2012 (5) TMI 772

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... D. Agrawal (Vice President) The only ground raised in this appeal by the Revenue reads as under:- "The Ld.CIT(A) has erred on facts and in law in deleting addition of Rs. 9,00,000/- made by the Assessing Officer u/s 68 of the I.T.Act, 1961 on account of share capital and share premium, ignoring the fact that even if paper identity of the share applicants have been established, yet fo....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the total capital of Rs. 1,93,00,000/-, out of which, the sum of Rs. 38,60,000/- was share capital and Rs. 1,54,40,000/- was share premium. The assessee had produced the confirmations and other supporting evidence in respect of share capital and share premium received by it. He also produced the various shareholders whose statements under Section 131 were recorded. However, the assessee could not....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....id concern in which they have directly confirmed to the Assessing Officer. On these facts, the learned CIT(A), relying upon the decisions of Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Value Capital Services (P) Ltd. - 307 ITR 334, CIT Vs. Dwarkadhish Investment (P) Ltd. - ITA No.911/2010 & ITA No.913/2010 and CIT Vs. Oasis Hospitalities Pvt.Ltd. - 9 taxmann.com 179, held that the ass....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... - 159 ITR 78 would be squarely applicable wherein their Lordships of the Apex Court held as under:- "that in this case the respondent had given the names and addresses of the alleged creditors. It was in the knowledge of the Revenue that the said creditors were income-tax assessees. Their index numbers were in the file of the Revenue. The Revenue, apart from issuing notices under sectio....