TMI Blog2020 (12) TMI 606X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hus hold that the lower authorities have not correctly appreciated the fact. Hon ble Gujarat high court in PCIT vs. Gyscoal Alloys Ltd [ 2018 (10) TMI 1725 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT] held that such an instance of the share capital having group entities from thereby jurisdiction does not qualify for section 68 unexplained cash credits additions. - Decided in favour of assessee. - I.T. A No.1217/Kol/2019 - - - Dated:- 15-12-2020 - Hon ble Shri J. S Reddy, AM and Hon ble Shri S. S. Godara, JM For the Appellant/Assessee : Shri MirajD.Shah, Ld.AR For the Respondent/Department : Shri ImokabaJamir, CIT/DR ORDER Shri S. S. Godara , JM : This assessee s appeal for assessment year 2011-12arises against the CIT (Appeals), 21, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ain substantive grievance(s) that both the lower authorities have erred in law and on facts in framing the impugned assessment u/s. 143(3)/153A of the Act, without there being any incriminating material found or seized during the course of search. Learned authorized representative invited our attention to the assessment year 2011-12 involving the search in question dated 12-03-2016, be stated that this is an instance of unabated assessment since the relevant limitation prescribed u/s. 143(2) of the Act for initiating scrutiny was over on 30.09.2012. Mr. Shah next took us through the assessment order dated 25.12.2016 indicating the Assessing Officer s discussion that the assessee issued 50,000 and 63,100 of shares at a premium of ₹ 990 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ) that assessment u/s. 153A of the Act involving unabated proceedings has to be based on incriminating material found or seized during the course of the search in question. We go by the above said hon ble jurisdictional high court at the cost of nonjurisdictional high courts (supra) and hold that both the lower authorities have erred in law and on facts in framing the impugned assessments in assessee s case not involving any seized material. The same stands quashed therefore. 6. Coming to later issue on merits as well, we reiterate that the impugned share application has been raised from assessee s group entities only involving common directors and these assessments are also in the same jurisdiction. The assessee has already filed all th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... any. The extracts of the bank statement which have been filed before me during the course of appellate proceedings as well as before the AO clearly show that there are no cash deposits as mentioned by the AO in the assessment order. The observation of the AO that the cash has been deposited and subsequently cheques were issued is factually incorrect. The director of the company also attended before AO and confirmed the fact. It is also noted that both the companies, that is the appellant company as well as the share applicant are managed by the same group of persons. Honourable High Court of Gujarat has consistently held that if the assessee has given sufficient proof in respect of the share application, no addition can be made in the hands ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
