9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (7) TMI 249X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed the same. The assessee preferred appeal before ITAT which vide its order dated 23rd March, 2007 in ITA no. 4007/Del/2002 restored the matter to the file of assessing officer as per the directions in its order. Accordingly assessing officer issued notice to assessee in response to which the assessee's counsel vide its letter dated 20th November, 2007, pointed out as under :- "that the assessee has tried its best to produce the parties but they are not cooperating. You are requested to kindly exercise the powers vested in your good self by the provisions of the Act and summons the parties concerned." 3. The Assessing Officer, therefore, issued notice u/s 133(6) to the following fifteen persons :- "1. Mukesh Bhatia. 2. Santosh Gupta. 3 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... more than 10 years old and I have not preserved the bank statement and therefore I am unable to produce the bank statement. 4. Mukesh Bhatia - I purchased 1000 equity shares of the assessee company and I has not sold them till date. The payment was made through a bank demand draft. I do not have the bank statement which is almost 10 years old. 5. Shri Basant Lal - That I had been allotted 1000 shares and even today these shares are with me. I made the payment for Rs. 10,000 through saving bank account with Vijaya Bank, Faridabad and the statement of bank is not available with me as it is very old". 6. After receiving the above response, the Assessing Officer again issued notice u/s 133(6) to Shri Basant Lal Mukesh Bhatia, Santosh Gupta ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 12 in which the findings in the assessment order were reiterated. The A.O. emphasized in view of the above of the directions of the Hon'ble ITAT since the assessee had failed to establish creditworthiness of the various parties and provide adequate explanations regarding the demand drafts etc., this addition of Rs. 1,79,000/- was fully justified." 7. Being aggrieved with the order of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), the assessee is in appeal before me and has taken following grounds of appeal :- "1. the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) - erred in upholding the addition of Rs. 1,79,000/- u/s 68 of the Act and without prejudice it is double addition. 2. The observations as well as the order passed by the Ld. Assessing Offi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n had been confirmed by us u/s 68 of the I.T. Act all the cases of the remaining persons are to be re-examined. The Assessing Officer is directed to examine the bank account and DDs purchased by these persons. The Assessing Officer should issue summons to them u/s 131 and he is directed to give specific finding about the capacity of each persons to advance money for purchase of shares. On the basis of this, in the cases of these 3 persons, the lower authorities erred in presuming that all the remaining deposits of money for share application was unexplained u/s 68. This issue of remaining 15 persons is restored to the file of the Assessing Officer with the direction that he should readjudicate the case of all the remaining share applicants ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
