TMI Blog2021 (3) TMI 616X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing to the assessee. We note that the AO has acknowledged to have served notices on six (6) share subscribers out of eleven (11) and the assessee was not put to notice regarding the non-service of notice to eight (8) parties. However, it has been brought to our notice that all the share subscribers had in fact replied with all the details and supporting documents to the assessee pursuant to sec. 133(6) notice. The replies from share subscribers were late by one (1) day (before the assessment was framed on 21.12.2016). Therefore, we find that in this case the assessee did not get proper opportunity before the AO, therefore, we relying on the decision of Tin Box Company [ 2001 (2) TMI 13 - SUPREME COURT ] set aside the order of the Ld. C ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the assessee company has raised share capital of ₹ 5,15,750/- along with huge securities premium from fourteen (14) subscribers and according to him, letters had been issued to the subscribers for the purpose of verification of source of their investment u/s. 133(6) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). However, according to him, out of the fourteen (14) subscribers eight (8) notices were returned by postal authority with remarks not known . According to AO, the six (6) subscribers to whom the notices were served neither replied nor the rest could be served the notices. So, the AO made the entire addition of share capital and the share premium. According to Ld. AR, all the share subscribers in fact replied ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and without giving proper opportunity of hearing to the assessee. Further, taking note of the aforesaid facts narrated by Ld AR before the AO during assessment proceedings, it was pointed out by the Ld. AR that the AO did not give sufficient time for the share subscribers to respond to the notices sent u/s. 133(6) of the Act and even though there was enough time i.e, more than 10 (ten) days to complete the assessment, the AO instead has passed the order hurriedly on 21.12.2015; and the fact according to Ld AR was that compliance were made from the part of the share subscribers directly to the AO on 22/23rd December, 2016. Therefore, according to the Ld. AR, proper opportunity was not granted to the assessee and the assessee was not put to n ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
