2012 (9) TMI 474

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs.1 crore on account of accommodation entries. 2. The appellant craves leave to add, alter or amend any ground of appeal raised above at the time of hearing. C.O. No.208/De;-2011: (Assessee's Cross Objection): 1. On the basis of facts and circumstances of the case and in law, it is incorrect to call investment in share application which is purely business transaction, As accommodation entry. Hence, CIT(A) was justified in deleting addition of Rs.1 crore and holding as a business transaction. 2. The brief facts of the case are that assessee filed its return of income on 29.1.2004 showing total income of Rs.3,90,94,350/-. The Asse....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... were treated as genuine, proper and verifiable; iv) That reopening was based on information received from Investigation Wing that there was a search in the case of Shri Pawan Kumar Ruhia and his group companies on 19.2.2004; v) That the original assessment order in this case was completed on 31.3.2005 u/s 143(3) of the Act. This information was available with Assessing Officer at the time of original assessment. There was no new information for reopening and taking adverse view in the case; vi) That the reasons recorded for initiation of proceedings u/s 147(2) of the Act do not disclosed the basis. The proceedings have been initiated on the ground of information received from the Investigation Wing but the order of Assessing Offic....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....eopening was resorted. Failure of which should be nullification of reopening; xii) That assessee has refunded the entire share application money received from the parties concerned and which has not been denied by the parties; xiii) That there is no justification for holding the transaction as not genuine. Reliance was placed in the cases of Jagatjit Pal 320 ITR 106; SFIL Stock Broking Ltd. 325 ITR 285; Pradeep Gupta 303 ITR 95 and Sarthakj Securities Co. Pvt. Ltd. 329 ITR 110 (Del.). 4. Ld AR further pleaded before Ld CIT(A) that information regarding survey of Shri Pawan Kr. Ruhia which was on 19.2.2004 was before Assessing Officer and which was before completion of original assessment on dated 31.3.2005 and therefore there wa....