TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (7) TMI 605
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....as changed from KGMS Financial services P Ltd. to Aagam Shares and commodities with effect from 14.9.2007 after getting the necessary permission from Registrar of Companies. The company is stated to be engaged in the business of dealing in stock market and purchase and sale of shares. It filed its return of income for AY 2007-08 on 30.10.2007 declaring total income of Rs. 24,60,420/-. The case was selected for scrutiny and thereafter assessment was framed u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") vide order dated 29.10.2009 and the total income was determined at Rs. 69,69,045/-. Aggrieved by the order of AO, Assessee carried the matter before CIT(A) who vide order dated 30.12.2010 (in Appeal No.CIT(A)-VI/....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hat shortly thereafter the shares were allotted by the incoming directors to the 4 new shareholders at a premium of Rs. 90/- per share and that no valuation exercise was done before allotting the shares at a premium of Rs. 90/- per share. AO thereafter got held inquiries conducted u/s.131 of the Act at the premises of Dhanvidya Impex P Ltd., Dhanvidhya Multisales P Ltd. and Prabhavi Investments P Ltd. and during the course of inquiry statement of Shri Rupang Shah, the Director of the aforesaid three companies were recorded u/s 131 of the Act. In the statement, Shri Rupang Shah inter alia submitted that he had entered into a arrangement for purchase and sale of shares with the directors of the assessee and as per the arrangement, the aforesa....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s under: "2.3. I have considered the facts of the case, assessment order and appellant's submission. Appellant took bogus share capital to the extent of Rs. 45 lakhs during the year from various companies as mentioned in assessment order. All these companies who were made shareholders are managed by two persons. Statements of these persons were recorded by the assessing officer who categorically stated that the said capital provided by them was not genuine. It was against cash provided by the appellant and as such not a genuine credit. When these statements were confronted two the appellant, appellant submitted a letter in writing in which the bogus share capital was offered for tax. In view of acceptance by the shareholders as well as app....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ce on the decision of Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs Nipun Builders & Developers P Ltd. reported in (2013) 30 taxmann.com 292 (Del). He further submitted that the Assessee has neither taken a ground before CIT(A) nor before Hon'ble Tribunal that no addition could be made simply on the basis of offer made by the Director of the Company. He thus supported the order of lower authorities. 5. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. The issue in the present case is with respect to addition of capital introduced u/s 68 of the Act. We find that AO in the assessment order has noted that during the year, i.e. in the month of January 2006, the new group of directors had purchased the shares of the assessee-comp....