2016 (6) TMI 804

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....referred by the revenue. The assessee also filed a cross objection which was numbered as C.O. No.6/Kol/2007, connected with ITA No.126/Kol/2006. The aggrieved revenue has come up in appeal. At the time of admission of the appeal, the following questions were formulated: (a) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in holding that out of Rs. 95,00,000/-, Rs. 76,98,000/- constituted of old loans being converted into share application money and since there was no fresh infusion of credit, section 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is not applicable? (b) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....urview of Section 68 and, therefore, uphold his order to this extent." Ms. Quereshi, learned Advocate appearing for the revenue, was unable to point out any fault with the aforesaid finding recorded by the learned Tribunal. Section 68 of the I.T. Act, in so far as the same is material for our purpose, reads as follows: "68.Where any sum is found credited in the books of an assessee maintained for any previous year, and the assessee offers no explanation about the nature and source thereof or the explanation offered by him is not, in the opinion of the Assessing Officer, satisfactory, the sum so credited may be charged to income-tax as the income of the assessee of that previous year." It is not the case of the revenue that an....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... question strictly between the assessee and its creditors. She added that it is not also the fact that consent was not obtained. She drew our attention to paragraph 2 of the impugned judgment, wherein the learned Tribunal has recorded as follows: "The A.O. sent notices under section 133(6) to the above persons and notices were served on the persons except M/s. Ramsay International and a letter sent by registered post to M/s. Ramsay International also returned unserved. All the other share applicants confirmed that they had applied for the shares of the company." It is submitted that just because one of the applciants of the shares chose to go back on his commitment, the issuance of shares in his favour cannot become bad. But tha....