companies. 11. Apropos the claim of the assessee company that the investment made with it by M/s. Extent Vinimay Pvt. Ltd., 63, Radhabazar Street, Kolkata, viz. (i) share capital/premium of Rs. 1.90 crore and Rs. 12.68 crore in A.Y 2013-14 & A.Y 2014- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ey laundering and infusion of unaccounted money in the books of accounts of the assessee company in the guise of share capital/premium was detected during the course of search proceedings conducted in its case just prior to framing of the aforesaid assessment. On the basis of his aforesaid observations the A.O declined the claim of the assessee company that the source of the investment made by the aforesaid investor, viz. Extent Vinimay Pvt. Ltd. was out of its duly explained sources. Also, the A.O negated the aforesaid claim of the assessee company by referring to the admission of Shri Ashok Jain (supra), who vide his statement dated 20/22.09.2016 had admitted that the unaccounted money of the assessee company was laundered in the garb of share capital/premium received from paper/shell companies. Apart from that, it was observed by the A.O that the fact that M/s. Extent Vinimay Pvt. Ltd. was a paper/Jamakharchi company that was managed and controlled by Shri Anand Sharma and Shri Janardhan Chokhani, infamous entry operators and dummy directors, was established by the Kolkata Investigating Wing. Considering the financial statements of M/s. Extent Vinimay Pvt. Ltd. a/w its peculiar ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n paper correspondence) or valuation of the net worth of the assessee company. Apart from that, it was observed by the A.O that the investor companies who were stated to have held substantial stake in the assessee company had never participated in its management. Also, it was observed by him that no revenue by way of dividend was being earned by the investor companies on their investment made in the assessee company. On the basis of his aforesaid observations the A.O was of the view that the same clearly revealed that the investor companies were shell/paper companies through whom the unaccounted money of the assessee company was routed back to its coffers. 13. Considering the non-existence and non-creditworthiness of the share applicants, non-genuineness of the transactions, surrounding circumstances and admission by Shri. Ashok Jain (supra) in his statement recorded u/s 132(4) of the Act of the undisclosed income which was introduced in the form of bogus share capital/premium, the A.O was of the view that the assessee company had failed to establish the genuineness of the transactions of receipt of genuine amounts towards share capital/premium from the aforementioned companies. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ons merely on the basis of the retracted statement of Shri Ashok Jain, director of the assessee company; and (v) the A.O had erred in not considering the documentary evidences that were filed by the assessee company in order to support the identity and creditworthiness of the investor company as well as the genuineness of the transactions in question. 15. Apropos the claim of the assessee company that in absence of any incriminating material having been found and seized in the course of the search proceedings, no addition qua the unabated assessment for the year under consideration could be made, the same after exhaustive deliberations found favour with the CIT(Appeals). On a perusal of the record, it was observed by the CIT(Appeals) that the A.O had in his order not made reference of any incriminating document relating to the assessee company that was found and seized during the course of search proceedings. It was observed by him that the A.O in his order had referred to the statement of Shri Ashok Jain, director of the assessee company that was recorded u/s.132(4) of the Act on 20/22.09.2016. It was observed by the CIT(Appeals) that though the A.O had referred to the fact that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (iii) DCIT Vs. Mahalaxmi Technocast Ltd, Raipur, ITA Nos. 256 to 259/RPR/2014 dated 25.10.2021 (iv) Rawal Das Jaswani Vs. ACIT, (2015) 43 CCH 606 (Raipur) (v) DCIT (Central) Vs. Abhishek Steel Industries Ltd., ITA Nos. 250 to 255/RPR/2014, dated 25.10.2021. Considering the facts involved in the case of the assessee company r.w the aforesaid settled position of law, the CIT(Appeals) was of the view that in the absence of any incriminating material relating to the assessee for the year under consideration having been found and seized in the course of search proceedings, there was no justification for the A.O to have made the impugned addition qua the non-abated assessment of the assesee company. 16. Apropos the grievance of the assessee company that the A.O had erred in making the impugned additions merely on the basis of statements of third parties which were recorded by the Investigating Wing, Kolkata without providing any opportunity to cross-examine the said person, it was observed by the CIT(Appeals) that the A.O had in the assessment order relied on the statements of two accommodation entry providers, viz. S/shri Sankar Kumar Khetan and Abhishek Chokhani wherein, bot ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he statement of Shri Ashok Jain (supra) that was recorded u/s.132(4) of the Act, which, though had thereafter been retracted by him, it was observed by the CIT(Appeals) that a perusal of the assessment order revealed that the A.O had solely relied on the statement of the aforementioned person without making any reference to any positive and incriminating document found and seized during the course of search proceedings. Apropos the seized document, viz. Page -78 - LPS-8 that was confronted to Shri Ashok Jain (supra), it was observed by the CIT(Appeals) that the latter in his reply to Question No.43 had categorically stated that the said seized document made a mention of the share capital/premium that was received by the assessee company during the F.Y.2011-12 and F.Y.2012-13 from Kolkata based companies. It was observed by the CIT(Appeals) that the aforesaid seized document, viz. Page 78 - LPS-8 was in fact an extract of the ledger account of share capital as was appearing in the books of account of the assessee company. The CIT(Appeals) on the basis of his aforesaid observations was of the view that considering the duly accounted transactions mentioned in the seized document, viz. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f additions by acting upon the same. Considering the facts involved in the case in light of the settled position of law, the CIT(Appeals) was of the view that there was no justification for the A.O to have made the impugned addition merely on the basis of statement of Shri Ashok Jain (supra), which had already been retracted by him at a later stage, and the said additions ought to have been based on incriminating material, if any, seized during the course of search proceedings. 19. Apropos the claim of the assessee that the A.O had erred in making addition on the basis of suspicion, surmises and conjectures, i.e., without referring to any incriminating material, the CIT(Appeals) found favour with the said contention. It was observed by the CIT(Appeals) that during the course of the search proceedings conducted on the assessee company no incriminating material was found which would reveal that the assessee company was involved in procuring bogus accommodation entries in the guise of share capital/premium. In fact, it was observed by him that no incriminating material was referred to by the A.O while making the impugned additions in the hands of the assessee company. On the contrary ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... T(Appeals) after deliberating at length on their financials, i.e., audited financial statements a/w. audit reports for the year under consideration i.e. upto 31.03.2012, and considering the substantial amount of share capital and reserves & surplus as were available with the respective investor companies as on 31.03.2012, observed, that the said investor companies had substantial funds to make investment in the equity shares of the assessee company. Accordingly, the CIT(Appeals) on the basis of his exhaustive deliberations with respect to all the investor companies and their financial statements, Page 86 to 120 of his order, observed that all the said investor companies had substantial funds available with them to make the respective investments in equity shares of the assessee company. Also, it was observed by him that the assessee company in the course of the assessment proceedings had placed on record documentary evidence to substantiate the identity and creditworthiness of the assessee company and also the genuineness of the transactions in question. Considering the fact that the A.O had failed to place on record any cogent material which would disprove the aforesaid claim of t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ved by the assessee company from the respective investors. 