TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2012 (7) TMI 802
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ainable under the circumstances and that the disallowance of an amount of Rs.69,75,000/- under Section-68 of the Income Tax Act was warranted. 3. The brief facts are that in the relevant assessment year i.e. 2000-01, the Assessing Officer noted that the assessee/respondent had received share application money to the extent of Rs.69,75,000/- which included some amounts received from M/s Onyx Exim & Sales Pvt. Ltd. and M/s Shorabh Finance Pvt. Ltd. After issuing notice, the Assessing Officer concluded that assessee had not given satisfactorily explanation and included the entire amount under Section-68. The assessee appealed to the CIT (A) who by order dated 03.11.2009, allowed the same. Apparently, the CIT (A) took into consideration materi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....appellate proceedings the appellant made more efforts and obtained desired evidences from all the persons. Moreover, these evidences go to the root of the matter and these are very essential for the adjudication of appeal on merits. Under these circumstances it appears that appellant was prevented by sufficient cause in filing these evidences before A.O. Therefore, these evidences are admitted for deciding this appeal. Regarding decision on merits it is seen that the appellant has submitted sufficient evidences to show that all the persons are properly identified and all assessed to tax. The details of these evidences have already been mentioned in earlier part of the order. A.O. has made allegation about ingenuity of the amount received f....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... and various High Courts that no addition can be made on account of share application money once the names of the share applicants are given. In the instant case, identity of these persons are not on doubt and assessment particulars of all the persons are on record and there is no material to hold that credit worthiness of these persons are not established. The judgment of Hon‟ble Supreme Court in the case of Lovely Export 216 CTR 195 and also the judgment of Hon‟ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Value Capital Services Pvt. Ltd. 307 ITR 334 are relevant on this issue. It was held by Hon‟ble Madras High Court in the case of CIT vs. Electro Polychem Ltd. 294 ITR 661 and Hon‟ble Allahabad High Court in the cas....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... them to the assessee and that this aspect itself prima facie pointed that an order under Section-68 was warranted. Counsel also relied upon the decision in Commissioner of Income Tax v. Nova Promoters & Finlease (P) Ltd. (ITA-342/2011, decided on 15.02.2012) by the Division Bench of this Court. 7. This Court has carefully considered the submissions. The previous discussion, particularly the order of the CIT (A), would reveal that even though the Assessing Officer had initially concluded on the basis of the materials made available at that stage that service of the entry providers had been utilized to bring in capital, after remand the CIT (A) elaborately took into account considerable material furnished by the assessee. These included inc....