TMI Blog2011 (1) TMI 796X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e conclusion arrived at by the Tribunal being based on concurrent findings of fact, the said ground of appeal, therefore, does not give rise to any question of law. share application money - creditworthiness of creditors, genuineness of the transaction - Proof - the amount of share application money of Rs.6,50,000/- cannot be held to be undisclosed income under section 69 of the Act particularly when all the four persons who had paid share application money were existing income-tax assessees. It was further noted that there was no dispute that the names and addresses of the four persons were given to the Assessing Officer and that the said persons had furnished confirmations before the Assessing Officer - the Tribunal has merely applied t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ruction of Government and other private buildings. 3. In relation to proposed question [A], which relates to disallowance of Rs.50,18,505/- on account of labour expenses for failure of the assessee to substantiate its claim by producing the labour contractors for examinationduring the course of assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer noticed that the assessee had claimed labour expenses to the extent of Rs.3.32 crores as against the total receipts of Rs.6.92 crores and most of the bills raised were in the month of March, 2000. The Assessing Officer made further inquiries through the Inspector from the Department and it was found that none of the labour contractors were available at the given addresses. He, therefore, called upon t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed that despite several opportunities having been granted to the assessee, the assessee has not produced any labour contractor and as such, the Assessing Officer was justified in disallowing part of the labour expenses claimed by the assessee. 5. As can be seen from the impugned order of the Tribunal, the Tribunal has concurred with the findings recorded by the Commissioner (Appeals). In the circumstances, it may be germane to refer to the findings recorded by the Commissioner (Appeals). The Commissioner (Appeals), upon appreciation of the evidence on record has found that the Assessing Officer had not taken into account other relevant material for deciding the issue of any disallowance out of labour expenses. The Assessing Officer had ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sallowing 15% of the labour expenses claimed by the assessee. The Commissioner (Appeals) further found that insofar as the issue as regards non-production of labour contractors was concerned, such persons belonged to nomadic tribe, that is, Vanjara who have no permanent residence and as such, the assessee has valid reason for not producing them at a particular time. It was noted that the assessee had made payments to the labour contractors by cheque only and had deducted TDS out of majority of the payments made to them and filed necessary TDS returns and that notices issued to the seven labour contractors had been duly served by the postal authorities at the addresses given by the assessee. An important factor, according to the Commissioner ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tained by the assessee. In the light of the aforesaid findings of fact, the view taken by the Tribunal that the order made by the Assessing Officer was based on suspicion cannot be said to be, in any manner, unreasonable. The conclusion arrived at by the Tribunal being based on concurrent findings of fact, the said ground of appeal, therefore, does not give rise to any question of law. 7. In relation to proposed question [B], the Assessing Officer made addition of Rs.6,50,000/-, brought in as share capital as income of the assessee from undisclosed sources. The Assessing Officer had observed that the assessee has shown increase in share capital to the extent of Rs.6,50,000/- stated to have been received from the four persons named in th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 8. In Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Lovely Exports (P) Ltd. (supra) the Supreme Court has held that if the share application money is received by the assessee from alleged bogus shareholders, whose names are given to the Assessing officer, then the Department is free to proceed to reopen their individual assessments in accordance with law, but it cannot be regarded as undisclosed income of the assessee company. 9. From the facts noted hereinabove, it is apparent that the Tribunal has merely applied the decision of the Supreme Court to the facts of the present case. In the circumstances, the said ground of appeal cannot be stated to give rise to any question of law so as to warrant interference. 10. For the foregoing reasons, in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