22. Adverting to the addition of Rs.1,64,71,430/- made by the A.O u/s.41(1)(a) of the Act, it was observed by the CIT(Appeals) that the same was an addition that was made by the A.O while framing of the original assessment u/s.143(3) of the Act dated 31.03.2015. Elaborating on the facts leading to the aforesaid addition, it was observed by the CIT(Appeals) that the same was with respect to an outstanding amount that was payable by the assessee company to a contractor, viz. M/s. Pragmatic Builders Pvt. Ltd. as regards certain works contracts which were executed by the latter for the period relevant to F.Y 2010-11. The CIT(Appeals) observed that the assessee company as against the amount of Rs.2,24,19,987/- that was initially due towards the aforesaid contractor in FY 2010-11 had made a part payment of Rs.65 lac (after deducting TDS) and the remaining amount of Rs.1,54,71,430/- was shown as "contract bills payable". Also, it was observed by the CIT(Appeals) that a cheque of Rs.10 lac was returned unpaid to the assessee company and the same too was outstanding as payable during the year under consideration. As certain dispute ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... arch proceedings conducted u/s.132 of the Act from the residential/business premises of the assessee company, therefore, no addition as regards the unabated assessment of the assessee company for the year under consideration i.e. A.Y.2012-13 was liable to be made, therefore, we shall first deal with the said issue. 27. On a perusal of the orders of the lower authorities it transpires that there is only a reference of one seized document, viz. Page 78 - LPS-8, and a reference of that too had surfaced in Question No.43 that was raised while recording the statement of Shri Ashok Jain, director of the assessee company u/s.132(4) of the Act, Page 26 of the assessment order. On being confronted with the aforesaid seized document, viz. Page-78 - LPS-8, we find that Shri Ashok Jain had in his reply categorically stated that the same was a consolidated ledger account wherein there was a mention of the respective amounts of share capital/premium that were received by the assessee company over the period i.e. F.Y.2011-12 to F.Y.2015-16, and, the same were duly accounted for in the books of account of the assessee company. In order to verify the aforesaid factual position we may herein cull o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r under consideration i.e. A.Y.2012-13. 29. Considering the fact that no incriminating material was found and seized from the residential/business premises of the assessee company and, the assessment for the year under consideration was unabated, we shall now deal with the claim of the Ld. AR that no addition could have been made in the hands of the assessee company. As per the "2nd Proviso" to Section 153A of the Act, assessment or reassessment, if any, relating to any assessment year falling within the period of six assessment years referred to in sub section (1) of Section 153A of the Act, which is, inter alia, pending on the date of initiation of the search proceedings u/s.132, shall abate. For the sake of clarity the "2nd proviso" to Section 153A of the Act is culled out as under: "Provided further that assessment or reassessment, if any, relating to any assessment year falling within the period of six assessment years and for the relevant assessment year or years referred to in this sub-section pending on the date of initiation of the search under section 132 or making of requisition under section 132A, as the case may be, shall abate." On a careful perusal of the afores ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d property discovered in the course of search." (B). CIT Vs. Kabul Chawla, (2016) 380 ITR 573 ( Delhi) :- 31. In the aforesaid case, it was observed by the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi that in a case where no assessment or reassessment was pending on the date of search, then in the absence of any incriminating material having been unearthed during the course of search proceedings, no addition could have been made to the income of the assessee which was already assessed. For the sake of clarity the summarised observations of the Hon'ble High Court in its order are culled out as under: "Summary of the legal position 37. On a conspectus of Section 153A(1) of the Act, read with the provisos thereto, and in the light of the law explained in the aforementioned decisions, the legal position that emerges is as under: i. Once a search takes place under Section 132 of the Act, notice under Section 153 A (1) will have to be mandatorily issued to the person searched requiring him to file returns for six AYs immediately preceding the previous year relevant to the AY in which the search takes place. ii. Assessments and reassessments pending on the date of the search shall abate. Th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... TR 496 (Del), had observed, that in absence of any incriminating material unearthed during the course of search proceedings no addition could be made in respect of an unabated assessment of the assessee. In sum and substance, it was observed by the Hon'ble High Court that the provisions of Section 153A could not be invoked to reopen the concluded assessment of an assessment year in absence of incriminating material found during the course of search proceedings relating to such year. The Hon'ble High Court after relying on a host of judicial pronouncements had approved the view taken by the Tribunal that once an assessment has attained finality for a particular year, i.e., it is not pending, then, in absence of any incriminating material gathered in the course of search proceedings for the said year no addition could be validly made in the hands of the assessee, observing as under: "Subsequently, in Principal Commissioner of Income Tax- 1 v. Devangi alias Rupa (supra), another Bench of the Gujarat High Court reiterated the above legal position following its earlier decision in Principal Commissioner of Income Tax v. Saumya Construction P. Ltd. (supra) and of this Court in Kabul Ch ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nciers Pvt. Ltd. (2022) 447 ITR 305 ( Delhi); 2021 SCC OnLine Del 4430 has held that where the assessment of the respondents had attained finality prior to the date of search and no incriminating documents or material had been found and seized at the time of search, no addition could be made under section 153A of the Act as the cases of the respondents were of non-abated assessment." Also, we find that following the aforesaid view this Tribunal had vide its order passed in the cases of (i). Rawal Das Jaswani Vs. ACIT, (2015) 43 CCH 606 (Raipur); and (ii). DCIT (Central) Vs. Abhishek Steel Industries Ltd., ITA Nos. 250 to 255/RPR/2014, dated 25.10.2021, had held that in absence of any incriminating material having been found and seized in the course of search proceedings, no addition qua an unabated assessment can be made by the A.O while framing the assessment u/s.153A of the Act. Also, the aforesaid view that in absence of any incriminating material found and seized in the course of search proceedings no addition can be validly made in respect of an unabated assessment of the assessee u/s.153A of the Act had been approved by the various Hon'ble High Courts in the following judgm ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (Allahabad) and that of the Hon'ble High Court of Kerala in the case of E.N Gopakumar Vs. CIT (2016) 390 ITR 431 (Kerala) are concerned, we find that as stated by the ld. D.R, and, rightly so, the Hon'ble High Courts in the said respective judgments have taken a view to the contrary. In the said cases, it was observe by the Hon'ble High Courts that assessment proceedings generated by the issuance of a notice u/s 153(1)(a) of the Act can be concluded against the interest of the assessee which would include making of additions even without any incriminating material being available against the assessee having surfaced in the course of the search proceedings conducted under Sec. 132 of the Act. 37. Although the Hon'ble High Court of Allahabad in the case of Raj Kumar Arora (supra) and the Hon'ble High Court of Kerala in the case of E.N Gopakumar (supra) (supra) had taken a view in favour of the revenue, but as observed by us at length hereinabove, in a plethora of judicial pronouncements the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi, High Court of Bombay, High Court of Gujarat and High Court of Karnataka in their subsequent judgments have taken a view in favour of the assessee. Admittedly, there ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the unabated assessment of the assessee company for the year under consideration i.e A.Y 2012-13. Our aforesaid conviction is fortified by the judgments of the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in the case of Pr. CIT Vs. Best Infrastructure (India) Pvt. Ltd. (2017) 397 ITR 82 (Del.) and Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Harjeev Aggarwal (2016) 290 CTR 263 (Delhi). In the aforesaid case, it was observed by the Hon'ble High Court that a mere statement recorded during the course of search proceedings u/s.132(4) of the Act could not be considered to be an incriminating material. 39. We, thus, in terms of our aforesaid observations concur with the view taken by the CIT(Appeals) that in absence of any incriminating material having been found and seized during the course of search proceedings conducted on the assessee company u/s.132 of the Act dated 19.09.2016, no addition could have been made by the A.O in respect of the unabated assessment of the assessee company for the year under consideration i.e. A.Y.2012-13. Thus, the Grounds of appeal No.(s) 3 & 4 raised by the revenue are dismissed in terms of our aforesaid observations. 