TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2014 (8) TMI 1054
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....on sale of machinery without appreciating the facts of the case. (ii) Deleting the addition of Rs. 59,000/- out of addition of Rs. 69,000/- made by the AO u/s 68 of the I.T. Act without appreciating the fact that alleged cash creditors were never produced before the AO and immediate source of funds was not explained by the assessee. (iii) Deleting the addition of Rs. 3,30,000/- made by the AO on account of unexplained share capital without appreciating the facts of the case. (iv) Deleting the addition of Rs. 1,18,927/-out of addition of Rs. 1,42,677/- made by the AO on account of unrecorded investment / expenses noticed in seized document without appreciating the fact that the assessee could not give any satisfactory explanation of....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the appellant company, that the machinery was sold to the parties and the payment thereof had been received, there seems no justification on the part of the ld. AO to treat the sum of Rs. 1,20,000/- as undisclosed income of the appellant from other sources. The impugned addition of Rs. 1,20,000/- made to the appellant's income is therefore, deleted.'' 3.1 Apropos Ground No. 2, the findings of the ld. CIT(A) in para 4.3 of his order narrate all the facts and reasons for giving relief which is as under:- ''4.3. I have considered the facts of the case, as well as, the evidence placed on record. The Assessing Officer has mentioned in the order that confirmation has been filed from all such persons and the appellant has also filed computati....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....order, it is noticed that the Assessing Officer has not mentioned full facts regarding the said addition and it has only been mentioned that Inspector's enquiry revealed on new GIR number submitted by the appellant that only three shareholders are genuine and therefore, Rs. 90,000/- i.e. Rs. 30,000/- each out of Rs. 4,20,000/- is being allowed and rest is added back to the company's income. The appellant was asked to explain the full facts in this regard and it has been pointed out by him that the appellant company has received application from 12 persons for allotting shares of the company and Photostat copies of the share application forms as well as confirmations from all the parties along with their GIR numbers and Wards were fu....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....pplications alongwith details of cheque number etc. as well as their GIR number. It seems that no enquiry has been conducted by the Assessing Officer from the said persons who have invested the amounts and the Assessing Officer simply made additions without trying to find out the existence of the applicants for shares. Relying on the decision of Hon'ble Rajasthan High Court in CIT vs. Shree Barkha Syntehtics Ltd. as well as decision of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in Steller Investments, which has also been affirmed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in 251 ITR 263, the appellant has discharged the burden placed upon it and therefore, the Assessing Officer was not justified in making addition of Rs. 3,30,000/- to the income of the appella....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....gs have been given which have not been controverted by the ld. DR . Thus the order of the ld. CIT(A) is relied upon. 8.1 We have heard the rival contentions and perused the materials available on record. It has not been disputed by the ld. AR of the assessee that machinery in question was held as an asset by the company. The assessee produced the details of M/s. Shekhawati Transport Company wherein the GRs bear the stamp of Municipal Council, Kishangarh. The ld. CIT(A) has given an appropriate findings of fact that the machinery was sold by the assessee. Therefore, in view of the facts and circumstances of the case, we find no infirmity in the order of the ld. CIT(A). Hence, the Ground No. 1 of the Revenue is dismissed. 9.1 Apropos Ground....