TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (1) TMI 1543
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....assessee from M/s. Sangam Distributors Pvt. Ltd. and M/s. Teac Consultants Pvt. Ltd. 2. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT (A) was justified in deleting the addition of Share application money by observing that the alleged investor companies M/s. Sangam Distributors Pvt. Ltd. and M/s. Teac Consultants Pvt. Ltd. are not shell companies without considering the financial statements of these companies. 3. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT (A) was justified in deleting the addition of unsecured loans allegedly obtained from M/s. Sangam Distributors Pvt. Ltd. and M/s. Teac Consultants Pvt. Ltd. merely for the reason that evidences in the form of statement on oath of the relevant entry operators were not available on record. 4. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT (A) was justified in deleting the addition of unsecured loans allegedly obtained from M/s. Sangam Distributors Pvt. Ltd. and M/s. Teac Consultants Pvt. Ltd. despite the fact that the directors or Principal Officers of these companies were never produced before the AO for examination despite number....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....year relevant to assessment year 2010-11 and M/s. ISIS Mercantile Pvt. Ltd. during the year relevant to assessment year 2011-12. The AO made the addition under section 68 by treating the share capital and share premium received from these companies as unexplained cash credit on the basis of the report of the Investigation Wing Kolkata. The AO treated these companies as Shell company and held that these companies are controlled by Shri Amit Kedia, & Shri Alok Harlalka who were found to be bogus entry providers by the Investigation Wing Kolkata. On appeal, the ld. CIT (A) has deleted the addition made by the AO by considering the fact that the AO has made the disallowance merely on the basis of information received from Investigation Wing Kolkata and without any material, even the statement of so called bogus entry provider. The ld. CIT (A) has specifically noted that the AO was not having the statement of the alleged entry provider in his possession and, therefore, when the assessee produced all the relevant documentary evidence in support of the claim, the addition made by the AO was not sustainable. 3. Before us, the ld. CIT D/R has submitted that the AO has received the inform....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ort of the Investigation Wing Kolkata but the AO conducted enquiry through Investigation Wing and statements of entry operators were also recorded, therefore, overwhelming evidences in the possession of the AO indicate bogus nature of transaction of share capital and premium which has been extensively discussed in the assessment order. During the course of assessment proceedings, the assessee was provided a number of opportunities for producing the alleged investors for verification and failure of the assessee in producing the investors in the light of the evidences was enough to invoke the provisions of section 68 of the IT Act. In support of his contention, he has relied upon the decision of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Navodaya Castles Pvt. Ltd., 226 Taxman 190 (Mag.) and submitted that the SLP filed by the assessee was dismissed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court reported in 230 Taxman 268 (SC). Thus it is evident that the assessee has failed to discharge its onus to rebut the evidence unearthed by the Investigation Wing Kolkata which shows that the transactions of share capital and share premium are nothing but bogus accommodation entries wherein the assessee's ow....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tigation Wing Kolkata behind the back of the assessee and much before the date of search. The learned A/R has submitted that the Assessing Officer was not having statements of the alleged entry providers. Further the alleged entry providers who have nowhere stated that cash was given by the assessee. During the course of assessment proceedings, the assessee produced the various documents of share applicants, namely, M/s. Sangam Distributors Pvt. Ltd. and M/s. Teac Consultants Pvt. Ltd. All the share capital and share premium etc. were received through bank and verifiable from bank statement of the assessee as well as bank statements of the share applicants. The onus under section 68 of the Act is to prove the identity, capacity and genuineness of the transaction which has been discharged by the assessee by producing the documentary evidence as well as the notices issued by the AO were duly responded by the share applicants. The ld. A/R has submitted that the share applicant companies were assessed to tax and there were assessment orders under section 143(3) for the assessment years 2005-06, 06-07, 2007-08, 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15. He has referred to the copies of the assessment ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ses, conjectures and irrelevant material. No positive material was brought on record by the AO to show the share applicant company is a shell company whereas the assessee has produced all the relevant documents to establish the identity, creditworthiness and genuineness of the transaction as well as share applicant. 