40. Although, we have upheld the view taken by the CIT(Appeals) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... -examine them but the said request of the assessee was not acceded to by the A.O, and neither the copies of the aforesaid statements were provided to the assessee nor their cross-examination was facilitated. 43. Considering the aforesaid facts, the CIT(Appeals) after drawing support from a host of judicial pronouncements, had observed, that the statements of the aforesaid unrelated parties that were recorded prior to the search and seizure proceedings could not have formed a standalone basis for drawing of adverse inferences in the hands of the assessee company. Apart from that, it was observed by the CIT(Appeals) that the assessee company was not in receipt of any share capital/premium from any of the companies which were stated to have been operated by the aforementioned persons. Relying on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of M/s. Andaman Timber Industries Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Kolkata-II, Civil Appeal No.248 of 2006 a/w. host of other judicial pronouncements, it was observed by the CIT(Appeals) that as the statements of the aforementioned unrelated third parties were recorded at the back of the assessee without affording any opportunity to cro ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 132(4) of the Act by Shri. Ashok Jain, director of the assessee company. 46. After hearing the ld. Authorized Representatives of both the parties, we find that the grievance of the revenue hinges around the acceptance by the CIT(Appeals) of the retraction of statement recorded u/s.132(4) of the Act by Shri Ashok Jain (supra). It is the claim of the department that the CIT(Appeals) while finding favour with the retraction of statement by Shri. Ashok Jain (supra), had failed to take cognizance of the fact that the assessee had not placed on record any such material which would have justified the said retraction. 47. On a perusal of the records, it transpires that the statement of Shri Ashok Jain, director of the assessee company was recorded u/s.132(4) of the Act on 22.09.2016. Ostensibly, Shri Ashok Jain (supra) had in his aforesaid statement came up with a surrender of a sum of Rs.19.05 crore, which included a sum of Rs.2.10 crore for A.Y 2013-14 and Rs.12.68 crore for A.Y.2014-15 in the hands of the assessee company. However, Sh. Ashok Jain (supra) had thereafter on the basis of an "affidavit" dated 24.09.2016 retracted his aforesaid statement recorded u/s.132(4) of the Act. On ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f independent material/evidence. In fact, we concur with the CIT(Appeals) that the A.O ought to have led evidence which would have supported the fact that the income disclosed by Shri. Ashok Jain (supra) in his statement recorded u/s 132(4) of the Act was the undisclosed income of the assessee company. Our aforesaid view is supported by the CBDT Instruction No. F-No.286/2/2003-IT (Inv. II) dated 10.03.2002, wherein the Board had emphasized that the officials in the course of search/survey operation should focus and concentrate on collection of evidence as regards income of the assessee which had either not been disclosed or is not likely to be disclosed before the Income Tax Department, and no attempt should be made to obtain confessions of undisclosed income at the time of recording of statement during the course of the aforesaid proceedings. Accordingly, on the basis of our aforesaid deliberations we uphold the view taken by the CIT(Appeals), who we find had rightly vacated the adverse inferences which were drawn by the A.O on the basis of the retracted statement of Shri Ashok Jain (supra) recorded u/s.132(4) of the Act de-hors any corroborative material supporting the same. Thus ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oration and confirmations of the respective investor companies filed by the assessee company had not been disproved or dislodged in any way by the A.O. Also, we may herein observe, that though the A.O had initially observed that the Inspector(s) of Income Tax attached with the ADIT(Inv.), Kolkata and DDIT(Inv.), Kolkata had claimed that only 8 out of 32 investor companies were traceable at their respective addresses, but the very fact that the notice(s) issued by the A.O u/s.133(6) of the Act dated 01.10.2018 to all the said investor companies were not only duly served at their respective addresses but also complied with by them, therein establishes beyond doubt that the said companies were very much in existence. We, thus, on the basis of our aforesaid observations, are of a strong conviction, that though the assessee company on the basis of supporting documentary evidence had duly discharged the primary onus that was cast upon it as regards proving the identity and creditworthiness of the investor companies a/w. genuineness of the transactions of receipt of share capital/premium from them, but the A.O, thereafter, had grossly failed to place on record any material/evidence which ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at 11, Bysack Street, Kolkata, West Bengal-700007. Regarding the genuineness of the transaction, the appellant submitted that all the transactions by the appellant with ADPL had taken place through account payee cheques/ banking channels only and none of the transactions had taken place in the form of cash. Appellant in support has filed copy of bank account statement of ADPL. On perusal of bank account statement of the investor company no cash was found deposited before and after transferring of funds to the appellant company. After receipt of funds the appellant company has issued 'Equity Share Certificate' with reg. Folio No d certificate No 125 on10.04.2012. In order to prove credit worthiness of the investor, the appellant has filed copies of audited financial statements of ADPL along with Auditors' Report, in respect of the financial year ended 31st March 2011. On perusal of the same it was found that ADPL as on 31.03.2011 has share capital of Rs.19,87,000/- and reserves & surplus of Rs. 9,24,69,652/-. Further, the balance sheet mentions application of funds of Rs.9,04,15,000/- and therefore, the investor company was having funds of Rs.40,41,652/- out of wh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ned in its Memorandum of Association, under which it has got incorporated. The registered office of the GTPL is situated at 6, NG, Flat No 1E, Block-I, Basak Road, Phase-II, Kolkata, West Bengal-700080. Regarding the genuineness of the transaction, the appellant submitted that all the transactions by the appellant with GTPL had taken place through account payee cheques/ banking channels only and none of the transactions had taken place in the form of cash. Appellant in support has filed copy of bank account statement of GTPL. On perusal of bank account statement of the investor company no cash was found deposited before and after transferring of funds to the appellant company. After receipt of funds the appellant company has issued 'Equity Share Certificate' with reg. Folio No 118 and certificate No 127 on 10.04.2012. In order to prove credit worthiness of the investor, the appellant has filed copies of audited financial statements of GTPL along with Auditors' Report, in respect of the financial year ended 31st March 2012. On perusal of the same it was found that GTPL as on 31.03.2011 has share capital of Rs. 2,18,62,798/- and reserves & surplus of Rs. 35,07,91,14 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ated. The registered office of the BDPL is situated at 54, Munshi Saddaruddin, 2nd floor, Kolkata, West Bengal-700007. Regarding the genuineness of the transaction, the appellant submitted that all the transactions by the appellant with BDPL had taken place through account payee cheques/ banking channels only and none of the transactions had taken place in the form of cash. Appellant in support has filed copy of bank account statement of BDPL. On perusal of bank account statement of the investor company no cash was found deposited before and after transferring of funds to the appellant company. After receipt of funds the appellant company has issued 'Equity Share Certificate' with reg. Folio No 120 and certificate No 129 on 10.04.2012. In order to prove credit worthiness of the investor, the appellant has filed copies of audited financial statements of BDPL along with Auditors' Report, in respect of the financial year ended 31st March 2012. On perusal of the same it was found that BDPL as on 31.03.2012 has share capital of Rs. 7,79,250/- and reserves & surplus of Rs. 5,55,47,877/-. Thus, the investor has sufficient funds to make investment in equity shares of appe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r which it has got incorporated. The registered office of the BSPL is situated at 63, Radha Bazar street, Kolkata, West Bengal-700001. The BSPL is an active and functionary company as per the records and data of the Ministry of Corporate Affairs (MCA), Government of India. Regarding the genuineness of the transaction, the appellant submitted that all the transactions by the appellant with BSPL had taken place through account payee cheques/ banking channels only and none of the transactions had taken place in the form of cash. Appellant in support has filed copy of bank account statement of BSPL. On perusal of bank account statement of the investor company no cash was found deposited before and after transferring of funds to the appellant company. After receipt of funds the appellant