2018 (12) TMI 1510

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....2. The assessee in the present is a company which is engaged in the business of trading in mercury equipments and accessories, labels etc. The return of income for the year under consideration was filed by it on 30.10.2005 declaring a total income of Rs. 90,596/-. During the course of assessment proceedings, the assessee could not explain satisfactorily share capital of Rs. 7,00,000/- raised during the year under consideration in terms of section 68. The AO, therefore, treated the said amount as unexplained and made addition of Rs. 7,00,000/- to the total income of the assessee in the assessment completed u/s 144 vide an order dated 31.12.2007. 3. Against the order passed by the A.O. u/s 144, an appeal was preferred by the assessee befor....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Profit & Loss Account for the F.Y. 2004-05, A.Y. 2005-06. ii. Copy of resolution of the share subscriber company authorizing them to invest in our company. iii. Copy of memorandum and articles of association of share holder companies permitting them in invest in shares of other companies. iv. Bank statement of the shareholder companies showing the source of such investment. v. Bank statement of our company where the above share application money were deposited." 4. It was also submitted on behalf of the assessee company before the Ld. CIT(A) that even the premium of Rs. 40 per share charged by it was properly justified by submitting the relevant financial statements. The ld. CIT(A) did not find merit ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....atter was more than 10 years old. He has contended that the assessee had never expressed such inability to produce the concerned shareholders for examination before the AO and the Ld. CIT(A) was not justified in relying on the remand report submitted by the AO to draw an adverse inference against the assessee. He has contended even the share premium of Rs. 40 per share charged by the assessee was duly justified by the assessee on the basis of the relevant financial statements and the Ld. CIT(A) was not justified in treating the share premium amount of Rs. 28 lacs received by the assessee as unexplained and enhancing the addition made by the AO to that extent. He has contended that the assessee is very much in a position to produce the share....