TMI Blog2022 (7) TMI 1466X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... iled the rebuttal/ rejoinder. Even before us, the Ld.DR has nothing specific to say except placing reliance on the stand of the AO. However, once the issuance of share capital is accepted as genuine, it cannot be open to the AO to treat share premium as unexplained credit u/s 68 but the A.O. has done. A composite receipt of share application money cannot be partly explained and partly unexplained u/s 68 - CIT(A) for this reason was justified in deleting the impugned addition u/s 68 - Decided against revenue. - SHRI PRAMOD KUMAR, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER For the Assessee : Shri.Salil Aggarwal, Sr.Adv Shri.Shailesh Gupta.AR For the Revenue : Shri.T. Shankar. CIT.DR ORDER PER ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 00 equity shares of Rs.10/- face value at a premium of Rs.15/- per share in the F.Y.2008-09. Whereas the shares are issued at huge amount of share premium compared to intrinsic value of the shares. In response to the notice the assessee has filed a letter dated 04.03.2015 to treat the return of income filed earlier as due compliance. Subsequently the notice u/s 143(2) and 142(1) of the Act are issued. The assessee was provided with the reasons for reopening of the assessment and the assessee has filed the letter on 23.03.2015 raising the objections. Whereas the A.O. has considered the objections and the submissions of the assessee and relied on the judicial decisions and disposed off the objections filed by the assessee dealt at page 3 and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he appellate proceedings the CIT(A) considered the grounds of appeal, submissions of the assessee, remand report, findings of the scrutiny proceedings. On the issue with respect to the validity of reassessment proceedings, the CIT(A) has dealt on the facts, provisions and the judicial decisions and upheld the validity of reassessment proceedings and dismissed the ground of appeal of the assessee. On the second disputed issue of addition of share premium, the assessee has filed an application for admission of additional evidence and the remand report was called for. The CIT(A) has observed that the details of shares investor Mr. Anil Balla were not filed before the A.O. and were filed in the appellate proceedings. The A.O. has submitted the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the A.O. 6. Contra, the Ld. AR has submitted that the AO has doubted the genuineness and creditworthiness of the investor. Whereas the A.O. has accepted the paid up share capital to the extent of Rs. 10 per each share which worked out to Rs. 1.5 crores and there are no valid reasons for not considering the share premium of Rs.15 per share which works out to Rs.2.25 crores. The Ld. AR has made elaborate submissions on the law and facts and supported the order of the CIT(A) and substantiated the submissions relying on the judicial decisions and the paper book and prayed for dismissal of the revenue appeal. 7. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. The sole crux of the disputed issue envisaged by the L ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e CIT(A) has dealt on the facts, provisions and judicial decisions at Para 5.4 page 21 to 27 of the order and deleted the impugned addition u/sec68 of the Act. 8. We find that the Ld.AR has substantiated the submissions on the genuineness of the transaction with the judicial decisions and referred to the paper book at page 50 to 71, where the assessee has filed the written submissions on various dates which were considered by the CIT(A). Further, the CIT(A) has called for the remand report from the A.O. referred at page 73 to 79 of the paper book and the assessee was provided an opportunity to submit the comments on the remand report. The assessee has filed the rebuttal to the remand report on 16.05.2019 dealt at page 80 to 130 of paper ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y the ingredients of Sec. 68 of the Act, though the source of transaction is the same person and there is no rationality of bifurcation of the source. We found that the CIT(A) has admitted the additional evidence and also provided an opportunity to the A.O. to make the comments and the assessee has filed the rebuttal/ rejoinder. Even before us, the Ld.DR has nothing specific to say except placing reliance on the stand of the Assessing Officer. However, once the issuance of share capital is accepted as genuine, it cannot be open to the Assessing Officer to treat share premium as unexplained credit under section 68 of the Act but the A.O. has done. A composite receipt of share application money cannot be partly explained and partly unexplaine ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