company has issued 'Equity Share Certificate' with reg. Folio No 122 and certificate No 131 on 10.04.2012. In order to prove credit worthiness of the investor, the appellant has filed copies of audited financial statements of BSPL along with Auditors' Report, in respect of the financial year ended 31st March 2012. On perusal of the same it was found that BSPL as on 31.03.2011 has share ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ant submitted that originally, the CVPL was incorporated as a Private limited company, duly registered under the erstwhile Companies Act, 1956, under the Certificate of Incorporation granted by the Registrar of Companies, West Bengal on 17.05.2010 vide registration No. U51909WB2010PTC148156. The CVPL was incorporated with the objects contained in its Memorandum of Association, under which it has got incorporated. The registered office of the CVPL, is situated at 63, Radha Bazar Street, 2nd floor, Kolkata, West Bengal-700006. The CVPL is an active and functionary company as per the records and data of the Ministry of Corporate Affairs (MCA), Government of India. Regarding the genuineness of the transaction, the appellant submitted that all the transactions by the appellant with CVPL had taken place through account payee cheques/ banking channels only and none of the transactions had taken place in the form of cash. Appellant in support has filed copy of bank account statement of CVPL. On perusal of bank account statement of the investor company no cash was found deposited before and after transferring of funds to the appellant company. After receipt of funds the appellant company ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2012 has share capital of Rs. 6,56,250/- and reserves & surplus of Rs. 3,10,77,443/-. Thus, the investor has sufficient funds to make investment in equity shares of appellant company. * M/s Fastmove Vintrade Pvt Ltd (PAN-AABCF6231A) [in short FVPL]:- Regarding the identity of the company, the appellant submitted that originally, the FVPL was incorporated as a Private limited company, duly registered under the erstwhile Companies Act, 1956, under the Certificate of Incorporation granted by the Registrar of Companies, West Bengal on 10.11.2010 vide registration No. U51909WB2010PTC154565. The FVPL was incorporated with the objects contained in its Memorandum of Association, under which it has got incorporated. The registered office of the FVPL is situated at 105, Cotton Street, Kolkata, West Bengal-700007. The FVPL is an active and functionary company as per the records and data of the Ministry of Corporate Affairs (MCA), Government of India. Regarding the genuineness of the transaction, the appellant submitted that all the transactions by the appellant with FVPL had taken place through account payee cheques/ banking channels only and none of the transactions had taken pla ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... .04.2012. In order to prove credit worthiness of the investor, the appellant has filed copies of audited financial statements of MTPL along with Auditors' Report, in respect of the financial year ended 31St March 2012. On perusal of the same it was found that MTPL as on 31.03.2012 has share capital of Rs.26,38,000/- and reserves & surplus of Rs. 12,40,15,575/-. Thus, the investor has sufficient funds to make investment in equity shares of appellant company. * M/s Manthan Vintrade Pvt Ltd (PAN-AAHCM5395A) [in short MVPL] :- Regarding the identity of the company, the appellant submitted that originally, the MVPL was incorporated as a Private limited company, duly registered under the erstwhile Companies Act 1956, under the certificate of Incorporation granted by the Registrar of Companies, West Bengal, on 22.11.2011 vide registration No. U51909WB2011PTC169712. The MVPL was incorporated with the objects contained in its Memorandum of Association, under which it has got incorporated. The registered office of the MVPL was situated at 54, Munshi Saddaruddin lane, 2nd Floor, Kolkata-700007. The MVPL is an active and functionary company as per the records and data of the Minis ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ellant company. After receipt of funds the appellant company has issued 'Equity Share Certificate' with reg. Folio No 129 and certificate No 138 on 10.04.2012. In order to prove credit worthiness of the investor, the appellant has filed copies of audited financial statements of MDPL along with Auditors' Report, in respect of the financial year ended 31st March 2012. On perusal of the same it was found that MDPL as on 31.03.2012 has share capital of Rs. 6,57,250/- and reserves & surplus of Rs. 3,12,84,318/-. Thus, the investor has sufficient funds to make investment in equity shares of appellant company. * M/s. Nirmal Vintrade Pvt. Ltd. (PAN-AADCN7579F) [in short NVPL]:- Regarding the identity of the company, the appellant submitted that originally, the NVPL was incorporated as a Private limited company, duly registered under the erstwhile Companies Act, 1956, under the Certificate of Incorporation granted by the Registrar of Companies, West Bengal, on 28.09.2011 vide registration No.US1909WB2011PTC 168227. The NVPL was incorporated with the objects contained in its Memorandum of Association, under which it has got incorporated. The registered office of the NVPL ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ompany. After receipt of funds the appellant company has issued 'Equity Share Certificate' with reg. Folio No 131 and certificate No 140 on 10.04.2012. In order to prove credit worthiness of the investor, the appellant has filed copies of audited financial statements of OVPL along with Auditors' Report, in respect of the financial year ended 31st March 2011. On perusal of the same it was found that OVPL as on 31.03.2011 has share capital of Rs. 20,34,990/- and reserves & surplus of Rs.9,48,20,548/-. Likewise as on 31.03.2012 has share capital of Rs. 20,34,990/- and reserves & surplus of Rs. 9,48,27,433/-. Thus, the investor has sufficient funds to make investment in equity shares of appellant company. * M/s Parrot Dealers Pvt Ltd (PAN-AAGCP2875F) [in short PDPL|:- Regarding the identity of the company, the appellant submitted that originally, the PDPL was incorporated as a Private limited company, duly registered under the erstwhile Companies Act, 1956, under the Certificate of Incorporation granted by the Registrar of Companies, West Bengal, on 22.11.2011 vide registration No. U51909WB2011PTC169711. The PDPL was incorporated with the objects contained in its Memorandum of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ash. Appellant in Support has filed copy of bank account statement of PTPL. On perusal of bank account statement of the investor company no cash was found deposited before and after transferring of funds to the appellant company. After receipt of funds the appellant company has issued 'Equity Share Certificate' with reg. Folio No 133 and certificate No 142 on 10.04.2012, In order to Prove credit worthiness of the investor, the appellant has filed copies of audited statements of PTPL along with Auditors' Report, in respect of the financial year ended 315' March 2012. On perusal of the same it was found that PTPL as on 31.03.2011 has share capital of Rs. 25,76,000/- and reserves & surplus of Rs. 12,13,27,118/- . Likewise as on 31.03.2012 has share capital of Rs. 25,76,000/- and reserves & surplus of Rs. 12,09,87,950/-. Thus, the investor has sufficient funds to make investment in equity shares of appellant company. * M/s Queens Agency Pvt Ltd (PAN-AAACQ2647N)[in short QAPL]:- Regarding the identity of the company, the appellant submitted that originally, the QAPL was incorporated as a Private limited company, duly registered under the erstwhile Companies Act, 1956, under ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ransaction, the appellant submitted that all the transactions by the appellant with RVPL had taken place through account payee cheques/ banking channels only and none of the transactions had taken place in the form of cash. Appellant in support has filed copy of bank account statement of RVPL. On perusal of bank account statement of the investor company no cash was found deposited before and after transferring of funds to the appellant company. After receipt of funds the appellant company has issued 'Equity Share Certificate' with reg. Folio No 135 and certificate No 144 on 10.04.2012. In order to prove credit worthiness of the investor, the appellant has filed copies of audited financial statements of RVPL along with Auditors' Report, in respect of the financial year ended 3 1 March 2012. On perusal of the same it was found that RVPL as on 31.03.2011 has share capital of Rs. 2,14,35,875/- and reserves & surplus of Rs. 26,71,72,232/-. Likewise as on 31.03.2012 has share capital of Rs. 2,14,35,875/- and reserves & surplus of Rs. 26,71,74,346/-. Thus, the investor has sufficient funds to make investment in equity shares of appellant company. *M/s._Risewell Vintrade Pvt Ltd (PAN ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er Which it has got incorporated. The registered office of the RDPL is situated at 54, Munshi Saddaruddin lane, 2nd Floor, Kolkata-700007. The RDPL is an active and functionary company as per the records and data of the Ministry of Corporate Affairs (MCA), Government of India. Regarding the genuineness of the transaction, the appellant submitted that all the transactions by Ne appellant with RDPL had taken place