TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2013 (5) TMI 173
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....M/2011 (2002-2003) (By Assessee) 2. This appeal filed by the assessee on 18.2.2011 is against the order of CIT (A)- 36, Mumbai dated 31.12.2010 for the assessment year 2002-2003. In this appeal, assessee raised the following grounds which read as under. "1.1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld CIT (A) erred in confirming the additions of Rs. 25,00,000/- received by the appellant towards Share Application Money as unexplained cash credits u/s 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 1.2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld CIT (A) has not appreciated the facts that the Share Application receipt is supported by corresponding entries, confirmation of party and also return allotment f....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ings in SKS Ispat group, of Shri Kiran Lapasiya, Director of M/s. D. Kumar Trading Company Private Limited, has admitted that these are merely accommodation entries. These transactions are only on paper. The director or the company do not have capacity to advance such huge credit as Share Application Money / loan / inter corporate deposits to any other persons and the transactions shown regarding purchase / sales / share application money / loan are accommodation entries. It has been held in the case of M/s. SKS Ispat & Power Limited and other group concerns cases for AY 2002-2003 to 2007-08, after making detailed enquiries that these concerns / companies are merely providing accommodation entries. Since, the assessee have failed to produce....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n appeal before the Tribunal vide the above mentioned grounds. 5.1. On the other hand, against the deletion of Rs. 1 Cr by the CIT (A), the Revenue is in appeal before the Tribunal. 6. During the proceedings before us, in connection with the assessee's appeal, Shri M.S. Mathuria, Ld Counsel for the assessee mentioned that the discussion given by the CIT (A) from para 11 onwards is on both the additions u/s 68 of the Act. However, the decision is erroneously restricted only to the addition of Rs. 1 Cr. Further, Ld Counsel submitted that this is a bona fide omission by the CIT (A) and the decision given by the CIT (A) in para 18 should be extended to the other addition of Rs. 25 lacs, involving Odyssey Corporation Limited. 7. On the other ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. I.T.A. NO.2093/M/2011 (AY:2002-2003) (By Revenue) 11. This appeal filed by the Revenue on 15.3.2011 is against the order of CIT (A)- 36, Mumbai dated 31.12.2010 for the assessment year 2002-2003. In this appeal, Revenue raised the only effective ground which reads as under:- "On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT (A) erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 1,00,00,000/- made in respect of alleged share application money merely relying on the identity of the alleged share applicants as companies, but without appreciating that during the search it was found that the alleged share applicants were indulging in accommodation transactions and were....