2019 (2) TMI 723

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... R 1. The Revenue claims to be aggrieved by the order of the ITAT contending that the addition of Rs.6 crores made by the lower Revenue authorities is justified. 2. The assessee had reported the receipt of Rs.6 crores as share application money on account of issue of fresh capital on premium. The share value at face value of Rs.10 were issued at a premium of Rs.1,190/-. A Notice was issued t....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ntially on the ground that the AO did not make any inquiry from the banker of the investor and no notice was issued under Section 131, to the investor or the banker. It relied upon several decisions of the Court including that of this Court in Commissioner of Income Tax-II vs. M/s. Jansampark Advertising & Marketing (P) Ltd., [(2015) 375 ITR 373]. Further decisions in Commissioner of Income Tax vs....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e investor M/s Mekastar Finlease Pvt. Ltd. was genuine stood established; it had resources to the tune of Rs.300 crores. The only ground on which the genuineness of the transactions was doubted was that the M/s Mekastar Finlease Pvt. Ltd. also received some amounts from dubious sources. It is now established that the investor's duty is to satisfy the Revenue about the trinity of tests indicated in....