TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (11) TMI 61
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... appeals on similar issue. So, they are being disposed of by way of common order for the sake of convenience. 2. In ITA No. 2117/Mum/2014 for A.Y. 2006-07 in case of M/s. Deep Darshan Properties P. Ltd., Revenue has filed the appeal on the following grounds: "1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 35,00,000 / - made under section 68 of the I.T. Act in respect of share application money without appreciating the fact that addition was bases on specific information provided by the Investigation Wing of Income Tax Department that investor companies had issued cheques towards the alleged share application money in return of cash." 2. On the facts and in the c....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nd having considered the same, CIT(A) upheld the order of reopening which is not issue before us. On merit, CIT(A) allowed the appeal following various case laws on the point. Same has been opposed before us, inter alia submitting that CIT(A) was not justified in deleting the addition of Rs. 35 lacs made u/s.68 of Income Tax Act in respect of share application. Without appreciating the fact that addition was based on specific information provided by the Investigation Wing of Income Tax that investor companies had issued cheques towards the alleged share application money in return of cash. Thus, assessee failed to discharge onus cast upon him to establish the credit entries of share application money as required under the statute. According....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e application money, the ITAT, Jaipur Bench in case of Charti Syntex Ltd. vs. DCIT in ITA Nos. 172 & 173/Jp/2010 has held in para 24.4 as under: "24.4 In this case also no cross examination was allowed to the assessee. Therefore, adverse inference cannot be drawn only on the statement of Shri Mukesh Choksi. We further noted that all other necessary details have been filed before AO. Amounts were received through account payee cheque. Both the companies are assessed to tax in Mumbai. Confirmation along with copies of share certificate bank statement memorandum of articles copy of share Application money audited balance sheet and P&L a/ c of these parties were filed. These are similar details as were filed in case of three other companies ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....if necessary reopen their individual assessments. Held, dismissing the appeal, that there was no dispute that the assessee had given the details of names and addresses of the share holders, their PAN/GIR numbers and had also given the cheque numbers, name of the bankers. The Assessing Officer ought to have found out their details through PAN cards, bank accounts details or from their bankers so as to reach the share holders. Thus, the view taken by the Tribunal could not be faulted." Further Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Lovely Exports 6 DTR 308 (SC) has held as under: "If the share application money is received by the assessee company from alleged bogus share holders who's name are given to the AO then the department ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....stood confirmed also, on the basis of confirmation letters of all these share holders. The AO doubted the genuineness by relying upon some statements which were not recorded by the Assessing Officer. The statements relied by ld. Assessing Officer were not tested in the assessment proceedings conducted by the Assessing Officer. No opportunity of cross examination was provided by the Assessing Officer to the assessee before using these statements against the Assessing Officer. Following submissions have been made before us, in support of the claim made by the assessee:- (i) The share application form is the confirmation of the share applicant. The share allotment in compliance of Companies Act 1956 in Form NO.2 is factually evident of the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Karamveer Real Estate Pvt. Ltd. Rs.50,00,000/- 2157/Ahd/2014 Dignity Securities Trading Pvt. Ltd. Rs.50,00,000/- 2119/Ahd/2014 M/s. Blue Hill Properties Pvt. Ltd. Rs.1,12,00,000/- 8. These additions made on similar line have been deleted by concerned CIT(A) in their respective orders with similar reasoning as in case of M/s. Deep Darshan Properties Pvt. Ltd. (supra). Facts being similar, so following same reasoning, we are not inclined to interfere in the orders of CIT(A) who has granted relief to all these assessees with reasoned findings. Same are upheld. 9. As a result, all appeals filed by Revenue are dismissed. Pronounced in the open Court on this the 28th day of September, 2015. ITA. Nos. 21....