through account payee cheques/ banking channels only and none of the transactions had taken place in the form of cash. Appellant in support has filed copy of bank account statement of RDPL. On perusal of bank account statement of the investor company no cash was found deposited before and after transferring of funds to the appellant company. After receipt of funds the appellant company has issued 'Equity Share Certificate' with reg. Folio No 137 and certificate No 146 on 10.04.2012. In order to prove credit worthiness of the investor, the appellant has filed copies of audited financial statements of RDPL along with Auditors' Report, in respect of the financial year ended 31st March 2012. On perusal of the same it was found that RDPL as on 31.03.2012 has share capital ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... B2010PTC150945. The SVPL was incorporated with the objects contained in its Memorandum of Association, under which it has got incorporated. The registered office of the SVPL is situated at 20, MD Road, Kolkata-700006. The SVPL is an active and functionary company as per the records and data of the Ministry of Corporate Affairs (MCA), Government of India. Regarding the genuineness of the transaction, the appellant submitted that all the transactions by the appellant with SVPL had taken place through account payee cheques/ banking channels only and none of the transactions had taken place in the form of cash. Appellant in support has filed copy of bank account statement of SVPL. On perusal of bank account statement of the investor company no cash was found deposited before and after transferring of funds to the appellant company. After receipt of funds the appellant company has issued 'Equity Share Certificate' with reg. Folio No 139 and certificate No 148 on 10.04.2012. In order to prove credit worthiness of the investor, the appellant has filed copies of audited financial statements of SVPL along with Auditors' Report, in respect of the financial year ended 31st M ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... garding the identity of the company, the appellant submitted that originally, the SAPL was incorporated as a Private limited company, duly registered under the erstwhile Companies Act, 1956, under the Certificate of Incorporation granted by the Registrar of Companies, West Bengal on 09.11.2010 Vide Registration No. U51909WB2010PTC154536. The SAPL was incorporated with the objects contained in its Memorandum of Association, under which it has got incorporated. The registered office of the SAPL is situated at 6, NG Basak Road, phase-ii, Block-I, 1st floor, Kolkata-700080. The SAPL is an active and functionary company as per the records and data of the Ministry of Corporate Affairs (MCA), Government of India. Regarding the genuineness of the transaction, the appellant submitted that all the transactions by the appellant with SAPL had taken place through account payee cheques/ banking channels only and none of the transactions had taken place in the form of cash. Appellant in support has filed copy of bank account statement of SAPL. On perusal of bank account statement of the investor company no cash was found deposited before and after transferring of funds to the appellant company ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... STPL as on 31.03.2012 has share capital of Rs. 6,42,500/- and reserves & surplus of Rs. 2,83,40,307/-. Thus, the investor has sufficient funds to make investment in equity shares of appellant company. * M/s Suruchi Suppliers Pvt Ltd (PAN-AAOCS9705M) [in short SSPL]:- Regarding the identity of the company, the appellant submitted that originally, the SSPL was incorporated as a Private limited company, duly registered under the erstwhile Companies Act, 1956, under the Certificate of Incorporation granted by the Registrar of Companies, West Bengal on 10.11.2010 Vide Registration No U51909WB2010PTC154569. The SSPL was incorporated with the objects contained in its Memorandum of sociation, under which it has got incorporated. The registered office of the SSPL is situated at 105, Cotton Street, Kolkata- 700007. The SSPL is an active and functionary company as per the records and data of the Ministry of Corporate Affairs (MCA), Government of India. Regarding the genuineness of the transaction, the appellant submitted that all the transactions by the appellant with SSPL had taken place through account payee cheques/ banking channels only and none of the transactions had taken pla ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 011 has share capital of Rs. 2,40,41,193/- and reserves & surplus of Rs. 78,43,09,525/-. Likewise as on 31.03.2012 has share capital of Rs. 2,40,41,193/- and reserves & surplus of Rs. 78,42,45,741/-. Thus, the investor has sufficient funds to make investment in equity shares of appellant company. * M/s. Ziona Dealmark Pvt Ltd (PAN-AAACZ4469P) [in short ZDPL]:- Regarding the identity of the company, the appellant submitted that originally, the ZDPL was incorporated as a Private limited company, duly registered under the erstwhile Companies Act, 1956, under the Certificate of Incorporation granted by the Registrar of Companies, West Bengal on 21.09.2010 Vide Registration No U51909WB2010PTC153237. The ZDPL was incorporated with the objects contained in its Memorandum of Association, under which it has got incorporated. The registered office of the ZDPL is situated at 63, Radha Bazar Street, Kolkata-700001. The ZDPL is an active and functionary company as per the records and data of the Ministry of Corporate Affairs (MCA), Government of India. Regarding the genuineness of the transaction, the appellant submitted that all the transactions by the appellant with ZDPL had taken pl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... llant has filed copies of audited financial statements of AMPL along with Auditors' Report, in respect of the financial year ended 31st March 2012. On perusal of the same it was found that AMPL as on 31.03.2011 has share capital of Rs. 2,24,57,500/- and reserves & surplus of Rs. 46,91,44,056/-. Likewise as on 31.03.2012 has share capital of Rs. 2,24,57,500/- and reserves & surplus of Rs. 46,91,59,145/-. Thus, the investor has sufficient funds to make investment in equity shares of appellant company. * M/s Pearl Dealers Pvt Ltd (PAN-AAECP4377L) [in short PDPL]:- Regarding the identity of the company, the appellant submitted that originally, the PDPL was incorporated as a Private limited company, duly registered under the erstwhile Companies Act, 1956, under the Certificate of Incorporation granted by the Registrar of Companies, West Bengal on 22.11.2007 Vide Registration No U51109WB2007PTC120528. The PDPL was incorporated with the objects contained in its Memorandum of Association, under which it has got incorporated. The registered office of the PDPL is situated at 9/12, Lal Bazar Street, mercantile Building, Block B, Room No 10, Kolkata-700001. The PDPL is an active and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r has brought to our notice any perversity in the view so arrived at by him. We, thus, finding no justifiable reason to dislodge the well-reasoned observations of the CIT(Appeals), approve the same. Thus, the Grounds of appeal No.(s) 1, 2 and 8 raised by the revenue being devoid and bereft of any merit are dismissed in terms of our aforesaid observations. 53. We shall now deal with the grievance of the revenue that the CIT(Appeals) had erred in vacating the addition of Rs.1,64,71,430/- that was made by the A.O u/s.41(1)(a) of the Act. 54. As observed by us hereinabove an amount of Rs.1,64,71,430/- (out of Rs.2,24,19,987/-) was reflected as payable by the assessee company to M/s. Pragmatic Builders Pvt. Ltd., a contractor who had executed certain works contract for the assessee company in the period relevant to A.Y 2011-12. Although, the assessee in the course of the assessment proceedings had filed copy of confirmation of the aforesaid contractor, viz. M/s. Pragmatic Builders Pvt. Ltd., but the A.O without making any enquiry had vide his order u/s 143(3), dated 31.03.2015 held the aforesaid amount as a liability which had ceased within the meaning of Section 41(1)(a) of the Act. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e 39-40 of assessment order (as the copy of the said bank account of the assessee company was called for by the A.O u/s.133(6) of the Act), therefore, the same by no means could be held as being in the nature of an additional evidence. Also, as observed by the CIT(Appeals), as the assessee company in the course of the original assessment proceedings that had culminated vide order passed by the A.O u/s.143(3) dated 31.03.2015 had filed before him copies of confirmations of the aforementioned contractor, therefore, on the said count also we are unable to persuade ourselves to concur with the view taken by the A.O that the aforesaid liability in question was to be held as having ceased u/s.41(1)(a) of the Act. As the assessee had discharged the majority of its outstanding liability towards the aforesaid contractor, viz. M/s. Pragmatic Builders Pvt. Ltd. during F.Y.2012-13 to F.Y.2015-16 and an amount of Rs.2,54,430/- only was outstanding as payable in the running account of the aforesaid party on 18.05.2016, therefore, in our considered view the CIT(Appeals) had rightly observed that there was no justification for the A.O to have dubbed the liability in question as a ceased liability ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ade additions on the basis of incriminating material and not on the basis of statement of the appellant which had already been retracted by the appellant at later stage knowing the fact of evidentiary value of statement recorded u/s.132(4) of the Act and while retracting from the statement given earlier, the assessee could not produce any corroborative evidence in support of his retraction. Further, in his concluding para of the statement, the assessee agreed and gave his consent that the statement given by him are correct and put his signature." 