TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (2) TMI 1129
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... transactions. 2. That it is prayed that the order of the ld. CIT(A) be set aside and that of the AO be restored." 2. As per record of the case, the assessee is a colonizer. The assessment under section 143(3) of the Act was completed vide order dated 29.12.2011 at an income of Rs. 3,95,00,000/-. The penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act were initiated on account of concealment of particulars of income/furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income. The ld. CIT(A), Bathinda vide order dated 20.12.2012, deleted the entire additions. 3. These additions were as follows: i) Rs. 1,65,00,000/- on account of failure of the assessee to prove identity and genuineness of the persons having introduced share capital and share premium. ii) Rs. 1,10,00,000/- on account of failure to account for the accrued income at the rate of Rs. 10,00,000/- per month from May, 2008 to March, 2009 for eleven months from M/s. Satya Developers Limited as per agreement. iv) Rs. 1,20,00,000/- on account of failure to prove capacity of the loan creditors as well as genuineness of transactions. 4. Ground no.1 is against the action of the ld. CIT(A) in deleting the addition of Rs. 1,65,00,000/- on a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... In the remand report furnished, the AO did not object to the information so filed by the assessee before the ld. CIT(A) at pages 1 to 57 of the paper book filed before the ld. CIT(A). Rather, the AO asked for the same to be considered at the time of disposal of the appeal. The ld. CIT(A) found the detail containing complete addresses of the persons, who had made the share application money, their PAN and mode of transfer , i.e., through bank. The information filed by the assessee before the ld. CIT(A), contained at pages 1 to 22 of the paper book filed before the ld. CIT(A), to be the copy of ITR, copy of audited accounts alongwith balance sheet and other relevant records. The ld. CIT(A) found this evidence to be sufficient to hold that the assessee had discharged the initial burden lying upon him, as held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of "CIT vs. Lovely Exports (P) Ltd., 216 CTR 195 (SC), wherein, the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that if the share application money was received from alleged bogus shareholders, whose names were given to the AO, then the department is free to proceed to reopen their individual assessments in accordance with law, but it cannot be regarded ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....appeal. As per the ld. CIT(A) at the time of assessment, the assessee had filed complete details, addresses of the persons having made share application money, their PAN, mode of transfer, i.e., through bank. Before the ld. CIT(A), the assessee had filed the copy of ITR, bank account, copy of audited account alongwith balance sheet and other relevant record as per paper book containing pages 1 to 22. This found by the ld. CIT(A) to be sufficient to hold that the assessee had discharged the initial burden as per "Lovely Exports Pvt. Ltd." (supra) and "GP International Ltd.," (supra). In "Lovely Exports Pvt. Ltd." (supra), the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held where the share application money is received by the assessee company from alleged bogus shareholders, if the assessee gives the names of such shareholders to the AO, the department can proceed to reopen their individual assessments in accordance with law, but the amount cannot be regarded as undisclosed income of the assessee company. To the same effect is the decision of the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of "GP International Limited,"(supra). 12. The ld. CIT(A) while giving relief to the assessee on account of s....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s of the investing companies, we find that there were no cash deposits before investments in the assessee company except an amount of Rs. 1,50,000/- and these companies had sufficient balance in their bank accounts to make investments in the assessee company. For example, in the case of M/s. SKM Securities Pvt. Limited, the company had balance of Rs. 35,28,860/- in its bank account with Indusind Bank as on 27.6.2008 out of which Rs. 15,00,000/- was invested in the assessee company on 28.6.2008 and further the investing company had balance of Rs. 50,28,835/- as on I0th July, 2008 out of which Rs. 50,00.000/- has been invested in the assessee-company on 12th July, 2008. The analysis of bank account statement reveals that the deposit in the bank account before investments in the assessee company were all through Banking transactions. Therefore, the genuineness of transaction cannot be doubted. 18. As regards the investment made by M/s. Dhir Management Consultants Pvt. Ltd., its bank statement is placed at PB-10. From the analysis of this bank account, we find that the assessee company had invested Rs. 40,00,000/- on 10.06.2008 through RTGS and further Rs. 30,00,000/- was invested on ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....at the ld. CIT(A) has made a finding of fact that as per clause-14, the developer had to complete the project within 24 months from the date of sanction of plan or handing over possession, whichever is later excepting force majeure circumstances or any action of the Statutory Authority or Court orders. The clause-14 reproduced by the ld. CIT(A) at page 10 of his order states that period of 24 months shall be subject to force majeure conditions and in view of the facts, we hold that no compensation accrued to the assessee company as there was delay in handing over clear cut possession to the assessee company by PUDA, which delayed the completion of project. Moreover, we find that assessee had filed additional evidence before the ld. CIT(A) which was forwarded to the AO and the AO has not made any adverse comments on the additional evidence. In view of the above, we do not find any infirmity in the order of the ld. CIT(A). 23. In view of the above discussion, Ground no.1(ii) is also dismissed. 24. As regards Ground no.1(iii), the AO made addition u/s 68 of the Act on account of loan from M/s. Golden Laminates Ltd. The ld. DR heavily relied upon the assessment order, whereas the ld.....