TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (4) TMI 1350
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....- as income from undisclosed source and making an addition u/s 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 therefore is arbitrary, misconceived and unjust and so must be quashed." 3. In this case assessment u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was completed on 22.12.3009 on an income of Rs. 1,54,61,630/- after making addition of Rs. 70,00,000/- on account of Share Application Money. Aggrieved with the addition the assessee went in appeal before the CIT(A), Muzaffamagar, who vide order dated 16.9.2010 deleted the addition. Thereafter, the department filed appeal before the ITAT, New Delhi, who vide its order dated 31.1.2012 remitted the matter to the file of the Assessing Officer to consider the issue afresh. Hence, the notice u/s 143(2) and 142(1) w....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....y of the parties from whom the share application money was received, the notices u/s 133(6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 were issued to both the addresses provided by the assessee of M/s Maya Industries Ltd. and M/s Ishom Photo Color P) Ltd. but the envelop of Lucknow address of M/s Maya Industries Ltd. has been received back from the postal department with the remark "Not found at given address." And no reply has been received in response to the letter sent at Delhi address. Similarly no reply his been received from M/s Ishom Photo Color Lab (P) Ltd. Thereafter, the ITI of this office is is also sent to the Delhi addresss of M/s Maya Industries Ltd. to serve the notice u/s 133(6). The IT of this office has reported that on the given address....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e notice the assessee vide its reply dated 10.3.2014 submitted that Maya Industries Ltd. has been amalgamated with Dishayen Leasing Pvt. Ltd. as per High Court order dated 23.9.2009, which is situated at 11/468- Telewara, Near Gita Bhawan, Shahadra, Delhi-110092 as per Company/ LLP Master Data and Company Master details. Regarding Ishom Photo Color Lab (P) Ltd. the assessee submitted that as per company/ LLP Master Data and company master details the present address of the company is MIG-I, No. 17 BDA Corporation, Zamnpur Colony, Bhadoi. The counsel of the assessee relied upon the judgment in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax Vs Victor Electrodes Ltd. (Delhi) ITA No. 586/2010. The Assessing Officer did not accept the contention of the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....CIT(A). The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee. 7. The Ld. AR submitted that the assessment u/s 143(3) was completed on income at Rs. 1,54,61,630/- after making addition of Rs. 70,00,000/- on account of share application money. The assessee company filed appeal before the CIT(A) and the CIT (A) Muzaffarnagar had allowed on 16.09.2010, the issue of share capital in the case of the assessee company as the assessee company had already proved the identity, creditworthiness and genuineness of transaction. The Ld. AR submitted that the Assessing Officer had made the assessment u/s 143(3) read with Section 254 dated 14.03.2014 after about 4 years and 7 months after furnishing the current details on 07.12.2009 regarding amalgamation of Ma....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... and filed application for allotment of shares. In the circumstances, share applicant was and is identifiable and creditworthy. The Assessing Officer could have called them under the provision of Section 131 of the Income Tax Act,1961. All the shareholders had confirmed in writing about their investment in the share capital of assessee and all of them had given their PAN No. and other relevant particulars under which they were assessed to tax relied on CIT vs. Makhni and Tyagi (P) Ltd. 267 ITR 433. The Ld. AR also relied upon the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in case of CIT vs. Lovely export 299 ITR 268 and other decisions of the various High Courts. 8. The Ld. DR submitted that the assessee failed to prove identity, genuineness of t....