5. The next objection/contention of the ld. A/R is that the sole basis of addition is the statement of Shri Anand Sharma and others whereas the assessee was not given the opportunity of cross examination despite repeated requests and demands. The AO has violated the principles of natural justice by not providing the copies of material used against the assessee at the assessment stage and further not providing the opportunity of cross examination of the witness during the assessment stage as well as appellate stage. Though the ld. CIT (A) called for a remand report and asked the AO to provide opportunity of cross examination to the assessee, however, after the remand proceedings the AO did not afford an opportunity of cross examination rather the AO has asked the assessee to produce the witness instead of allowing the assessee to cross examine the witness. In support ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t the assessee has introduced its undisclosed income under the garb of share capital and share premium. The ld. A/R supported on the order of the ld. CIT (A). 6. We have considered the rival submissions as well as the relevant material on record. For the assessment year 2010-11, the assessee received share capital with premium from two companies details of which are as under :- (1) M/s. Sangam Distributors Pvt. Ltd. Rs. 90,00,000/- (2) M/s. Teac Consultants Pvt. Ltd. Rs. 15,00,000/- There is no dispute that during the course of search and seizure no incriminating material was either found or seized disclosing any undisclosed income or indicating any bogus transaction of receipt of share capital and premium by the assessee from these two companies. Further, the AO has also not referred or relied upon any seized document while making the addition of the amount of Rs. 1,05,00,000/- on account o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....474 14 Copy of Summon no. 1433 dated 13.10.2017 and reminder summon no.-1592 dated 31.10.2017 issued by DDIT (Investigation), Unit-1(3), Kolkata u/s 131 of Income Tax Act, 1961 to M/s Teac Consultants Private Limited. 475-478 15 Copy of reply in response to summon issued to the company. 479-481 16 Copy of letter for confirmation of source of funds used for applying the shares along with supporting documents 482-485 M/s Sangam Distributors Pvt. Ltd. S. No. Particulars Paper Book Page No. 1 Copy of Ack. of ITR of AY 2010-11 along with computation sheet 486-487 2 Copy of Balance sheet of AY 2010-11 along with enclosures 488-489 3 Copy of relevant page of bank statement showing the entry of payment made to assessee. 490 4 Confirmation of account showing the transaction with Assessee Company. 491 5 Copy of share application form of equity share 492-493 6 Copy of affidavit of Mrs Neelam Gautam director of M/s Birla Arts Pvt Ltd. On behalf of amalgamated company M/s Sangam Distributors Pvt Ltd. 494-497 7 Copy of order dated 19.07.2014 passed by Calcutta High Court regarding amalg....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....re applicant companies are also regularly assessed to tax and subject to scrutiny assessment. The assessee produced the assessment orders passed under section 143(3) in respect of the share applicant companies, details of which are as under :- Assessment u/s 143(3) : Name of Company Assessment year Income Assessed Assessment Order u/s 143(3) at PB pg M/s Teac Consultants Pvt. Ltd 2005-06 13,980 451-453 M/s Teac Consultants Pvt. Ltd 2006-07 45,395 454-455 M/s Teac Consultants Pvt. Ltd 2012-13 49,91,290 459-462 M/s Teac Consultants Pvt. Ltd 2014-15 10,14,150 466/ M/s Sangam Distributors Pvt.Ltd 2006-07 Nil 530-531 M/s Sangam Distributors Pvt.Ltd 2007-08 9,600 534-535 M/s Sangam Distributors Pvt.Ltd 2013-14 6,79,400 538 M/s ISIS Mercantile Pvt. Ltd. 2006-07 6,936/- 500-501 M/s ISIS Mercantile Pvt. Ltd 2013-14 21,81,459/- 502-505 M/s ISIS Mercantile Pvt. Ltd 2014-15 Nil (Amalgamated with M/s Magnate Capital Market Pvt. Ltd.) 509-510 Thus it is clear that both the share applicant companies are regularly assessed and assessment orders....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....mation of accounts as well as bank statement reflecting the transactions with other substantiating documents along with assessment orders in case of investor companies, which are available at Page no. 292 to 389 of PB. From these documentary evidences placed on record, identity, creditworthiness and genuineness of transactions is established. There is no gain saying that the onus squarely lies on the appellant to prove the identity, creditworthiness and genuineness of the cash credits. In the case of Addl. CIT v. Bahri Bros. (P) Ltd. [1985] 154 ITR 244 (Pat), the Hon'ble Patna High Court has held "if the loans are given by an account paying cheque, it amounts to identification of the parties and discharge of burden by the borrower." In view of the above, it is clear that Appellant discharged its burden u/s 68 of the Act. Even otherwise, there is no adverse finding of any investigation conducted by the department in relation to these companies. Therefore, in the absence of any independent inquiry and any adverse findings to rebut the evidences filed by the Appellant, I find that the addition in respect of Share application and Share premium from M/s Sangam Distributors Pvt. Ltd.