TMI Blog2014 (3) TMI 895X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... be interfered with, in appeal -once the identity and other relevant particulars of shareholders are disclosed, it is for those shareholders to explain the source of their funds and not for the assessee company to show wherefrom these shareholders obtained funds – thus, there is no reason to interfere in the findings of the Tribunal – Decided against Revenue. - Income Tax Appeal No. 52 of 2001 - - - Dated:- 2-12-2013 - Indira Banerjee And Anindita Roy Saraswati,JJ. JUDGMENT Indira Banerjee, J. : This appeal, under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, is directed against a judgement and/or order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, C Bench, Calcutta dismissing the departmental appeal against an order of Commissioner of Tax (A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... capital by Rs.52,03,500/- was nothing but the introduction of the assessee s own undisclosed funds/income into the books of accounts of the assessee company. The Assessing Officer accordingly treated the investment as unexplained credit under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act and added the same to the income of the assessee. Being aggrieved, the assessee filed an appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) being the First Appellate Authority and contended that the Assessing Officer had no material to show that the share capital was the income of the assessee company and as such the addition made by the Assessing Officer under Section 68 of the Act was wrong. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) after hearing the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... me Tax Act. Moreover, if the nature and source of investment by any shareholder, in shares of the Assessee Company remained unexplained, liability could not be foisted on the company. The concerned shareholders would have to explain the source of their fund. The learned Commissioner on considering the submissions of the respective parties and considering the materials, found that the Assessing Officer had applied the provisions of Section 68 of the Income Tax Act arbitrarily and illegally and in any case without giving the assessee adequate opportunity of representation and/or hearing. Learned Tribunal agreed with the factual findings of the learned Commissioner and accordingly the learned Tribunal dismissed the appeal of the revenue and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... volved in this appeal far less any substantial question of law. The learned Tribunal has concurred with the learned Commissioner on facts and found that there were materials to show that the assessee had disclosed the particulars of the shareholders. The factual findings cannot be interfered with, in appeal. We are of the view that once the identity and other relevant particulars of shareholders are disclosed, it is for those shareholders to explain the source of their funds and not for the assessee company to show wherefrom these shareholders obtained funds. We find no grounds to interfere with the order of the learned Tribunal under appeal. Thus, the appeal is dismissed. Let photostat certified copy of this judgment and/or order, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
