Subscription   Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Articles Highlights TMI Notes SMS News Newsletters Calendar Imp. Links Database Experts Contact us More....
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

Income Tax Officer, Ward-16 (1) , New Delhi Versus M/s Triumph Infrastructure (P) Ltd.

Addition u/s 68 on account of unexplained sources - proof of identity and creditworthiness and the genuineness of the Companies - discharge of burden of proof - non cooperation by assessee - exparte qua assessee - Held that:- AO has passed assessment order u/s 143 by holding that assessee has failed to discharge the burden cast upon it to satisfy the genuineness and creditworthiness of the companies passed order u/s. 143(3) of the Act by assessing the income of the assessee at ₹ 2,46,51,59 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ot done the independent inquiry and verification properly. Therefore, we think it proper to set aside the issue in dispute to the file of the AO to decide the same afresh, after making independent inquiry and verification, as deem fit. However, the Assessee is also directed to submit all the necessary documents, as asked by the AO during the assessment proceedings and fully cooperate with the AO and did not take any unnecessary adjournment. Accordingly, the issue in dispute is set aside to the f .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

06 on the following grounds:- 1. Ld. CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition of ₹ 1,25,54,000/- disallowed by AO on account of share application money received, without appreciating that the assessee company has failed to submit confirmations from the said parties during the course of assessment proceedings. CIT(A) erred in ignoring the decision of Hon ble High Court of Delhi in the case of Nova Promoters and Finlease Pvt. Ltd., and the latest judgment in the case of CIT vs. NR Portfolio Pvt .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

t) was issued on 27.10.2006 and served upon the assessee. The case of the assessee was fixed for hearing on 27.11.2006. During the course of assessment proceedings, the AR of the Assessee attended the proceedings on certain dates. AO observed that since beginning of the assessment proceedings, the assessee has been found lacking in furnishing the requisite details/ information. AO further observed that it is apparent from the records that the assessee has already been allowed sufficient time and .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

Return, P&L Alc and Balance Sheet (without Schedules) in respect of 6 companies namely; M/s. VRN Securities Ltd., M/s. Am Soft Global Pvt. Ltd., M/s. Kohli Exim Pvt. Ltd., M/s. Nice Electronics Pvt. Ltd., M/s. Ganex Power Corporation Ltd.; M/s. Bankey Bihari Corporation Ltd. were filed; none of the Balance Sheets of the six companies show further break-up of Investments to prove subscription to share capital or share premium account in M/s. Triumph Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd.; ) Confirmations f .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

s. Prashant Properties & Investments Ltd., Mumbai, the assessee has not even filed confirmation from this company regarding subscription of share capital amounting to ₹ 20,00,000/- and share application money of ₹ 54,000/-. AO further observed that in view of the Hon ble Delhi High Court decision dated 30.7.2007 in the case of CIT vs. Himalaya International Ltd. it has been held that if the AO harbors doubts of the legitimacy of any subscription, he is empowered, nay duty-bound t .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

,51,592/-. Against the assessment order, the assessee appealed before the Ld. CIT(A), who vide his impugned order dated 01.10.2013 has deleted the addition in dispute by partly allowing the appeal of the assessee. Aggrieved with the impugned order passed by the Ld. CIT(A), Revenue is in appeal before the Tribunal. 3. Ld. DR relied upon the order of the AO and reiterated the contentions raised in the grounds of appeal. 4. In this case, Notice of hearing to the assessee was sent by the Registered .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

. We have heard the Ld. DR and perused the records, especially the order of the Ld. CIT(A). We find that Ld. First Appellate Authority has adjudicated the issue and held as under:- It is clear that the appellant has discharged his burden of proof in respect of identity and creditworthiness of the creditors and the genuineness of the transactions. The appellant has pointed out the he has filed the confirmation alongwith complete address and PAN of the share investors alongwith a copy of their inc .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ion made u/s. 68 is not sustainable in law and is therefore, deleted. The grounds are accordingly allowed. 6. On going through the aforesaid findings of the Ld.CIT(A) as well as the finding of the Assessing Officer made in the assessment order, we find that AO has passed the assessment order 28.12.2007 u/s. 143 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 by holding that assessee has failed to discharge the burden cast upon it to satisfy the genuineness and creditworthiness of the companies. However, the Ld. CIT .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

what is new what is new
  ↓     Update Alerts     ↓  


|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version