Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2013 (10) TMI 306

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... f the Income Tax Act – Held that:- Having found complete details of the receipt of share application money, along with the form names and addresses, PAN and other requisite details Revenue found complete absence of the grounds noted for invoking the provision of section 68 of the Income tax Act - Reliance has been placed upon the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax. Vs. Lovely Exports (P) Ltd. [2008 (1) TMI 575 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] – Decided against the Revenue. - Tax Appeal No. 555 of 2012 - - - Dated:- 28-1-2013 - Akil Kureshi And Sonia Gokani,JJ. For the Petitioner : Ms. Paurami B. Sheth For the Respondent : Mr. Saurabh N. Soparkar, Mr. Bandish Soparkar and Mrs. Swati Soparkar .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the Assessing Officer even though it was argued before it that no notice was served upon the assessee and on merit also, addition was not justifiable. 4. When challenged in the 2nd Appeal by the assessee, after a detailed hearing, the Tribunal held that it was not open to the department to prescribe what expenditure the assessee should incur and in what circumstances he should incur the expenses. It sought to rely upon the decision of the Apex Court in case of Commissioner of Income Tax, Andhra Pradesh Vs. Dhanrajgirji Raja Narasinghirji reported in 91 ITR 544 for arriving at such findings. In our opinion, sufficiently elaborate discussion already finds place in the order of the Tribunal. Tribunal has appropriately considered the entire .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... s found in survey which indicated that software developed and installed by the assessee in the system. The assessee produced all the vouchers and receipt for the same which was also examined by learned CIT(A). Nothing is produced before us during the course of arguments to rebut the findings of learned CIT(A). Considering the facts and circumstances of the case in the light of the material on record, we do not find any justification to interfere with the order of the learned CIT(A) in allowing depreciation in respect of all the software purchased and installed during the year. This question also arose in Tax Appeal No. 506 of 2012. In neither of these appeals we deemed it fit to interfere as it also is a remand to the Assessing Officer. .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... s (P) Ltd. reported in 216 CTR Supreme Court page 195. 6. Tribunal upheld the order of the CIT(Appeals) in the following manner: 87. The revenue on ground No.3, challenged the order of the learned CIT(A) in directing the AO to allow share application money of Rs. 4,36,00,000/-. The AO disallowed the above amount u/s. 68 of the IT Act being unexplained share application money. The assessee furnished details before the AO which includes details of preferential warrants issued to four companies i.e. Pan Emamy Cosmed Ltd., Vimposn Investments Pvt. Ltd. Shri Vikram Patel and Sharad C. Patel amounting to Rs. 5,04,00,000/-. But the claim of the assessee was rejected treating the same as unexplained share capital money. It was submitted before .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... It can be noted from the submissions made by learned counsels as also from the material on record that both CIT(Appeals) as well as the Tribunal have duly considered issue and having found complete details of the receipt of share application money, along with the form names and addresses, PAN and other requisite details they found complete absence of the grounds noted for invoking the provision of section 68 of the Income tax Act. Moreover, both rightly had applied the decision of Lovely exports (P)Ltd. (supra) to the case of the respondent assessee. We find no reason in absence of any illegality much less any perversity too to interfere with the order of both these authorities, who have concurrently held the due details having been proved. .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates