2013 (2) TMI 44

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....eferred to as the Act) from the order of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench 'G', New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the Tribunal) dated 05.10.2009, passed in Income Tax Appeal No. 3423/Del/2009 by which the appeal filed by the Revenue has been dismissed and the order of Commissioner Income-tax (Appeals), Meerut, allowing the appeal of the assessee, has been upheld. The appellant has proposed the following substantial questions of law, said to be involved in the appeal:- "1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 25,00,000/- on account of bogus share application money, ignoring the facts that identity and creditworthiness of t....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....der Section 143 (2) was issued and served upon the assessee on 26.05.2005. Thereafter notice under Section 142 (1) vide order sheet entry dated 28.08.2006 along with detailed questionnaire was issued and served upon the assessee. The assessee filed his reply on 12.10.2006, and submitted information relating to 18 parties, who had invested in the share capital of the assessee, of the amount of Rs. 1,12,50,000/-. No information has been submitted in respect of balance amount. Thereafter show cause notice dated 28.12.2006 was issued to the assessee who submitted it's reply on 29.12.2006. 4. However the Assessing Officer passed the assessment order dated 29.12.2006 in line of direction issued by Additional Commissioner of Income-tax, Rang....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... such circumstances, the Assessing Officer had rightly made addition in the income of the assessee under Section 68 of the Act. He further submitted that the CIT (A) has wrongly relied upon the obiter dicta of the judgment of Supreme Court in CIT Vs. Lovely Export, 172 Taxman 44 and ignored the judgment of this Court in Ram Lal Agrawal Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (2006) 280 ITR 547 (Alld) which was fully applicable in this case. 6. We have considered the arguments of the counsel for the parties. CIT (A) found that five companies subscribing the equity shares amounting to Rs. 25,00,000/- were identified and they had submitted their bank statements, cash extracts and returns filing receipts. As such identity of the share applicant compa....