9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (12) TMI 1453X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... umstances of the case and in law, the ld. CIT(A) erred in deleting addition of Rs. 40,00,000/- made under section 68 of I T Act in respect of share application money without appreciating the fact that addition was based on specific information provided by the Investigation Wing of Income Tax Department that the investor companies had issued cheques towards the alleged share application money in return of cash. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the ld. CIT(A) erred in not appreciating the fact that the assessee has failed to discharge the onus cast upon it to prove the credit entries of share application money as required under the statute." 2.1 Assessee is in the business of builder and developer. Assessment was completed under section 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Income Tax Act. During the year, the assessee-company received share application money to the tune of Rs. 85 lakhs from eight companies out of which Rs. 40 lakhs was received from three companies viz. Mihir Agencies Pvt. Ltd., Alpha Cehmie Trade Agencies Pvt. Ltd. and Talent Infoway Ltd. The stand of the assessee has been that the reasons recorded did not whisper about any tangible material w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... vered the following decisions of ITAT. i) ITO (10(2)(3) vs. J.J. Multitrade Pvt Ltd, in ITA No.2158/Mum/2014 : AY 2007-08, J-Bench & ITA No.2159/Mum/2014 : AY 2008-09, J-Bench The relevant paragraph Nos. 8 & 9 are reproduced herein below: "Applying to the facts of instant case to the proposition laid down by the co-ordinate bench, as discussed above, we do not find any merit in the addition so made by treating the sale proceeds of shares as undisclosed income of the assessee. Accordingly, the Assessing Officer is directed to delete the same. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed in part, in terms indicated hereinabove." ii) ITAT E Bench in M/s. SDB Estate Pvt Ltd vs. ITO-(5)(3)(2) in ITA No. 584/Mum/2015: AY 2008-09 has decided similar issue by observing as under:- "In view of the above stated legal position and in the light of reliable evidences brought on record by assessee to substantiate identity, genuineness and creditworthiness of shareholders, which have not been controverted by the Revenue, the additions made solely on the basis of general statement of Shri Mukesh Chokshi cannot be held to be justified and the same are accordingly ordered to be delete ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ccordingly, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed. 3. ITA No. 3644/Mum/2014 : AY 2006-07: In this case, i.e. ITO vs. M/s. Sitara Properties Pvt. Ltd., the Assessing Officer made total addition of Rs. 1,15,47,169/- under section 68 of the Act, out of this amount Rs. 85 lakhs was made in respect of share application money and remaining amount of Rs. 30,47,169/- was made on account of unsecured loan. Both the aforesaid additions amounting to Rs. 1,15,47,169/- was deleted by CIT(A). 3.1 The first issue in this appeal regarding the addition in respect of share application money of Rs. 85 lakhs is similar to the issue we decided above in case of M/s. Super Construction Pvt. Ltd. in ITA No. 3645/Mum/2014 for A.Y. 2007-08 vide para 2.1 to 2.5 of this order. Therefore, facts and issues being similar, so following same reasoning we are not inclined to interfere with the findings of CIT(A) who has rightly deleted the addition of Rs. 85 lakhs made by the Assessing Officer on account of share application money. The same is upheld. 3.2 The next issue in this appeal is with regard to addition of Rs. 30,47,169/- made by the Assessing Officer on account of unsecured loan which was deleted ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s. 15,23,426/- (unsecured loan) under the provisions of Section 68. This view is fortified by our decision in M/s. Sitara Properties Pvt Ltd (supra) vide para 3.1 to 3.3 of this order. The same is upheld. 4.1 In the result, appeal of Revenue is dismissed. 5. ITA No. 3647/Mum/2014 : AY 2006-07: In this case i.e., ITO vs. M/s. Soumya Trading & Finance P. Ltd., also the Assessing Officer made addition under section 68 in respect of share application money of Rs. 35 lakhs and on account of unsecured loan of Rs. 45,70,686/- which was deleted by CIT(A). The issue in this appeal is also similar to the issue we decided above in case of M/s. Super Construction Pvt. Ltd. in ITA No. 3645/Mum/2014 for A.Y. 2007-08 , in ITA No. 3644/Mum/2014 (supra) in the case of M/s. Sitara Properties Pvt Ltd and in ITA No.3646/Mum/2014 in the case of M/s. Samsung Builders & Developers Pvt Ltd, wherein we have decided the issue in favour of assessee on both accounts. Facts and issues being similar, so following same reasoning we are not inclined to interfere with the order of the CIT(A) who has rightly granted relief to the assessee on both accounts. This view is fortified by our decision in M/s. Sitara Pro ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