7. In reference to the above mentioned Point 6, Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) is justified in ignoring the dictum of law pronounced in case of Bannalal Jat Construction (P) Ltd vs ACIT 106 Taxmann 128(SC)/2019 264 Taxmann 5(SC) and in ignoring that the statement recorded u/s.131 of the act has evidentiary value and the burden lays on the person who made the statement, to provide a reasoned explanation for retracting from the statement, specifically, when he himself declared in his own handwriting that the statement is made in sound state of mind and without coercion. Therefore, Ld. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he assessee Rs.10,68,271/- 4. Ad-hoc disallowance of 1/5th of the travelling, telephone and conveyance expenses Rs.76,280/- 5. Disallowance u/s.40A(3) of the Act Rs.46,340/- 61. Aggrieved, the assessee assailed the order passed by the A.O u/s 143(3), dated 28.03.2016 before the CIT(Appeals). 62. That pursuant to the search proceedings conducted u/s 132 of the Act on 19.09.2016 notice u/s. 153A of the Act was issued to the assessee company on 19.07.2017. In compliance, the assessee company had filed its return of income u/s.153A of the Act on 20.08.2017, declaring an income of Rs.32,46,730/-. Assessment was, thereafter, framed by the A.O vide his order passed u/ss. 153A/143(3) dated 26.12.2018, determining the income of the assessee company at Rs.3,03,37,621/- i.e. after reconsidering the additions which were earlier made by his predecessor vide original assessment framed u/s.143(3) dated 28.03.2016. 63. Consolidating the appeals filed by the assessee against the original assessment u/s 143(3), dated 28.03.2016 and u/s 153A r.w.s 143(3), dated 26.12.2018, the CIT(Appeals) vacated the aforesaid additions/disallowances made by the A.O. 64. The revenue being aggrieved with t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he CIT(Appeals), that as per the "2nd proviso" to Sec. 153A of the Act, in a case where no assessment or reassessment is pending on the date of search u/s. 132 of the Act, then, in absence of any incriminating material found and seized during the course of said proceedings relating to the year under consideration i.e A.Y 2013-14, no addition could have been made in the hands of the assessee company. On the basis of our deliberations at Para 25 to 37 hereinabove, we finding no infirmity in the view taken by the CIT(Appeals) uphold the same to the said extent. Thus, the Grounds of appeal No.(s) 3 & 4 raised by the revenue are dismissed in terms of our aforesaid observations. 69. Considering the facts involved in the present case before us in the backdrop of the contentions of the ld. Authorized Representatives of both the parties, as the Grounds of appeal No.(s) 5 to 7 on the basis of which the order of the CIT(Appeals) has been assailed before us remains the same as were there in the appeal of the revenue for the immediately preceding year i.e A.Y 2012-13 in IT(SS)A No.2/RPR/2022 for A.Y.2012-13, therefore, the order therein passed shall mutatis mutandis apply for the purpose of di ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tal/premium from the aforementioned company as an unexplained cash credit u/s.68 of the Act. 74. The A.O while framing the assessment vide his order passed u/s.153A r.w.s. 143(3), dated 26.12.2018 repeated the aforesaid additions as were made by him while framing the original assessment u/s.143(3) dated 28.03.2016. BEFORE CIT(APPEALS) : (A) M/s. Manali Tradecom Pvt. Ltd. : Rs. 20 lac 75. The CIT(Appeals) on an appeal filed by the assessee company deliberated at length on the documentary evidences that were filed to substantiate the identity and creditworthiness of the aforementioned share applicant i.e. M/s. Manali Tradecom Pvt. Ltd., as well as the genuineness of the transaction of receipt of share capital/premium from the said share applicant company. Considering the certificate of incorporation granted by the Registrar of companies (ROC), West Bengal on 14.12.2010 bearing registration no. U51909WB2010PTC155767, memorandum of association, articles of association, copies of bank statement, audited financial statements of the aforesaid investor company, the CIT(Appeals) was of the view that there was no justification for the A.O in holding the investment made by the said inve ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ar, Kolkata, West Bengal-700007, however, as current registered office as per MCA record is at 119, Cotton Street, 2nd Floor, Burra Bazar, Kolkata-700007. The EVPL is an active and functionary company as per the records and data of the Ministry of Corporate Affairs (MCA), Government of India. Regarding the genuineness of the transaction, the appellant submitted that all the transactions by the appellant with MTPL had taken place through account payee cheques/ banking channels only and none of the tr ions had taken place in the form of cash. Appellant in support has filed copy of bank account statement of MTPL. On perusal of bank account statement of the investor company no cash was found deposited before and after transferring of funds to the appellant company. In order to prove credit worthiness of the investor, the appellant has filed copies of audited financial statements of MTPL along with Auditors' Report, in respect of the financial year ended 31st March 2013. On perusal of the same it was found that MTPL as on 31.03.2012 has share capital of Rs. 26,38,000/- and reserves & surplus of Rs.12,40,15,575/-. Likewise, as on 31-03-2013, MTPL has share capital of Rs. 26,38, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cast upon it as regards proving the identity and creditworthiness of the share subscriber, and the genuineness of the transaction under consideration, therefore, there was no justification for the A.O to have held the amount of Rs.20 lac that was received by the assessee company as share capital/premium from the aforesaid investor as an unexplained cash credit u/s.68 of the Act. (B). M/s. Extent Vinimay Pvt. Ltd. : Rs.1.90 crore 77. On a perusal of the orders of the lower authorities, we find that the aforementioned investor company was duly registered with the Registrar of Companies, West Bengal (ROC) on 12.07.2010 vide registration No. U51101WB2010PTC15102. It initially had its registered office at 63, Radha Bazar Street, Kolkata, West Bengal - 700 001, which thereafter w.e.f. 15.05.2018 was shifted to a new address i.e 201, 2nd floor, Lal Ganga Shopping Mall, G.E Road, Raipur-492 001. It was observed by the CIT(Appeals) that the aforementioned company was an active and functional company as per the records and data of the Ministry of Corporate Affairs (MCA), Government of India. Also, it was observed by the CIT(Appeals) that the aforesaid investor company, viz. M/s Extent Vi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g independent, detailed and complete enquiry into the fresh subscription of share capital of Rs. 35.39 lac and share premium of Rs. 17.34 crore that was raised by the latter during the said year i.e A.Y 2011-12. It was further observed by the CIT(Appeals) that the A.O pursuant to the aforesaid directions had vide his order passed u/s.143(3) r.w.s. 263, dated 20.12.2016 verified the share capital/premium of Rs. 17.69 crore (approx.) that was raised by the aforesaid investor company, viz. M/s Extent Vinimay Pvt. Ltd. and had found the same in order. On the basis of the aforesaid facts, the CIT(Appeals) found substance in the claim of the assessee company that now when the share capital/premium received by the investor, viz. M/s Extent Vinimay Pvt. Ltd. in A.Y 2010-11 was after necessary vetting and verifications in its case by the ITO-Ward 12(2), Kolkata vide his order passed u/ss. 143(3)/263, dated 20.12.2016 found to be in order, then, the investment of Rs. 1.90 crore (supra) made by the said investor company by realizing its investments, which, in turn were sourced from the aforesaid duly explained share capital/premium of Rs. 17.69 crore (supra) could not be held as an unexplaine ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... financial statements of EVPL along with Auditors' Report, in respect of the financial year ended 31St March 2013. On perusal of the same it was found that EVPL as on 31.03.2012 has share capital of Rs. 36,39,000/- and reserves & surplus of Rs.17,34,26,476/-. Likewise, as on 31-03-2013, EVPL has share capital of Rs. 36,39,000/- and reserves & surplus of Rs.17,34,35,034/-. Thus, the investor has sufficient funds to make investment in equity shares of appellant company. Most importantly, the case of EVPL was re-opened u/s 263 of the share capital and share premium received during A.Y.2011-12. The ld AO i.e. ITO Ward-12(2), Kolkata after verification of facts and submissions filed by ld AR of the investor company treated the share capital/premium as genuine by passing order u/s 263 r.w.s 143(3) dated 20.12.2016. The said order has been passed after the search and seizure proceedings in the case of appellant. Once, the source of investment has been treated as genuine, the AO has no locus to treat the same as bogus and nongenuine and that to in absence of any positive documents in support of his allegation." 