TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (9) TMI 663
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 1,13,83,772/- made by the AO u/s. 68 of the I.T. Act. 2. The appellant craves leave, to add, alter or amend any ground of appeal raised above at the time of the hearing. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the Assessee filed its return of income declaring income of Rs. 8,250/- on 31.10.2002. The return of the assessee was processed u/s. 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred as the Act). Thereafter, a notice u/s. 148 of the Act was issued in the case of the assessee on 31.3.2009 after duly recording the reasons for reopening and after taking the necessary approval. As per the provisions of the aforesaid notices, the assessee was required to file a return of ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....at this was nothing but a sham transaction of accommodation entry. It is also noticed that the transactions were routed through Canara Bank. The assessee has also not furnished any evidence whatsoever in this regard. Thus entry remains unexplained in the hands of the assessee as has been arrived by the Investigation wing of the Department. As such entries of Rs. 1,13,83,772/- received by the assessee are treated as an unexplained cash credit in the hands of the assessee and added to its income and accordingly assessment order passed u/s. 143(3)/148 of the Act by assessing the income of the assessee at Rs. 1,13,92,022/-. Against the assessment order, the assessee appealed before the Ld. CIT(A), who vide his impugned order dated 03.7.2012 has....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..../- but factually the transactions on 19.06.2001 is of Rs. 6,00,000 and not Rs. 60,00,000 (as mentioned by the Investigation Wing), therefore the AO has wrongly added the amount of Rs. 1,13,83,772. 7.1. It is seen from the perusal of balance sheet as on 31.03.2001 (i.e. prior to the year under consideration) which is filed alongwith the return of income for Assessment Year 2001-02, the appellant had made various investments worth Rs. 94,71,100 which includes the investment in shares of G.K. Consultants Ltd. worth Rs. 79,68,560. From the perusal of profit and loss account and balance sheet for Assessment Year 2002-03 it is seen that the appellant in the year under consideration has sold these shares of G.K. Consultants Ltd. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he assessment order and the assessment folder and from the facts available on record, it is seen that no notices or enquiry have been done by the AD in respect of the transaction the appellant had with AyushiStock Brokers {P} Ltd. at all. 7.4 In the circumstances where the appellant had a business transaction with Ayushi Stock Brokers Pvt. Ltd. which has duly been reflected in their books of accounts for the year under consideration and the income from such sale of shares have also been declared, it is therefore held that in these circumstances the addition made on account of sums received from Ayu.shi Stock Brokers (P) Ltd. as an unexplained credit, has no basis at all. 7.5 Further also I find that no material has been br....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ich has been in the above information and the assessee has not furnished any evidence whatsoever in this regard. Thus entry remains unexplained in the hands of the assessee as has been arrived by the Investigation Wing of the Department.. However, the Ld. CIT(A) in his impugned order has observed that evidences produced by the assessee to substantiate that the transactions with Ayshi Brokers (P) Ltd. was a genuine business transaction and the same was not an accommodation entry and hence, the evidence collected by the AO which could prove otherwise. Accordingly, the AO is not justified in treating the amount received by the assesee as its undisclosed income. In view of aforesaid discussions, we are of the considered view that the assessee r....