TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (11) TMI 1329
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....doned. Applications u/s 5 of the limitation Act are allowed. Other defects are waived and applications for the same are also allowed. 2. In all these appeals common question of law and facts are involved hence they are decided by this common judgments. 3. By way of these appeals, the appellant has assailed the judgment and order of the tribunal whereby tribunal has dismissed the appeals of the department. 4. Counsel for the appellant has framed following substantial question of law:- In D.B. ITA No. 136/2018:- 1. whether, on the fact and the circumstances of the case the Hon'ble ITAT was justified in upholding the decision of the CIT(A) which erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 1.95 crore/- made under section 56....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed money of the assessee company which have been introduced in the garb of share application money by these concerns which don't have any worth to invest at such high premium. In D.B. ITA No. 128/2018:- 1. whether, on the fact and the circumstances of the case the Hon'ble ITAT was justified in upholding the decision of the CIT(A) regarding in deletion of the addition of Rs. 6,96,50,000/- made under section 56(1) of the Act ignoring the fact that neither any business activity was performed nor any business income has been shown by these concerns from whom share application money has been received, hence, it is the unaccounted money of the assessee company which have been introduced in the garb of share application money by ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tion 251(2) of the IT Act which states that in disposing of an appeal, the [commissioner (appeal)] may consider and decide any matter arising out of the proceeding in which the order appealed against was passed notwithstanding that such matter was not raised before the [commissioner (appeal)] by the appellant. In D.B. ITA No. 130/2018:- 1. Whether, on the fact and the circumstances of the case the Hon'ble ITAT was justified in uploading the decision of the CIT(A) regarding in deletion of the 8650000/- out of the total addition of Rs. 9000000/- made under section 56(1) of the Act ignoring the fact that assets of the assessee company don't commensurate to premium charged and further ignoring the fact that the neither any bus....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d in uploading the decision of the CIT(A) regarding in deletion of the 63650000/- out of the total addition of Rs. 77800000/- made under section 56(1) of the Act ignoring the fact that assets of the assessee company don't commensurate to premium charged and further ignoring the fact that the neither any business activity was performed nor any business income has been shown by the assessee. 2. Whether on the facts and the circumstances of the case the Hon'ble ITAT was justified in holding that section 68 of the IT Act does not empower the CIT(A) to make addition under this Act, as the section 68 empowers only the assessing officer to make addition. 3. whether on the facts and the circumstances of the case the Hon'ble ITAT w....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....se concerns which don't have any worth to invest at such high premium. In D.B. ITA No.139/2018:- 1. whether, on the fact and the circumstances of the case the Hon'ble ITAT was justified in upholding the decision of the CIT(A) which erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 3.4 crore/- made under section 56(1) of the Act ignoring the fact that neither any business activity was performed nor any business income has been shown by these concerns from whom share application money has been received, hence, it is the unaccounted money of the assessee company which have been introduced in the garb of share application money by these concerns which don't have any worth to invest at such high premium. In D.B. ITA No.162/2018 ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... In D.B. ITA No. 168/2018:- 1. Whether, on the fact and the circumstances of the case the Hon'ble ITAT was justified in uploading the decision of the CIT(A) regarding deletion of Rs. 2,86,27,500/- made under section 56(1) of the Act ignoring the fact that assets of the assessee company don't commensurate to premium charged and further ignoring the fact that the neither any business activity was performed nor any business income has been shown by the assessee. 2. Whether on the facts and the circumstances of the case the Hon'ble ITAT was justified in holding that section 56(1) of the IT Act does not empower the CIT(A) to make addition under this Act, as the aforesaid amount could have been taxed under section 68 of IT Ac....