TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (11) TMI 1371
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ssessing Officer on account of disallowance of increase in share capital. 2. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in deleting addition of Rs. 3,31,000/- made by Assessing Officer on account of disallowance of increase in unsecured loans. 3.(a) The order of Ld CIT(A) is erroneous and not tenable in law and on facts. (b) The appellant craves leave to add, alter or amend any/all of the ground of appeal before or during the course of the hearing of the appeal." 2. No one was present at the time of hearing on behalf of the assessee. The notice sent to the assessee has come back unserved with the comment "No such Firm". The record shows that on an earlier date also, no one was present on behalf of the assesse....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f the I.T. Act." 3.1. Relying upon paras 4 & 5 of the assessment order it was his submission that on account of the assessee's failure to explain the increase of share application money of Rs. 10 lacs and failure to explain the unsecured loans of Rs. 3.31 lacs addition of Rs. 13,31,000/- was made by the AO. For ready reference, paras 4 & 5 of the assessment order are reproduced hereunder:- 4. "From the perusal of balance sheet filed it was noticed that there was increase of Rs. 10 Lac in the share application money & Rs. 3.31 Lacs in unsecured loans. There was also addition of Rs. 12,18,980/- in the fixed assets. The Assessee was required to furnish the details of the above vide this office letter dated 05-12- 2011. On 16/12/201....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ces and joined the proceedings, it is not appropriate for the appellant to raise issues relating to jurisdiction at the appellate stage. I also find that an order u/s 127 was duly passed in the case and not objected to by the appellant. In the circumstances, it cannot be concluded that the assessment proceedings suffer from lack of jurisdiction. 1 hold accordingly and proceed to decide the case on merits." 5. In the said background, deletion of the addition on the following reasoning was assailed by him. For ready-reference the same is extracted from the impugned order:- 7.1. "The revenue has completed assessments in the case of the appellant for the AY from 2004-05 to 2007-08 treating the share application money / increase ther....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... fresh loans raised and decreased by loans repaid and the interest accrued thereon was added as income. Thus, the additions made by the AO in assessments framed on the same day in the case of the same appellant suffer from factual inaccuracies as well as internal inconsistencies. 7.3. In the present assessment year, addition of Rs. 10,00,000/- was made on account of increase in share application money and addition of Rs. 3,31,000/- was made on account of increase in unsecured loans. It is clear from the documents filed that share application was received from two companies who are existing assessees on the record of the department. Unsecured loans had been raised from the two directors of the appellant company. During the year anot....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... any evidence considered. Whether it is based on a finding arrived at by the AO in that year or it is a finding arrived at in some appellate forum the fact remains it was argued that the issue is not addressed. In the absence of discussion on relevant facts and on the inability of the assessee whose firm is found to be closed to explain the same. It was his submission that the impugned order may be set aside to the Ld. CIT(A) to consider the facts afresh based on cogent evidence and if need be obtain a Remand Report from the AO in order to conclusively decide the issue on correct facts and law. 6.1. It was his submission, inviting attention to the facts in 2005-06 & 2006- 07 assessment years that identical reasoning has been taken by the....