9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (2) TMI 508X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of Rs. 230 lacs, a sum of Rs. 110 lacs was received in preceding year and hence, cannot be added u/s. 68 in the year under appeal." 3. Brief facts of the case are that assessee filed its return on 28.09.2012, reporting total income at Rs. 2,06,404/-. Case was selected for scrutiny through CASS for which statutory notices were issued and served on the assessee. In the assessment proceeding, Ld. AO noted that assessee had introduced Rs. 230 lacs in the form of share capital including share premium for which it has issued 4,60,000 shares at a face value of Rs. 10/- each with a premium of Rs. 40/- each to eighteen different share subscribing companies. Ld. AO in the course of assessment proceedings directed the assessee to produce the director of the assessee and also the directors of the allottee companies along with relevant documentary evidence and details. By applying the test of human probability, ld. AO made an addition of Rs. 230 lacs u/s. 68 of the Act. Aggrieved, assessee went in appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) who confirmed this addition made by the Ld. AO. Aggrieved, assessee is now in appeal before the Tribunal. 4. Shri Anil Kochar, Advocate represented the assessee and Smt. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to various documents and details furnished in respect of each of the investing companies, all of which are placed in the paper book. He referred to document set of one such company to demonstrate detailed documents furnished to establish identity and creditworthiness of the investing company and the genuineness of the transaction. The documents furnished in respect of each of the investing companies are listed as under: (i) Copy of share application, (ii) Allotment of share certificate, (iii) Copy of Form 2 filed with ROC, (iv) Audit report and audited financial statement for AY 2012-13, (v) Copy of ITR Acknowledgment for AY 2012-13, (vi) Copy of bank statement reflecting the transaction undertaken with the assessee. 7. Ld. Counsel further submitted that the observations made by the Ld. CIT(A) that Ld. AO has arrived at conclusions after empirical analysis of the balance sheet of the assessee and the share subscribers is grossly incorrect devoid of merit. He stated that Ld. AO in his order has concluded merely on the basis of non-production/attendance of the director of the assessee and share subscribers in the assessment proceedings and without finding any fault or de ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Assessing Officer, such fact could not justify disbelief of the explanation offered by the assessee when details of Permanent Account Nos. payment details of shareholding and other bank transactions relating to those payments were placed before the Assessing Officer. It appears that the Tribunal below has recorded specifically that the Assessing Officer totally failed to consider those documentary evidence produced by the assessee in arriving at such conclusion. We, therefore, find no reason to interfere with the decision passed by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) and the Tribunal below and answer the questions formulated by the Division Bench in the affirmative and against the Revenue. The appeal is, thus, dismissed." 7.4. Reliance was also placed on the decision of Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case of CIT v. Creative World Telefilms P. Ltd. (2011) 333 ITR 100 (Mad) wherein it was held as under: "In the case in hand, it was not disputed that the assessee had given the details of name and address of the shareholder, their PAN/GIR number and had also given the cheque number, name of the bank. It was expected on the part of the Assessing Officer to make prop ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... The revenue did not examine the source of income of the said alleged creditors to find out whether they were credit-worthy or were such who could advance the alleged loans. There was no effort made to pursue the so-called alleged creditors. In those circumstances, the assessee could not do any further. In the premises, if the Tribunal came to the conclusion that the assessee had discharged the burden that lay on him, then it could not be said that such a conclusion was unreasonable or perverse or based on no evidence. If the conclusion was based on some evidence on which a conclusion could be arrived at, no question of law as such could arise. The High Court was, therefore, right in refusing to refer the questions sought for. Decision of the High Court affirmed." 9.1. Ld. Counsel submitted that instead of pointing out any defect or discrepancy in the evidence and the details furnished by the assessee, Ld. AO proceeded to take adverse inference only on the ground that the directors of the subscriber companies did not appear personally before him. In this respect he placed reliance on the decision of Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court of Calcutta in the case of Crystal Network ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and Shipping Pvt. Ltd. [2017] 84 taxmann.com 58 (Pan) wherein it was held that once the assessee has produced documentary evidence to establish the existence of the subscriber companies, the burden would shift on the revenue to establish their case. We also draw our force from the decision of Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court of Calcutta in the case of Crystal Network Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT (supra) which held as under: "We find considerable force of the submissions of the learned counsel for the appellant that the Tribunal has merely noticed that since the summons issued before assessment returned unserved and no one came forward to prove. Therefore it shall be assumed that the assessee failed to prove the existence of the creditors or for that matter creditworthiness. As rightly pointed out by the learned counsel that the CIT(Appeals) has taken the trouble of examining of all other materials and documents viz., confirmatory statements, invoices, challans and vouchers showing supply of bidi as against the advance. Therefore, the attendance of the witnesses pursuant to the summons issued in our view is not important. The important is to prove as to whether the said cash credit was r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
