TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (2) TMI 1262
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....money of Rs.1,09,00,000/- treated as unexplained cash credits u/s 68., involving proceedings u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961; in short 'the Act' Heard both the parties. Case file perused. 2. Learned Addl. CIT-DR vehemently contends during the course of hearing that CIT(A) has erred in law as well as on facts in reversing the impugned sole substantive addition of unexplained share capital / premium amounting to Rs.1,09,00,000/- treated as unexplained cash credits in assessment order. He quotes hon'ble apex court's land mark decisions in Sumati Dayal vs. CIT (1995) 214 ITR 801 (SC) and CIT vs. Durga Prasad More (1971) 82 ITR 540 (SC) to buttress the Revenue's stand that mere submission of documentary evidence in absence of ge....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....companies but none of them appeared. Before the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee has specifically stated that no summons u/s 131 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 were received by the assessee. It was also argued that the assessing officer has not made any independent enquiry at his end, to disprove the claim of the assessee companies. 6. In the case of Sriram Tie Up Pvt. Ltd. supra at para 6 and 7 held as follows: "6.In the case of M/s. Sukanya Merchandise Pvt. Ltd. vs ITO (ITA 291/Kol/2016 dated 15.12.2017) cited by the learned counsel for the assessee, a similar view has been taken by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Tribunal and the similar issue relating to the addition made under section 68 on account of share capital contribution by....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ssessee company to produce the directors of the company before him on 26.03.2014, the assessee company contended that it has not received the said summon and, therefore, could not make the personal appearance. The AO has drawn adverse conclusion basically because of non-appearance of the directors of the assessee company and that of the shareholder companies. We note that initially the AO started the enquiry on 16.08.2013 which was complied by the assessee by submitting documents which has been acknowledged by the AO. Thereafter, the enquiry was started only at the fag end of February 2014 and the assessee company had informed the AO that their directors were out of station till 23.03.2014. In the light of the aforesaid facts, we are of the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....2014 that entire amount of share application money received along with premium amounting to Rs. 8,06,00,000/- which has remained unexplained and added to the income of the assessee. We also note that the Ld. CIT after looking into the pernicious practice of converting black money into white money has given the guidelines to AO as to how the investigation should be conducted to find out the source of source. Since similar order of the Ld. CIT passed u/s. 263 of the Act has been upheld by the Tribunal as well as by the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court as well as the SLP has been dismissed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, similar order of the Ld. CIT has to be given effect to as directed by the Ld. CIT. We take note that the Ld. CIT with his experienc....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d also have been established. 42. The AO here may have failed to discharge his obligation to conduct a proper inquiry to take the matter to logical conclusion. But CIT(Appeals), having noticed want of proper inquiry, could not have closed the chapter simply by allowing the appeal and deleting the additions made. It was also the obligation of the first appellate authority, as indeed of ITAT, to have ensured that effective inquiry was carried out, particularly in the fact of the allegations of the Revenue that the account statements reveal uniform pattern of cash deposits of equal amounts in the respective accounts preceding the transactions in question. This necessitated a detailed scrutiny of the material submitted by the assessee ....