80. We have given a thoughtful consideration to the view taken by the CIT( ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed reports of the Inspector of the Income-Tax, which, in turn were based on the verifications carried out by them at the old address of the investor company. Considering the aforesaid facts, we concur with the view taken by the CIT(Appeals) that now when the assessee company had duly discharged the onus that was cast upon it as regards proving the authenticity of the transaction of having received genuine share capital/premium from the aforementioned investor company, viz. M/s. Extent Vinimay Pvt. Ltd, therefore, the A.O could not have remained oblivion of the said material evidence and drawn adverse inferences without placing on record any material/evidence which would have disproved the authenticity of the aforesaid claim of the assessee company. Our aforesaid view that no addition could be made merely on the basis of suspicion, guess work and surmises is supported by the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Dhakeshwari Cotton Mills Ltd Vs Commissioner of Income Tax, (1954) 22 CCH 139 (ISCC) and that of the Hon'ble High Court of Calcutta in the case of Northern Bengal Jute Trading Co. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-Tax, (1968) 70 ITR 407 (Cal). Also, the aforesai ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Rs.35.39 lacs (+) Rs.17.34 crore], having found the same to be in order, was accepted by him. 82. On the basis of the aforesaid facts, we are of the considered view that now when the source out of which the aforementioned investor company,viz. M/s. Extent Vinimay Pvt. Ltd had made the investment with the assessee company towards share capital/premium in itself stands accepted by the department, therefore, as observed by the CIT(Appeals), and, rightly so, there was no locus standi with the A.O of the present assessee company to have held the investment made by the aforementioned company as an unexplained cash credit u/s. 68 of the Act in the hands of the assessee company. 83. In order to verify the aforesaid factual position and to dispel all doubts, the Ld. AR for the assessee in the course of hearing of the appeal was directed to place on record a "fund flow" chart which would reveal that the investment of Rs. 1.90 crore (supra) made by M/s. Extent Vinimay Pvt. Ltd towards share capital/premium with the assessee company during the year under consideration was sourced out of its duly disclosed funds of Rs.17.69 crore (supra). In compliance, the assessee had filed before us a cons ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ried to project, that the investments made with it by the aforesaid investor company i.e towards share capital/premium and loans/advances for the year under consideration i.e. A.Y.2013-14 and the succeeding two years, were out of rotation of the latter's investments/funds of Rs.17.71 crore (supra), the source of which was looked into and accepted by the ITO, Ward 12(2), Kolkata, vide his order passed in the case of the said investor company, viz. M/s. Extent Vinimay Pvt. Ltd u/s.143(3) r.w.s. 263 dated 20.12.2016. 85. We have given a thoughtful consideration and find substance in the aforesaid claim of the assessee. Now when the investments made by the aforesaid investor company, viz. M/s. Extent Vinimay Pvt. Ltd were sourced from the rotation/realization of its investments/funds of Rs.17.71 crore (supra) that had been accepted by the ITO, Ward 12(2), Kolkata vide his order passed u/s.143(3) r.w.s. 263 of the Act, dated 20.12.2016, therefore, as observed by the CIT(Appeals), and, rightly so, the A.O could not have held any part of such investment made by the said investor with the assessee company out of its said disclosed sources as an unexplained cash credit in the hands of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hat the investment made by the aforesaid investor company, viz. M/s. Extent Vinimay Pvt. Ltd towards share capital/premium of Rs.1.90 crore with it was out of rotation/realization of its duly disclosed investments of A.Y 2011-12 can only be accepted to the extent of Rs.1.84 crore (supra.). 87. Alternatively, we are of the considered view, that as observed by the CIT(Appeals), and, rightly so, as the assessee by placing on record supporting documentary evidences, viz. copies of audited financial statements, copies of bank accounts, memorandum of association, articles of association, copies of return of income etc. of the aforesaid investor company, viz. M/s. Extent Vinimay Pvt. Ltd., had duly established the identity and creditworthiness of the said investor company, as well as the genuineness of the transaction of having received share capital/premium from the said concern, therefore, there was no justification on the part of the A.O to have held any part of the investment of Rs.1.90 crore (supra) made by the said investor company towards share capital/premium with the assessee company during the year under consideration as an unexplained cash credit u/s.68 of the Act. On the basi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... unt of Rs.49 lac (supra) as an unexplained cash credit u/s.68 of the Act. 90. On appeal, the CIT(Appeals) after considering both the agreements i.e agreement of sale/cancellation agreement was of the view that the contents therein had been rejected by the A.O without carrying out any enquiry from the concerned parties. It was observed by him that the A.O had failed to arrive at a correct factual position by carrying out necessary enquiries from the concerned persons. The CIT(Appeals) was of the view that as the assessee by placing on record documentary evidence, had come forward with an explanation to discharge the initial onus that was cast upon it as regards proving the nature and source of the cash deposits in its books of accounts, therefore, there was no justification on the part of the A.O to have summarily dislodged the same without placing on record any credible evidence proving to the contrary. Apart from that, the CIT(Appeals) was of the view that the manner in which the cash was introduced in the books of accounts of the assessee also did not find any mention in the body of the assessment order. The CIT(Appeals) was of the view that as the A.O had made the impugned addi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rvations finding no infirmity in the view taken by the CIT(Appeals), uphold his order to the extent he had vacated the addition of Rs.49 lac (supra) made by the A.O. Thus, the Ground of appeal No. 9 raised by the revenue is dismissed in terms of our aforesaid observations. 92. We shall now deal with the grievance of the revenue that the CIT(Appeals) had erred in vacating the ad-hoc disallowances that were made by the A.O, viz. (i) disallowance @10% out of labour expenses: Rs.10,68,271/-; and (ii) disallowance @20% out of telephone expenses, travelling expenses and conveyance & car expenses : Rs.76,280/-. 93. It transpires on a perusal of the orders of the lower authorities that the assessee had booked, viz. (i). labour expenses of Rs.1,06,82,714/-; (ii). travelling expenses of Rs.11,646/-; and (iii). telephone expenses of Rs.73,004/-. The A.O observing that the assessee had not maintained any proper muster roll for labour expenses and had made all the payments in cash, thus, in order to prevent any possible leakage of revenue had made an ad-hoc disallowance of Rs. 10,68,271/- out of labour expenses i.e @10% of Rs. 1,06,82,714/-. On a similar footing the A.O had worked out an ad-h ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 96. In the result, appeal of the revenue in IT(SS)A No.3/RPR/2022 for A.Y. 2013-14 is dismissed in terms of our aforesaid observations. IT(SS)A No.04/RPR/2022 A.Y.2014-15 97. Now we shall deal with the appeal of the revenue for A.Y.2014-15 in IT(SS)A No.4/RPR/2022, wherein the revenue has assailed the impugned order on the following grounds of appeal: "1 "Whether on the facts and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) is justified in deleting the addition of Rs.12,68,00,000/- made by the AO on account of unexplained cash credit u/s.68 of the Income-tax Act, 1961?" 2. "Whether on the facts and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) is justified in deleting the addition made u/s.68 of Income-tax Act, 1961 by plainly accepting the plea of the assessee ignoring the fact that identity, creditworthiness and genuineness of the transactions could not be proved by the assessee". 3. "Whether on the facts and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) is right in holding that the additions were made in non-abated assessment year i.e. A.Y.2014-15 and in absence of any incriminating material and is not justified as per provision of section 153A of the Act? 4. "Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ant company is not genuine and it is not justified to held the investor companies as dummy entities and the investments made by these companies are non-genuine even the directors of the share applicant companies have accepted in his statements that they have provided accommodation entries to the company in lieu of commission." 