TMI Blog2013 (9) TMI 1107X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e of verification, different additions made and reasoning given for deleting the additions are plausible. - ITA 223/2013 - - - Dated:- 11-9-2013 - MR. SANJIV KHANNA MR. SANJEEV SACHDEVA, JJ. For The Appellant: Mr.Sanjeev Rajpal, Advocate For The Respondent: Mr.Satyen Sethi and Mr.Arta Trana Panda, Advocates ORDER CM No.6399/2013 and 6400/2013 (for condonation of delay) There is delay of 21 days in filing of the appeal and delay of 35 days in re-filing. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent states that he has no objection if the delay is condoned. Accordingly, the delay in filing and re-filing of the appeal is condoned. Applications stand disposed of. ITA 223/2013 1. This appeal by the re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lso taken loan from other parties. Details of the parties from whom the loan was taken was set out and stated in the appellate order along with other particulars including their PAN Numbers. The appellate order records that the assessing officer had verified the addresses of the said parties and they were found to be correct. 6. Jitendra Vaish, had appeared before the assessing officer and had accepted the factual position and admitted that he had advanced loan of ₹ 19,00,000/- to the respondent company. Copy of his Income Tax return, balance sheets, bank accounts statement etc. were placed on record. Jitendra Vaish had claimed that he sold a plot at Indore and capital gains earned was taxed and loan granted was from the said mone ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... turns. Rafat Abbas?s details were also available with copy of Income Tax Returns, bank statement etc. He had also appeared before the assessing officer. Details of Seema Suleman, Mohd. Ayub placed on record with their PAN Number, copy of bank statement, share application form etc. 10. There is nothing on record to show that the bank statements reflected that cash was deposited before the share capital was paid to the respondent assessee. It is not the case of the revenue that these persons were indulging or providing book entries or their details and particulars were incorrect. 11. The details of share application money received from four person is as under: Ayub Mohd. Dawood ₹ 3,00,000/- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
