TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2012 (5) TMI 103
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the case of M/s. LDK Builders (P) Ltd. The learned standing counsel for the department states that identical questions of law and fact are involved in all these appeals. We have heard the Income Tax Appeal No.487 of 2012: CIT Vs. M/s. LDK Share and Securities (P) Ltd., which relates to the assessment year 2003-2004 and is treated as the lead appeal by the counsel. The following substantial questions of law have been framed in the memo of appeal:- 1. Whether the Hon'ble ITAT has erred in law as well as in the facts and circumstances of the case in giving relief on account of addition being unexplained credits on wrong appreciation of law and without any basis substituting his own satisfaction in place of AO's sa....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ication money or loan was given by Welcome Coir Industries Ltd. to the assessee. He stated that the above two companies are of Kesarwani group and in fact the money shown as loan/share application money was the undisclosed money belonging to Shri Kamal Kumar Kesharwani and his business concerns which was only routed through M/s. Welcome Coir Industries Ltd. as loan/share application money. The deposit/share application money was treated as unexplained loan and was added in the income of the assessee company. The matter was carried in appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (A) who has allowed the appeal on the finding that the deposits in the account books of the assessee is fully explained. The matter was carried further by ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....eal of notary, Government of India and is on a non judicial stamp paper of Rs.20/- but is not an affidavit in the eyes of law. It has come on record that the contents of aforesaid letter/affidavit were very much disputed by the assessee who applied for cross-examination of Sri Anil Kumar Gupta. Multiple opportunities were given to Shri Anil Kumar Gupta but he did not appear. He failed to offer himself for cross examination. This being so, the letter of Sri Anil Kumar Gupta is of little evidenciary value and no reliance on such document can be placed. The other aspect of the case is that the finding that the Welcome Coir Industries Ltd. is an income tax assessee and is a public limited company, has been returned. It is ma....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... based on appreciation of evidence. The relevant findings of the Tribunal are reproduced below:- "The identity of Welcome Coir Industries Limited stands proved from the fact that it is a public company which is duly registered and has raised its funds through public issue. It is a regular income tax assessee assessed with the same Assessing Officer. The capacity of Welcome Coir Industries Limited duly stands proved from the balance sheets of Welcome Coir Industries Limited filed. The total sources of funds of Welcome Coir Industries Limited as on 31.03.2005 amounts to 9,48,39,776/- out of which a sum of Rs.5,44,90,000/- has been applied in forms of investments in unquoted equity shares. As on 31.03.2004 the total sources of Welcom....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....mar Gupta. Investment made by the said shareholder company was through the bank account of the said company maintained at Agra by the said company. Amount invested by the said shareholder company was out of the said bank account and deposits in the said bank account have been treated as investment from undisclosed income of the said bank account have been treated as investment from undisclosed income of the said shareholder company by the assessing officer of Welcome Coir Industries Limited in assessments passed u/s 147. It is important to mention that the cases of Welcome Coir Industries Limited were reopened u/s 147. Only evidence against the respondent assessee is the affidavit filed by Mr. Anil Kumar Gupta which does not have mandatory ....