TMI Blog2018 (7) TMI 372X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in the order of ld CIT(A) and confirm the impugned order of Ld. CIT(A). - I.T.A. No. 1972/Kol/2016 - - - Dated:- 5-7-2018 - Shri A. T. Varkey, JM And Dr. A. L. Saini, AM For The Appellant : Shri G. Hangshing, CIT For The Respondent : Shri Subhas Agarwal, Advocate ORDER Per Shri A.T.Varkey, JM This is an appeal preferred by the revenue against the order of Ld. CIT(A)-1, Kolkata dated 13.07.2016 for AY 2005-06. 2. The main grievance of the revenue is against the action of the Ld. CIT(A) in deleting the addition made by the AO in consequence to the direction given by the Ld. CIT u/s. 263 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act ). 3. Briefly stated facts are that in this case, the original assessment was completed u/s 147/143(3) of the Act through order dated 17.05.2010.Subsequently, the case was set-aside by the C.I.T, Kokata-1 vide order u/s 263 of the Act by holding the assessment order dated 17.5.2010 passed by the AO as erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of revenue. Subsequently, pursuant to the order u/s 263 of Act, assessment was completed by the AO u/s 144 of the Act on 21/03/2014 making addition of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ived by cheques by the appellant company during financial year 1999-2000 and were duly credited in its books of accounts including bank book during the previous year ended on 31.3.2000 relevant to the Assmt. Year 2000-2001. It was also averred that once it is proved that the impugned sums were received in previous year 1999-2000, the A.O has erred in facts and law to bring these to tax in previous year 2004-05 relevant to assessment year 2005-06. The appellant's A. R has also relied upon judgements of the High Courts in the case of CIT vs Usha Stud Agricultural Farms Ltd. 301 ITR 384 (Delhi) and in CIT v. Parameshwar Bohra 301 ITR 404 (Rajasthan) for the proposition that where a sum was found credited in earlier years but additions were made in subsequent year, it was clearly held that same amount of share capital which is coming as opening balance being brought forward from earlier year cannot be added in later year u/s 68 of the Act as unexplained cash credits. On considering the totality of facts or' the case and the cited case laws, it is found that in view of the categorical finding by the A.O in the remand report that the amount of ₹ 54,95,00,000/-, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ch the sum is credited in the books of the assessee is very relevant. The main contention of the assessee was that the impugned addition amount/sum was credited in the books of the assessee for financial year/previous year 1999-2000 relevant AY 2000-01. We note that the amount added in the income of the assessee as unexplained cash credit in the AY 2005-06 was the same amount which was credited in the books of account of the assessee in the previous year ending on 31.03.2000. It is not the case of the revenue that this amount of credit entered in the books of account of the assessee during the year ending on 31.03.2005. The assessee s case is that this is the closing capital as on 31.03.2000 and on 01.04.2000 it was an opening balance. Therefore, the Ld. CIT(A) concluded that what was already credited in the books of account ending on 31.03.2000 for AY 1999-2000 relevant to AY 2000-01 cannot be an unexplained cash credit in the books of account maintained for the FY 2004-05 relevant to AY 2005-06 so as to warrant this consideration as unexplained cash credit for relevant AY 2005-06. 6. We also note that the Ld. CIT(A) had called for the remand report from the AO and after verifi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eceived/credited in books of the appellant company for previous year 1999-2000 relevant to AY. 2000-01. 4) As directed, the assessee company was requested to furnish evidences in support of the claim made before you that share capital along with share premium for the total sum of ₹ 54,95,00,000/- was actually received during the F. Y. 1999-2000. The assessee company furnished copy of the share application, copy of Form 2 being date of allotment 31.10.1999, a copy of bank statement for the F. Y. 1999-2000 and copy of the bank statement of the share applicants for F. Y. 1999-2000, a copy of the audited accounts for the F. Y. 1999-2000 to 2004-05 along with the copy of the annual return for AGM 28.09.2000 filed with the Registrar Companies in support of claim. The above claim of the assessee company was also verified from the subscriber companies that the share capital along with share premium for the total sum of ₹ 54,95,00,000/- was actually received by the assessee company during the F. Y. 1999-2000 relevant to AY 2000-01. 7. From a perusal of the aforesaid remand report, we note that the AO has prepared the remand report after taking note of the evidence i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
