Share application money from alleged bogus shareholders cannot justify remand when identity, creditworthiness and genuineness were already examined.

The Commissioner (Appeals) had examined the share applicants on merits and recorded findings that their identity, creditworthiness and genuineness were established. The Tribunal's remand was unjustified because that view was contrary to the record and ignored the appellate findings supporting the assessee. Where share application money is received from alleged bogus shareholders whose particulars are available, the Department may proceed against those shareholders in accordance with law, but the assessment cannot be reopened on an incorrect factual premise after the material has already been considered. The question was answered in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue, and the Tribunal's order was set aside.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Tribunal was justified in remanding the matter to the Assessing Officer despite the Commissioner (Appeals) having examined the identity, creditworthiness and genuineness of the share applicants on merits.

Analysis: The Commissioner (Appeals) had dealt with each share applicant in detail and recorded findings that identity, creditworthiness and genuineness stood established. The Tribunal's view that these aspects had not been properly examined was found to be contrary to the record. The Court also noted that, where share application money is received from alleged bogus shareholders whose particulars are available, the Department is free to proceed against such shareholders in accordance with law; the assessment could not be reopened on an incorrect factual premise once the appellate findings supported the assessee.

Conclusion: The Tribunal was not justified in remanding the matter. The question was answered in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue, and the Tribunal's order was set aside.

---