TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2010 (9) TMI 122
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....dition on account of unexplained share application money under Section 68 of the Act, 1961. Ms. Aggarwal also submitted that the Tribunal had deleted the said addition even though the genuineness of transaction, creditworthiness and identity of the creditor had not been proved by the respondent-assessee. 3. However, upon a perusal of the file, we find that the said addition was deleted by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [for short "CIT(A)] and the Tribunal on the ground that identity of share applicant was not in doubt and he was an income tax assessee holding a valid Permanent Account number (PAN). In fact, the CIT(A) in its order has observed as under:- "2.5 I have carefully considered the submissions made on behalf of appellan....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... judicial authorities. Since in this case the identity of the person and genuineness of transaction is proved, in my opinion the addition of share application money in the case of appellant company is not justified. If the AO has any doubt about the source of payment, he may send the information to the AO having jurisdiction over Sh. Sujit Acharya for further necessary action. In view of this addition of Rs.50 lacs is deletled." 4. The Tribunal in its impugned order has also observed as under :- "6. In the present case, it is not in dispute that the assessee has received share application money from its Director Shri Sujit Acharya, who has filed confirmation letter before the AO. The existence of Shri Sujit Acharya was not in disput....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... been able to point out any material or evidence on the basis of which it could be said that money has been emanated from coffers of the assessee company so as to treat the share application money as undisclosed income of the assessee company. In case the department has any doubt about the source of payment made by Shri Sujit Acharya, the department is free to proceed against Shri Sujit Acharya for further action as so observed by the ld. CIT(A). 7. In this view of the matter, we don't find any material or basis to take a view other than the view taken by the CIT(A) in deleting the addition of Rs.50 lacs being share application money received by the assessee from Shri Sujit Acharya. We, therefore, not inclined to interfere with the order o....