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tatement, Notably, the disclosure made was in his personal capacity only and with respect to LTCG only and not in respect of any other transactions be it be receipt of unsecured loans. Further, Rajendra Agarwal and appellant are separate legal entity. Therefore, I find that in the absence of any nexus of the Statement of Shri Rajendra Agarwal with the appellant or its total income, this basis of addition adopted by the AO is farfetched & cannot be concurred. 5.6 It is further seen that AO has not brought any specific defect / discrepancies in the direct evidence brought on record by the Appellant. The AO has observed that on the date of debit in the account statement of investor, there is corresponding credit entry of equal amount, however, this observation of the AO is itself not sufficient to prove beyond doubt that Appellant routed its unaccounted income by these companies rather it proves the source in the hands of the Appellant. It is usual business practice, while making investment, funds are required to be arranged by the investor, therefore reflection of such entries in bank statement doesn't lead to draw any adverse inference against the Appellant. Needless to say....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ell as High Court has held that once the identity of creditor is established, the department is free to reopen the assessment of creditor and no addition can be made in the hand of borrower as rightly held in case of CIT v/s Lovely Exports Pvt. Ltd. [2008] 216 CTR 195 (SC), Commissioner of Income-tax v. Rock Fort Metal & Minerals Ltd. [2011] 198 TAXMAN 497 (Delhi), Divine Leasing & Finance Limited [2008] 299 ITR 268 (Delhi) CIT v. Orissa Corporation (P.) Ltd. [1986) 159 ITR 78/25 Taxman 80F (SC) and others on this question of law. 5.10 Further, power to call for information/production of evidences or enforcing attendance under the law is given to the income tax authorities only and therefore, in view of the judgment CIT v/s Victor Electrodes Ltd. [2010] 329 ITR 271, the Appellant cannot be fastened upon the burden to produce the investors before the assessing authorities though in the instance case, appellant has cooperated in assessment by showing his willingness to produce the directors of investor companies and some directors/officer were also produced before the AO. Thus, in view of the judicial precedents referred above, under the facts and circumstances of the presen....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nating material found during search to rebut the evidences filed by the Appellant, the impugned addition made in respect of Share application & Share premium u/s 68 of the Act is legally untenable and unjustified. 5.13 In view of the above discussion of relevant facts and following the several ratios on the subject from Hon'ble Apex Court, High Courts including jurisdictional High Courts, Tribunals including jurisdictional Tribunals, the impugned addition in respect of Share Application and Share premium received from M/s Sangam Distributors Pvt. Ltd. and M/s Teac Consultants Private Limited totalling to Rs. 1,05,00,000/- is not sustainable and hence the same stands deleted. In view of above the ground No. 2, 13 to 18 and 20 of appeal is allowed to the extent mentioned above. " Accordingly, in view of the above discussion as well as facts and circumstances of the case the AO has made the addition based on the report of the Investigation Wing Kolkata whereas the assessee has produced all the relevant documentary evidence to establish the identity, creditworthiness and genuineness of the transactions. Hence in the absence of any discrepancy or otherwise any material or re....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....th dispatch proof. 522-524 Further, the assessee also produced the master data of ROC showing the status of the said company as "Amalgamated". The amalgamation was duly approved by the Hon'ble High Court. The financial status and capacity to invest in the shares of the assessee was also proved by showing the share capital of the said company raised in the financial year 2005-06 of Rs. 15.42 crores, in the financial year 2010-11 of Rs. 2.5 crores and in the financial year 2012-13 of Rs. 12.9 crores. The assessment orders for all these years except assessment year 2011-12 were also passed under section 143(3) of the IT Act and, therefore, the availability of the funds as well as the investment made by the said company in the shares of the assessee were not disturbed by the department while completing the scrutiny assessment. Hence in view of our finding on this issue for the assessment year 2010-11 and an identical finding of the ld. CIT (Appeals) for the assessment year under consideration, we do not find any error or illegality in the impugned order of the ld. CIT (A) for the assessment year 2011-12. Ground No. 7 of the department's appeal is regarding deletion of disallow....