98. We shall first deal with the grievance of the revenue that the CIT(Appeals) had erred in law and the facts of the case in vacating the addition of Rs.12.68 crore made by the A.O u/s.68 of the Act. 99. Succinctly stated, the assessee company during the year under consideration had claimed to have received share capital/premium of Rs.12.68 crore from M/s. Extent Vinimay Pvt. Ltd. For the reasons that have been looked into at length by us hereinabove, the A.O holding a conviction that the assessee company had not received genuine share capital/premium from the aforesaid investor company, viz. M/s Extent Vinimay Pvt. Ltd., but in fact had routed back its unaccounted money in the garb of the aforesaid transactions, had thus, made an addition of Rs.12.68 crore (supra) as an unexplained cash credit u/s.68 of the Act. 100. On appeal, the CIT(Appeals) holding ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ash credit u/s.68 of the Act in the hands of the assesee company. Accordingly, the CIT(Appeals) on the basis of his aforesaid observations vacated the addition of Rs.12.68 crore (supra) made by the A.O u/s.68 of the Act. 101. We have given a thoughtful consideration to the issue in hand, and find that the observation of the CIT(Appeals) as regards the addition of Rs.12.68 crore (supra) made by the A.O u/s.68 of the Act, remains the same, as were there before us in its case for the immediately preceding A.Y. i.e. 2013-14, wherein the addition of Rs.1.90 crore (supra) received from the said investor company as share capita/premium was vacated by him. As we have after extensive deliberations approved the view taken by the CIT(Appeals) on the basis of which the addition made by the A.O in A.Y.2013-14 w.r.t the investment made by the aforementioned investor company, viz. M/s. Extent Vinimay Pvt. Ltd. was vacated by us, therefore, the observations of the CIT(Appeals) to the extent relatable to the identity an creditworthiness of the aforesaid investor company, as well as the genuineness of the transaction under consideration, which stands on a similar footing, are on the same terms appr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uding given to Lalganga Builders Pvt. Ltd. D=A+B+C 1771 2026 1587 313 110 Realisation of Investment,loan, cash and bank E 439 (2026-1587) 1274 (1587-313) 203 (313-110) Investment made in M/s. Lalganga Builders Pvt. Ltd. or loan given to Lalganga Builders Pvt. Ltd. F 190 1268 203 Refer Page No. for Bank Statement 34-37 23-33 38-39 Total loan or investment after considering the investment or loan given to Lal Ganga Builders Pvt Ltd. 344 1645 296 Refer Page No. 10 and 13 15 and 18 19 & 22 On a perusal of the aforesaid chart, we find that there have been realization of investment/loans and cash and bank balance of Rs.12.74 crore (supra) by the aforesaid investor company, viz. M/s. Extent Vinimay Pvt. Ltd. during the year under consideration i.e. A.Y.2014-15. On the basis of the aforesaid factual position, we concur with the view taken by the CIT(Appeals) that the investment of Rs.12.68 crore (supra) claimed by the assessee company to have been made out of realization of the investment/loans which had been held to be genuine in the hands of the investor co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... id extent. Thus, the Grounds of appeal No.(s) 3 & 4 raised by the revenue are dismissed in terms of our aforesaid observations. 106. As the facts and issues involved in the present appeal on the basis of which the revenue has assailed the order of the CIT(Appeals) by way of Ground of appeal No.(s) 5 to 7 remains the same as were there in IT(SS)A No.2/RPR/2022 for A.Y.2012-13 in Ground of appeal No.(s) 5 to 7, therefore, the order therein passed shall mutatis-mutandis apply to the issues under consideration raised in the present appeal. Thus, the Grounds of appeal No.(s) 5 to 7 raised by the revenue are dismissed in terms of our aforesaid observations. 107. In the result, appeal of the revenue in IT(SS)A No.04/RPR/2022 for A.Y.2014-15 is dismissed in terms of our aforesaid observations. IT(SS)A No.05/RPR/2022 A.Y.2015-16 108. Now we shall deal with the appeal of the revenue for A.Y.2015-16 in IT(SS) A No.5/RPR/2022, wherein the revenue has assailed the impugned order on the following grounds of appeal: "1 "Whether on the facts and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) is justified in deleting the addition of Rs.2,03,00,000/- made by the AO on account of unexplained cash credit u/s.69A of th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nn 128(SC)/2019 264 Taxmann 5(SC) and in ignoring that the statement recorded u/s.131 of the act has evidentiary value and the burden lays on the person who made the statement, to provide a reasoned explanation for retracting from the statement, specifically, when he himself declared in his own handwriting that the statement is made in sound state of mind and without coercion. Therefore, Ld. CIT(A) is not justified in ignoring this fact and in relying solely on assessee's retraction. 8. Whether on the facts and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) justified in holding that the AO has no locus standi to assume that the share application money infused in the appellant company is not genuine and it is not justified to held the investor companies as dummy entities and the investments made by these companies are non-genuine even the directors of the share applicant companies have accepted in his statements that they have provided accommodation entries to the company in lieu of commission." 109. We shall first deal with the grievance of the revenue that the CIT (Appeals) had erred in law and facts of the case in vacating the addition of Rs.2.03 crore made by the A.O u/s.69A of the Act. 110. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... serve, that the A.O had not dislodged or disproved the documentary evidence which were placed on record by the assessee company to substantiate the identity and creditworthiness of the investor company, viz. M/s. Extent Vinimay Pvt. Ltd as well as genuineness of the transaction of having received a loan of Rs.2.03 crore from the aforementioned concern during the year under consideration. Also, nothing has been brought to our notice by the Ld. DR in the course of hearing of the appeal which would persuade us to hold otherwise. Considering the fact that not only the assessee company had discharged the primary onus that was cast upon it as regards proving the authenticity of the loan transaction in question, but also the same had not been disproved or dislodged by the department by placing on record any material proving to the contrary, therefore, finding no justifiable reason to take a view to the contrary we approve the order of the CIT(Appeals) to the said extent. 114. Also, we concur with the view taken by the CIT(Appeals) that now when the ITO- Ward 12(2), Kolkata while framing the assessment in the case of the investor company i.e M/s. Extent Vinimay Pvt. Ltd, vide his order pa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of Rs.2.03 crore by the aforesaid investor company, viz. M/s. Extent Vinimay Pvt. Ltd. during the period relevant to the year under consideration i.e. A.Y.2015-16. On the basis of the aforesaid facts, we concur with the view taken by the CIT(Appeals) that now when the loan of Rs.2.03 crore (supra) received by the assessee company from the aforesaid lender, viz. M/s Extent Vinimay Pvt.Ltd. was made out of the realization of investments/loans which had been held by the department to be genuine in the hands of the investor company i.e M/s. Extent Vinimay Pvt. Ltd. for A.Y.2011-12, then the same by no means could have been held as the assessee's unexplained money u/s.69A of the Act. We, thus, in terms of our aforesaid observations, uphold the order of the CIT(Appeals) to the extent he had vacated the addition of Rs.2.03 crore (supra) made by the A.O u/s. 69A of the Act. Thus, the Grounds of appeal No.(s) 1, 2 & 8 raised by the revenue are dismissed in terms of our aforesaid observations. 116. Now we shall deal with the grievance of the revenue that the CIT(Appeals) had erred in law and facts of the case in vacating the addition made by the A.O u/s.69A of the Act, for the reason that i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... abated. We, thus, in terms of our aforesaid observation that the assessment in the case of the assessee had abated on the date on which search proceedings were conducted in its case i.e on 19.09.2016, thus, are unable to approve the aforesaid view taken by the CIT(Appeals). Accordingly, the order of the CIT(Appeals) to the said extent is set-aside and the Grounds of appeal Nos.(s) 3 & 4 raised by the revenue before us are allowed. 119. In so far the Grounds of appeal No. (s) 5 to 7 raised by the revenue in the present appeal are concerned, the said grievance of the revenue had been looked into by us at length while disposing off its appeal in the preceding years, specifically in IT(SS)A No.2/RPR/2022 for A.Y.2012-13 in Grounds of appeal No.(s) 5 to 7. As the facts and issues forming the very basis leading to the grievance of the revenue as had been projected before us vide Ground of appeal No.(s) 5 to 7 remains the same as were there in IT(SS)A No.2/RPR/2022 for A.Y.2012-13, therefore, on the same terms we finding no infirmity in the view taken by the CIT(Appeals), thus, uphold the same. Thus, the Grounds of appeal No. (s) 5 to 7 raised by the revenue are dismissed in terms of our ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
