Revenue's appeal dismissed, CIT(A) order upheld, additions by AO deleted. Assessee's cross-objection on notice u/s 148 dismissed.

The Tribunal dismissed the revenue's appeal and upheld the CIT(A)'s order, deleting the additions made by the AO. The cross-objection by the assessee regarding the validity of notice u/s 148 was dismissed as infructuous.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Validity of notice u/s 148.
2. Addition of Rs. 27,85,500/- u/s 68.
3. Addition of Rs. 41,782/- on account of commission.
4. Admission of additional evidence by CIT(A) in contravention of Rule 46A.

Summary:

1. Validity of notice u/s 148:
The assessee challenged the validity of the notice issued u/s 148. However, this ground became infructuous as the case was decided on merits in favor of the assessee.

2. Addition of Rs. 27,85,500/- u/s 68:
The AO added Rs. 27,85,500/- to the income of the assessee, alleging that the amount represented accommodation entries. The assessee provided details of share application money and sale proceeds of shares, including PAN, affidavits, and confirmations. The CIT(A) deleted the addition, holding that the assessee had discharged the onus of proving the identity, genuineness, and creditworthiness of the transactions. The Tribunal upheld this decision, noting that the AO did not conduct any independent enquiry and relied solely on the investigation wing's information.

3. Addition of Rs. 41,782/- on account of commission:
The AO added Rs. 41,782/- as commission paid for obtaining accommodation entries. Since the main addition of Rs. 27,85,500/- was deleted, the CIT(A) also deleted the commission addition, which was upheld by the Tribunal.

4. Admission of additional evidence by CIT(A) in contravention of Rule 46A:
The revenue argued that the CIT(A) admitted additional evidence without following Rule 46A. The Tribunal found that the evidence regarding the purchase of shares was requisitioned by the CIT(A) and was not additional evidence filed by the assessee. Therefore, the CIT(A) was within his rights to call for such evidence, and no contravention of Rule 46A occurred.

Conclusion:
The Tribunal dismissed the revenue's appeal and upheld the CIT(A)'s order, deleting the additions made by the AO. The cross-objection by the assessee regarding the validity of notice u/s 148 was dismissed as infructuous.

---