TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (2) TMI 624
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the Revenue's Appeal read as under:- "On the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in:- 1. The order of the CIT(A) is not correct in law and facts. 2. On the facts and circumstances of the cse, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 25,00,96,500/- made by AO u/s. 68 of the I.T. Act. 3. The appellant craves leave to add, alter or amend any / all of the grounds of appeal before or during the course of the hearing of the appeal." 3. The grounds raised in the Assessee's Cross Objection read as under:- 1. On the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)] has erred both on facts & in law in rejecting the conte....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....x (Appeals) [CIT(A)] has erred both on facts & in law in rejecting the contention of the assessee that the assessment framed under Section 153C is bad and liable to be quashed as no valid notice under Section 153C as required under the law has been issued and served on the assessee. The respondent craves leave to add, amend or alter any of the grounds of cross objection. 4. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is engaged in the business of investments in capital market. A search was initiated on the Jakson Group and its associates on 10.2.2010. Notice u/s. 153C was issued on 2.6.2011, in response to which the assessee filed a return on 1.7.2011 declaring income of Rs. 17,640/-. Notices u/s. 143(2) and 142(1) alongwi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e appellant. It is settled law that the onus of proving a claim is initially on the assessee but this is a shifting burden and once an assessee discharges its primary onus, the burden shins on the revenue. In the present case the appellant had duly discharged its onus by submitting necessary evidence available to establish the bona fide of the transactions. Thereafter, the onus shifted on the revenue to prove that the claim of the appellant was factually incorrect. Simply by pointing out that the applicant companies did not have sufficient income or that the bank accounts indicated credits and debits in rapid succession leaving little balance does not discharge the burden cast upon the revenue to take an adverse view in the matter. Further,....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....arged its by submitting necessary evidence available to establish the bona fide of the transactions. Thereafter, the onus shifted on the revenue to prove that the claim of the assessee was factually incorrect. Simply by pointing out that the applicant companies did not have sufficient income or that the bank accounts indicated credits and debits in rapid succession leaving little balance does not discharge the burden cast upon the revenue to take an adverse view in the matter. Moreover, if there was statement of a person or any other material indicating tax evasion by the assessee, or persons in control of its management, the material relied upon should have been made available to the assessee in its entirety. We find that this was not done....