9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (5) TMI 521X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ness of News Channel and Print Media. Assessee electronically filed its return of income for A.Y. 2010-11 on 07.10.2010 declaring income of Rs.69,820/-. The case was selected for scrutiny and thereafter assessment was framed u/s 143(3) of the Act vide order dated 30.03.2013 determining the total income at Rs.3,17,08,710/-. Aggrieved by the order of AO, assessee carried the matter before CIT(A) who vide order dated 10.09.2015 in Appeal No.57/2013-14/GZB granted substantial relief to the assessee. Aggrieved by the order of CIT(A), Revenue filed appeal before the Tribunal. Tribunal in ITA No.6269/Del/2015 vide order dated 05.02.2016 dismissed the appeal of the Revenue on account of low tax effect. Thereafter, a Miscellaneous Application was fi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... T(A) may be set aside and the order of the AO by restored." 4. First Ground is with respect to deletion of addition of Rs.6,67,420/- made on account of disallowance under the head distribution expenses. 5. AO on perusing the details of expenses noticed that assessee had shown distribution expenses of Rs.1,84,660/- and labour and wages expenses amounting to Rs.4,82,760/-. He further noticed that the corresponding expenditure in the preceding assessment year was Nil. He noted that since assessee could not furnish any satisfactory reply with supporting evidence of the aforesaid expenses he disallowed the distribution expenditure of Rs.1,84,660/- and labour and wages expenses of Rs.4,82,760/- and thus made the total disallowance of Rs.6,67,42 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Before us, no fallacy in the findings of CIT(A) has been pointed out by Revenue. In such a situation, we find no reason to interfere with the order of CIT(A) and thus the Ground of Revenue is dismissed. 10. Ground No. 2 & 3 are interconnected and are with respect to the deleting the addition of Rs. 3 crores made u/s 68 of the Act. 11. During the course of assessment proceedings and on perusing the Balance Sheet of the assessee, AO noticed that assessee had received share capital of Rs.30,00,000/- and share premium of Rs.2,70,00,000/- aggregating to Rs.3 crores from four concerns namely Vasudev Enterprises (P.) Ltd., M/s. Delhi Tradecom P. Ltd., M/s. Guru Udyog Pvt. Ltd. and M/s. Skand International P. Ltd. The assessee was asked to justif ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nvestor companies was not proved by the assessee and that there they were entry provider companies. He therefore considered the aggregate amount of Rs.3 crores as unexplained cash credit and accordingly made its addition u/s 68 of the Act. 12. Aggrieved by the order of AO, assessee carried the matter before CIT(A). CIT(A) after considering the submissions made by the assessee, remand report received from the AO and the rejoinder received from the assessee on the remand report deleted the additions. Aggrieved by the order of CIT(A), Revenue is now before us. 13. Before us, Learned DR took us to the findings of AO and submitted that assessee had not discharged its primary onus of proving the identity, creditworthiness and genuineness of tra ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... not on the basis of the tax paid. He further submitted that the assessee had furnished its reply to the remand report and no adverse comment of the assessee's submission has been brought on record by the Revenue. He further submitted that proviso Section 68 was inserted from 01.04.2013 i.e. A.Y 2013-14 and the year under consideration being 2010-11, no addition could have been made in the hands of the assessee on account of share capital and premium. He thus supported the order of CIT(A). 15. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. The issue in the present ground is with respect to the addition made by AO u/s 68 of the Act but deleted by CIT(A). CIT(A) while deleting the addition has given a findin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... or company has sufficient funds to invest the money. CIT(A) has further given a finding that the report of DDIT(Investigation) reveals that it was a mere general information connected with its parties including the assessee where it is not very clear as to which the companies was examined by them with reference to the assessee. He has further noted that in the remand report, AO had contended that the report of DDIT (Investigation), Kolkata was confronted to the assessee vide letter dated 22.03.2013. CIT(A) on considering the remand report along with the order sheet entry has given a finding that order sheet entry reveals that assessee had filed letter dated 13.03.2013 after which the case was adjourned on 15.03.2013 for filing certain infor ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
