TMI Blog2019 (2) TMI 1921X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he AO. It is noted that the reliance placed by the AR on the various judgments supports the case of the assessee whereby it has been held that in the absence of any inquiry made by the AO the addition on this account can t be sustained. In the present case falls in the other category as the assessment order is silent about the documents available on record in support of the share capital received by the appellant company. We find that there is no adverse observations or comment about the document available on record and submitted by the assessee in support of the share capital received by it in the original assessment proceedings on the basis of which assessment order dated 27.12.2007 was passed under section 143(3) of the Act. The AO having got the information from the investigation wing, the least he could do to make inquiry from the shareholders, the details of which were already on the record. Thus we delete the addition in dispute and allow the grounds raised by the assessee. - ITA No. 4540/Del/2014 - - - Dated:- 4-2-2019 - Shri H.S. Sidhu, Judicial Member And Shri L.P. Sahu, Accountant Member For the Assessee : Sh. Ashish Goel, CA. For the Revenue : Sh. Suren ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... om the two companies of Mr. Tarun Goyal. The re-assessment was framed by making addition of ₹ 50,37,500/- which included ₹ 37,500/- on account of commission in receiving the above entries of ₹ 50,00,000/- and reassessment was completed at ₹ 50,38,750/- u/s. 147/144 of the I.T. Act, 1961 vide order dated 01.03.2013. Aggrieved by the order of the A.O, assessee filed appeal before the Ld. CIT(A), who vide his impugned order dated 12.06.2014 dismissed the appeal of the assessee. Against the impugned order, the assessee is in appeal before us. 3. At the threshold, the Ld. AR of the assessee did not press the ground no. 1 to 4, hence, the same are dismissed as such. With regard to ground no. 5 6, it was contended by the Ld. AR that the addition in this case has been made on account of the share capital received from following two companies. M/s Geefcee Finance Limited ₹ 45,00,000/- M/s Maha Nivesh India Limited ₹ 5,00,000/- 3.1 It was further submitted that the issue of the share capital from these two companies have been subject matter of appeal before the coordinate bench of the ITAT. The ITAT on similar issue relating to same inv ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sdictional High Court in ITA No. 504 of 2016 dated 31.08.2016 (vi) Delhi High Court in the case of CIT v. Fair Finvest Ltd [2013] 357 ITR 146 (vii) Delhi High Court in the case of CIT v. Gangeshwari Metal Pvt. Ltd. [2013] 214 Taxman 423 4. In reply the Ld. DR supported the order of the Ld. CIT(A). It was submitted that the issue is covered in favor of the Revenue by the orders passed by the various authorities including the recent judgment in the case of Pr. CIT NDR Promoters Pvt. Ltd. ITA 49/2018 vide dated 17.01.2019. 5. We have considered the rival submissions and perused the relevant records, especially the impugned order as well as the Paper Book containing pages 1-110 in which assessee has attached the records of the assessment and submissions made before the Ld. CIT(A). On going through the same we note that assessee has received share capital of ₹ 45 Lakhs from Geefcee Finance Ltd. and ₹ 5 Lakhs from Mahanivesh (India) Ltd. It has filed confirmation, bank Financial Stock statement, ITR and Audited Financial Stock statement of both these companies. The assessment thereafter was completed under section 143(3) of the Act by the AO vide order dat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... here the AO has not kept quiet and has made inquiries. As against this the present case falls in the other category as the assessment order is silent about the documents available on record in support of the share capital received by the appellant company. We find that there is no adverse observations or comment about the document available on record and submitted by the assessee in support of the share capital received by it in the original assessment proceedings on the basis of which assessment order dated 27.12.2007 was passed under section 143(3) of the Act. The AO having got the information from the investigation wing, the least he could do to make inquiry from the shareholders, the details of which were already on the record. In the case of CIT vs. Fair Finvest Pvt. Ltd. a similar issue has arisen. In the case of CIT vs Fair Finvest Ltd 357 ITR 146 (Del.) the Hon ble Jurisdictional High Court has held as under:- 6. This Court has considered the submissions of the parties. In this case the discussion by the CIT(Appeals) would reveal that the assessee has filed documents including certified copies issued by the Registrar of Companies in relation to the share applicat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
