TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (3) TMI 319
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ies from where money had come were conduits, that the directors were employees of the entry of the entry operator and that the entry operator had admitted that he was providing accommodation entries to the assessee and like beneficiaries. 2. the Ld. CIT (A) erred in law in deleting the addition simply because the assessee had not been confronted with the primary documents containing adverse evidences against it. 3. The order of the Ld. CIT (A), be set-aside and that of the Assessing Officer be restored." 3. Facts of the case in brief are that the AO received information from Income Tax Officer Ward-18(2), New Delhi that Investigation Wing had conducted search of Sh. Tarun Goyal, CA at 13/34, WEA, Arya Samaj Road, Karol Bagh, New De....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....AO held that the aforesaid companies had given office address of Sh. Tarun Goyal and that these companies were bogus companies created by Sh. Tarun Goyal for giving accommodation entries. The AO made the addition of Rs. 43,00,000/-. 5. Being aggrieved the assessee carried the matter to the Id. CIT (A) and furnished the written submission which was forwarded by the Id. CIT(A) to the AO who submitted his remand report dated 26.12.2014. The Id. CIT (A) after considering the submissions of the assessee and the remand report of the AO deleted the impugned addition by observing in paras 17 to 20 of the impugned order as under: 17. The A.O. has also held that because the companies from whom the assessee has received the money are bogus, the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ve the arguments raised in defense. The A.O. has been given the Power to issue summons to verify any document or submission made by the assessee. In the instant case, the A.O. chose not to issue any summons to any of the parties to disprove any of the evidences produced by the assessee and instead any of the evidences produced by the assessee and instead asked the assessee to produce them. When the A.O. who has been given the powers of a Civil Court would not exercise them in compelling attendance of witnesses how could the assessee be expected to produce them, Accordingly it is held that the A.O. failing to issue summons in the case could not thereafter simply disregard the evidence presented by the assessee only on account of the report o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....searched person namely Shri Tarun Goyal is not shown to have stated specifically that he has provided accommodation entry to the appellant nor the investigation wing of the department found any evidence during search upon Shri Tarun Goyal to show that the appellant paid case in accommodation of receipt of the cheque as share application money. The assessing officer proceeded to make addition u/s 68 of the Act on the basis of information of receipt of share money by the appellant but made no enquiry from the investors before taking adverse view as such in this matter, even though identity by way of the complete address, permanent account number and bankers details available with him for reaching to the share holders. Even if it is assumed th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Lovely Exports Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT (2008) 216 CTR (SC) 195, as also by this Court if CIT Vs. Creative World Telefilms Ltd. (2011) 333 ITR 100 (Bom.). In such circumstances, we are of the view that the Tribunal's findings that there is no justification in the addition made under section 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 neither suffers from any perversity nor gives rise to any substantial question of law." 20. As the facts and circumstances of the assessee's case are identical to the facts and circumstances of the aforementioned case, accordingly, the addition of Rs. 43 lakhs u/s 68 of the IT. Act, 1961 on account of share application money received is fit to be deleted on this count also. It is acc....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....enuine and the addition made by the AO and sustained by the Id. CIT(A) on the basis of statement of Sh. Tarun Goyal, CA, Arya Samaj Road, Karol Bagh, New Delhi were deleted. It was further submitted that the said decision of the ITAT dated 11.08.2011 was upheld by the Hon'ble Bombay High Court at Goa vide order dated 30.02.2012 in ITA 16/2012 (copies of the said orders were furnished which are placed on record). 8. I have considered the submissions of both the parties and carefully gone through the material available on the record. In the present case, it is noticed that an identical issue having similar fact has already been adjudicated by the ITAT Panji bench, Goa vide order dated 11-.08.2011 in the case of Goa Sponge and Power Ltd. Vs....