9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (7) TMI 372X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the AO u/s 144 of the Act on 21/03/2014 making addition of Rs. 54,95,00,000/- by treating the fresh share capital and share premium for the year ending 31.3.2005 as unexplained Cash Credit. According to AO, the assessee was unable to discharge its onus to substantiate its claim of introduction of fresh share capital including premium amounting to Rs. 54,95,00,000/- during the time period for which such share application money was received by assessee i.e. the alleged share subscriptions were allegedly received during earlier previous year ended on 31.03.2000 and not during the current previous year ended on 31. 03.2005and thus treated the impugned amount as "unexplained cash credit" found in the accounts of assessee company for the "current previous year ended on 31.03.2005" relevant to the 'Assessment year 2005-06" by relying on the ratio of various case laws. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A), who was pleased to delete the same after taking into consideration the remand report of the AO by observing as under: "The appellant's A.R has mainly contended through the written submissions that the company had during the financial year 1999-2000 rele ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ,95,00,000/-, which was treated as "unexplained cash credits" for the A. Y 2005-06 under consideration, were in fact credited to the appellant company's books of accounts as share capital and share premium during the financial year 1999-2000 relevant to the Assessment Year 2000-2001.Hence,the impugned amounts are found to comprise the broughtforward balance in the books and capital account of the appellant company as on 31.3.2005. I am of the considered view that the facts of the appellant's case are squarely covered by the decisions of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in CIT vs Usha Stud Agricultural Farms Ltd. (supra) and Rajasthan High Court in CIT v. Parameshwar Bohra (supra). Therefore, once it is established that the impugned amount pertained to the previous year 1999-2000 relevant to the A. Y. 2000-01, the A.O was not justified in law in bringing the same amount of Rs. 54,95,00,000/- to tax as unexplained cash credits for A. Y 2005-06. The A.O is directed to delete the addition of Rs. 54,95,00,000/- made to the total income of the appellant company. These grounds are allowed." Aggrieved, the revenue is before us. 4. We have heard rival submissions and gone through ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e documents has given the report as under: "1) In the instant case, Ld. CIT-1, Kolkata set aside the order V/s 147/143(3) dated 17.05.2010 vide his order u/s 263 dated 11.03.2013. It was held in the order u/s 263 that "the Assessing Officer has not only illegally assumed the jurisdiction for passing assessment order for the Asst year 2005-06 but he has also gone one step further by giving a blatant an illegal finding in his assessment order that he has verified the subscription to share capital of the company in the Asst year 2000-01 and found that there was involvement of Rs. 54,95,00,000/- thereby attempting to give certificate of legitimacy to the dubious contribution to share capital claimed to have been received by the company in the Asst year 200-01. Considering the above facts, order passed by the A O. is erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of revenue and therefore, set aside. The AO shall pass afresh assessment order as per law". 2) Following the direction of the Ld. Pr. CIT-l, Kolkata the assessee company was requested in the set aside assessment proceeding to prove the year of receipt of share capital and share premium and genuineness of such transaction. The n ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ital along with the share premium for the total sum of Rs. 54,95,00,000/- was actually received by the assessee company during the FY 1999-2000 i.e. AY 2000-01. The AO notes that the assessee company had furnished before him the following documents to substantiate its claim: i) copy of the share application, ii) copy of Form 2 being date of allotment on 31.10.1999, iii) copy of bank statement for FY 1999-2000 and iv) copy of bank statement of the share applicants for FY 1999-2000, v) a copy of the audited accounts for the FY 1999-2000 to 2004-05 along with the vi) copy of the annual report of AGM dated 28.0-9.2000 filed with the Registrar of Companies in support of the claim. The AO has also stated that the aforesaid claim of the assessee company was also verified from the subscriber companies that the share capital along with the share premium for the total sum of Rs. 54,95,00,000/- was actually received by the assessee company during the FY 1999-2000 relevant to AY 2000-01. We note that the assessment has to be done on the right person, right year and on right income as held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in ITO Vs. Ch. Atchaiah 218 ITR 239 (SC). As per the Constitutio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
