9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (2) TMI 536X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... PAN, financial and bank statements showing share application money.
The facts of the assessee are squarely covered by the above decisions, wherein it has been held that addition u/s 68 cannot be made merely on the ground of non-compliance to summon issued u/s 131 of the Act when the assessee and subscribers have filed all the evidences. Pertinent to mention that the AO has not submitted the remand report before the ld. CIT(A) despite repeated reminders. Appeal of the Revenue is dismissed. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ant has explained source of source at this stage. From the assessment order it appears that explanations were put forward before AO, as well. In my communications to the AO, the same were referred to for his comments. Despite several opportunities the AO chose not to reply. 9.2. However, for a fair trial, submissions made before me were sent to the AO for his verification and examination. As already pointed out, despite several opportunities the AO chose not to reply." 05. Ld. Counsel for the assessee vehemently submitted before the bench that the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) is very reasoned and cogent one after taking into account the submissions and evidences filed by the assessee and facts on record and after following various decisions of different judicial forum. The Ld. AR, while referring to the evidences filed by the assessee as well as by the subscribers in response to notices issued u/s 133(6) of the Act, submitted that the assessee as well as the subscribers have filed all the evidences proving the identity and creditworthiness of the subscribers as well as genuineness of the transactions. The Ld. AR stated that where the assessee has filed all the evidences qua th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ng the ld. Authorized Representative and considering the facts/ evidences on record. The ld. CIT (A) discussed each and every issue on merit that assessee has filed all the evidences before the ld. AO as well as before the appellate authority and both the share subscribers have furnished all the details/evidences proving the identity, creditworthiness of the investors and genuineness of the transactions in reply to notice u/s 133(6) of the Act. However, the ld. AO has failed to carry out any meaningful investigation into the same and made the addition merely on the ground of non-compliance of summons issued to the Directors of the assessee company. We note that the ld. CIT (A) even noted that the Calcutta High Court vide order dated 09.01.2017, has approved the scheme of amalgamation in the case of these two subscribers thereby holding that there was no doubt regarding their existence and credibility. This observation has been given by the ld. CIT (A) in Para 10.5 of the appellate order. The ld CIT(A) has concluded that the assessee has furnished all the evidences which proved the three ingredient as provided u/s 68 of th4e Act and AO has not done any enquiry. Even the remand calle ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eturned un-served or no body complied with them is of little significance to prove the genuineness of the transactions and identity and creditworthiness of the creditors. The relevant portion of the decision is extracted below: "We find considerable force of the submissions of the learned Counsel for the appellant that the Tribunal has merely noticed that since the summons issued before assessment returned unserved and no one came forward to prove. Therefore it shall be assumed that the assessee failed to prove the existence of the creditors or for that matter creditworthiness. As rightly pointed out by the learned counsel that the Ld. CIT(A) has taken the trouble of examining of all other materials and documents viz., confirmatory statements, invoices, challans and vouchers showing supply of bidi as against the advance. Therefore, the attendance of the witnesses pursuant to the summons issued in our view is not important. The important is to prove as to whether the said cash credit was received as against the future sale of the product of the assessee or note. When it was found by the Ld. CIT(A) on fact having examined the documents that the advance given by the creditors have b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... habad High Court took a view that non-production of the director of a Public Limited Company which is regularly assessed to Income tax having PAN, on the ground that the identity of the investor is not proved cannot be sustained. Attention was also to the similar ruling of the ITAT Kolkata bench in the case of ITO vs. Devinder Singh Shant in ITA No. 208/Kol/2009 vide order dated 17.04.2009. 9. We have considered the rival submissions. We are of the view that order of Ld. CIT(A) does not call for any interference. It may be seen from the grounds of appeal raised by the revenue that the revenue disputed only the proof of identity of share holder. In this regard it is seen that for AY 2004-05 Shree Shyam Trexim Pvt. Ltd. was assessed by ITO, Ward-9(4), Kolkata and the order of assessment u/s 143(3) dated 25.01.2006 is placed in the paper book. Similarly Navalco Commodities Pvt. Ltd. was assessed to tax u/s 143(3) for AY 2005-06 by ITO, Ward-9(4), Kolkata by order dated 20.03.2007. Similarly Jewellock Trexim Pvt. Ltd. was assessed to tax for AY 2005-06 by the very same ITO, Ward-9(3), Kolkata assessing the assessee. In the light of the above factual position which is not disputed by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
