Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2014 (12) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2014 (12) TMI 385 - ITAT DELHIDeletion of addition on share application money received – Amount to be treated as unexplained credit or not - Reopening was based on the information received from Investigation Wing with regard to share application money received by assessee - Held that:- Assessee has filed the relevant details which it could have filed in support of its contention of having received the share application money from each of these shareholder companies - it cannot be said that these companies were not in existence at the given addresses - The documents filed with the Registrar of Companies show that these companies were active during the relevant period – AO has not verified any of the relevant documents submitted by AO for discharging onus u/s 68 – the AO has not referred nor discussed about the so-called statement of entry providers against the assessee company - it is also not known whether assessee’s name figured in that statement - the information received by him from the Investigation department has been made the basis of addition without any further investigation - even the process of examination of the directors by issue of summons has not been taken to the logical end as after the failure of the directors to attend in response to the summons issued to them no further steps were taken. Relying upon CIT vs Fair Finvest Ltd [2012 (12) TMI 170 - DELHI HIGH COURT] - the AO has not been able to bring on record any valid material or evidence to discredit the evidences and the explanation given by the assessee company - the only evidence which has been referred by the AO is statement of third parties recorded by the Investigation Wing - these statements were not recorded by the AO but were recorded by the Investigation Wing at the back of the assessee - The AO has not even referred to the relevant portion of such statement so as to establish the collusive arrangement the assessee company had with these persons – thus, the order of the CIT(A) is upheld in deleting the addition – Decided against revenue.
|