TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (2) TMI 114
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 59,00,000/- made u/s. 68 as all the 17 shares applicants failed to establish creditworthiness and genuineness of transactions. 3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) failed to appreciate that the onus of establishing the creditworthiness of creditors and genuineness of transaction was on assessee which the assessee failed to discharge. 4. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in not considering the recent landmark judgment of Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Nova Promoters and Finlease Pvt Ltd. (2012) 342 ITR 169 in which the Hon'ble Delhi High Court has interpreted ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... share applicant and later on issuance of cheque to the assessee company were originated from the assessee company and the socalled alleged share applicants are benami persons of the company. He further submitted that Ld. CIT(A) has wrongly deleted the addition in dispute, without examining the genuineness of the transaction, creditworthiness and identity of the share applicants and therefore, requested that the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) may be cancelled and the assessment order may be upheld. 6. On the contrary, Ld. Counsel of the Assessee relied upon the order of the Ld. CIT(A). In support of the impugned order, he has also filed the Synopsis in which he has narrated the facts of the case supported with the various decisions rende....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nd the half-hearted attempt at getting the Directors to appear before him. He did not even seek the assistance of the AOs of the concerned companies whose ITRs and PAN card copies had been produced. 14. The view taken by the CIT(A) that the AO failed to come up with the material to disprove what had been produced by the assessee is certainly a plausible view in the facts and circumstances of the case. Likewise, the view taken by the ITAT concurring with the CIT(A) on facts cannot be said to be perverse. 15. The decisions cited by Mr. Sahni turn on their own facts. As far as the broad principles governing the law under section 68 of the Act is concerned, the Court is satisfied that the order of the CIT(A) as confirmed by th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....u/s. 133(6) issued by the AO to verify the genuineness of transactions, have responded with confirmation of account, copy of bank statement, proof of filing returns of income and a sworn affidavit affirming the investments made by them with the appellant company." 5.1.4 The appellant has relied on the legal prepositions as laid out in the following cases:- 1. In case of Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Dolphin Can Pack Ltd [2006] 283 ITR 190 (Delhi) Delhi High Court inter-alia held that: "Where the credit entry relates to the issue of the share capital, the ITO is entitled to examine whether the alleged shareholders do in fact exist or not. In the course of said enquiry, "The assessee had disclosed to the Assessing Officer n....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....eld as under: "Even if it be assumed that the subscribers to the increased share capital were not genuine, nevertheless, under no circumstances can the amount of share capital be regarded as on undisclosed income of the assessee. It may be that there are same bogus shareholders in whose name the shares had been issued and the money may have been provided by some other persons. If the assessment of the persons, who are alleged to have really advanced the money, is sought to be reopened, that whould have made some sense but we fail to understand as to how this amount of increased share capital can be assessed in the hands of the company itself" 4. In case of CIT vs. Divine Leasing & Finance Ltd [2007] 158 Taxman 440 (Delhi) ....