9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (9) TMI 652X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ials on record, we find that the Assessing Officer assessed M/s Esspal International Pvt. Ltd. under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 only on the basis of the statement given by Shirish Chandrakant Shah; though he has recorded that the assessment order is being passed after considering the totality of the facts and circumstances the case . Now it is a matter of record that Shirish Chandrakant Shah had retracted his statements given before the AO - Even otherwise, an admission by the assessee cannot be said to be a conclusive piece of evidence. The admission of the assessee in absence of any corroborative evidence to strengthen the case of the Revenue cannot be made the basis for any addition. Therefore, the substantial questions of law framed by the appellant pertained to an open issue which stands concluded by the decision of M/s Pullangode Rubber Produce Co. Ltd. v. State of Kerala And Another [ 1971 (9) TMI 64 - SUPREME COURT] Therefore, we hold that no substantial question of law arises between the parties. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and associates and it was detected that he was engaged in providing accommodation entries of share capital, share premium, share application money, unsecured loans, long term capital gains, short term capital gains etc. in lieu of cash received by him. Accordingly, a notice under section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was issued to him on 10th November 2014 for initiating the reassessment proceedings on the ground of escapement of income to the tune of Rs.2,90,00,000/-. On completion of the assessment under section 143(3) read with Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, the total income assessed was Rs.3,75,06,610/- by making additions on account of bogus share application money and commission for bogus accommodation entries. 5. The assessment order dated 22nd March 2016 passed under section 143(3)/147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was challenged by the respondent by filing Appeal No.119/2016-17 which was allowed by an order dated 15th March 2018. This appellate order was put to challenge by the Income Tax Department by filing I.T.A. No.288/Jodh/2018. 6. In the background of the aforementioned facts, Mr. K.K. Bissa, the learned standing counsel submits that the findings recorde ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Appeal No.4228 order dated 02.09.2015) while deleting the addition of Rs.3,00,00,000/- made by the AO u/s 68 is hereby deleted. …………………………………………………………………………………………… …………………………………………………………………………………………… 14. That the Ld. CIT(A) on a very detailed examination was satisfied about identity, creditworthiness and genuineness of the investor companies and held that the assessee had discharged the primary onus to prove their identity, creditworthiness, and genuineness. We, therefore, concur with the finding of the Ld. CIT(A) that the AO has made an addition under section 68 of the Act without any basis. In our view, the CIT(A) has analyzed the transaction with each share holder and assigned reasons as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... p;………………………………………………… …………………………………………………………………………………………… 5. Thus, it is clear from above discussion that M/s. Esspal International Pvt. Ltd. Has received accommodation entries of ₹3.00 crores from Shri Shirish Chandrakant Shah. 6. In view of the above, it is crystal clear that the transcations made with the concerns owned or operated by Shirish Chandrakant Shah are not genuine and there are only paper transaction took place instead of actual transactions. Although the transactions are completed through banking channel after getting commission in case. Therefore, share application money of ₹3,00,00,000/- shown by the assessee is treated as diversion of profits to evade the tax liabilities. Therefore, the amount of ₹3,00,00,000/- is added to the total income of the assessee. Penalty pr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
