TMI Blog2012 (10) TMI 319X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s and genuineness of transactions. It is undisputed that Rs 14 lacs have been received by banking channels in earlier year i.e. A.Y. 2004-05 and the remaining Rs. 1 lac in one year. Since assessee has discharged its onus cast by S68 in establishing the identity and creditworthiness of share applicants and genuineness of the transaction. Mere fact of cash deposits for withdrawals in the hands of the share applicants cannot justify the addition - Decided against Revenue - ITA No. 4711/Del/10 - - - Dated:- 13-7-2012 - SHRI R.P. TOLANI AND SHRI K.G. BANSAL JJ. Appellant by : Smt. Nandita Kanchan DR Respondent : Ms. Meenakshi Sharma CA O R D E R PER R.P. TOLANI, J.M: This is revenue s appeal against CIT(A) s order dated ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Glitz Media P. Ltd. M/s AKG Metals P. Ltd. as per bank statement has paid Rs. 2 lakhs vide instrument no 679803 on 30.7.2004 i.e. relevant to A.Y. 2005-06 whereas as per its affidavit a sum of Rs. 1 lakh is claimed to have been paid. The payment has been made after depositing cash of Rs. 2 lakhs on the same date. In the case of Glitz Media P. Ltd. the bank statement shows a clearing entry of Rs. 2,60,000/- vide instrument no. 682408 on 9.3.2004 after depositing cash of same amount. In the case of Sarang Electricals, a clearing entry of Rs. 2,00,000/- vide instrument no. 679805 on 30-1-2004 after depositing cash is seen in the bank statement. Similarly, in the case of Shri Ganpati Steel Centre, the bank statement shows a clearing entry of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e bank statements. However, the ingredients of onus cast by sec. 68 remains complied with by the number of other documents, besides amounts were received by banking channels. As per the settled legal position, source of source cannot be insisted by Assessing Officer, more so when other requirements of sec. 68 stand complied with by other evidence. 2.3. CIT(A) deleted the addition by following observations: I have considered the submissions of the appellant, the assessment order of the Assessing Officer, the remand report of the AO and the facts on the record. The AO made addition of Rs. 15,00,000/- on the ground that the appellant did not submit bank statement of the respective share applicants. The appellant has submitted details su ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... applicants for the share capital issued for which the amount of Rs. 14,00,000/- was received. In the previous assessment year itself. Further the appellant has provided bank statement and fresh confirmation through an affidavit for receipt of Rs. 2,00,000/- from M/s AKG Agro Pvt. Ltd.. as share application money in F.Y. 2004-05 to who out of the same shares for Rs. 1,00,000/- only were allocated during the year. Taking all this in to consideration, the addition to income for Rs. 15,00,000/- is accordingly deleted. 3. Ld. DR relied on the order of Assessing Officer and contends that Assessing Officer has unfettered powers of inquiry and there was no proper compliance of notice u/s 133(6) issued by AO. Before Assessing Officer the stand ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion money. Assessee issued share capital to 25 different share applicants and Assessing Officer chose to add amount of Rs. 15,00,000/- in respect of six applicants. It has not been denied that PAN ITR, balance-sheet, confirmation and addresses of the share applicants were furnished by the assessee. Though assessee could not file bank statements in respect of six share applicants, it cannot be the sole reason for making the addition u/s 68 ignoring the other evidence which establishes the identity, creditworthiness and genuineness of transactions. Rs. 14 lacs have been received by banking channels in earlier year i.e. A.Y. 2004-05 and the remaining Rs. 1 lac in one year. This fact has not been disputed. 5.1. In our considered view, asses ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