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rther, there was no dividend income earned by the assessee during these assessment years, therefore, in the absence of any exempt income earned by the assessee during the years under consideration, the disallowance made by the AO being 1% of the average investment is not sustainable when there is no specific and identified expenditure or finding by the AO regarding any expenditure incurred by the assessee for earning the exempt income. Accordingly, in view of the above facts and circumstances, we do not find any error or illegality in the order of the ld. CIT (A) qua this issue. C.O. NOS. 45 & 46/JP/2018 : 10. In these Cross Objections, the assessee has raised the following common grounds for both the assessment years :- " 1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the order passed u/s 153A read with section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is bad in law, void-ab-initio, and deserves to be annulled as the assessment for the year under consideration was not abated as on the date of search and CIT (A) erred in holding that the contention of the assessee cannot be accepted in view of SLPs admitted in various cases. The ld. CIT (A) further erred in....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ded by the department is behind the back of the assessee and, therefore, the same cannot be used against the assessee without giving opportunity of cross examination of the witnesses. Further it was contended since there is no incriminating material found during the course of search and seizure action, therefore, the AO is not empowered to make any addition in the total income of the assessee. It is a settled position of law that there cannot be a review under the garb of reassessment proceeding under section 153A of the Act and, therefore, the proposed reassessment proceedings are absolutely in abuse of process of law, illegal and bad in law. The provisions of section 153A cannot be applied in respect of assessment which has already been completed unless some incriminating material/information comes into the possession/knowledge of the AO during the course of search proceedings. Since the assessments for these four assessment years i.e. 2010-11 and 2011-12 were not pending as on the date of search and there is no incriminating material found or seized during the course of search, then the AO is bound to reassess the total income as it was assessed on the original return of income.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ent or reassessment under section 153A has to be read in the context of section 132 or 132A of the IT Act, in as much as in case nothing incriminating is found on account of such search or requisition, then the question of reassessment of concluded assessment does not arise, which would require mere reiteration and it is only in the context of abated assessment under second proviso which is required to be assessed. The underlined purpose of making assessment of total income under section 153A of the Act is, therefore, to assess income which was not disclosed or would not have been disclosed. The assessment or reassessment proceedings which have already been completed and assessment orders have been passed determining the assessee's total income and, such orders are subsisting at the time when search or requisition is made, there is no question of any abated assessment since no proceedings were pending and, therefore, the addition to the income that has already been assessed will be made on the basis of incriminating material. In the absence of any incriminating material, the completed assessment can be reiterated and the abated assessment or reassessment can be made. Thus the ld. A....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....mitted that the information received from the Investigation Wing Kolkata is also the incriminating material found during the search and pertains to the assessee disclosing undisclosed income. Therefore, it is not a case of reassessment framed by the AO under section 153A without any incriminating material. The AO even conducted further investigation during the course of assessment proceedings through the Investigation Wing Kolkata and, therefore, the addition is fully based on the evidence in the possession of the AO. As per the provisions of section 132 read with section 153A of the IT Act, the AO has to assess or reassess the income of last six years and total income refers to the sum total of income in respect of which a person is assessable. The total income will therefore cover not only the income emanating from the declared source or any material omission before AO but from all sources including undisclosed ones or based on unplaced material before the AO. The ld. CIT D/R has thus submitted that the decisions in the case of M/s. All Cargo Global Logistics Ltd. as well as Kabul Chawla (supra) were challenged before the Hon'ble Supreme Court and the Hon'ble Supreme Court has ad....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tion 153A in respect of those assessment years which stand abated due to the reason of pending on the date of initiation of search or requisition shall be the original/first assessment. In the second category where the assessment or reassessment has already been completed on the date of initiation of search or making of requisition as the case may be, the assessment under section 153A would be in the nature of reassessment. The Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Kabul Chawla while analyzing the provisions of section 153A read with section 132 of the Act has observed in para 37 and 38 as under :- "37. On a conspectus of Section 153A(1) of the Act, read with the provisos thereto, and in the light of the law explained in the aforementioned decisions, the legal position that emerges is as under: i. Once a search takes place under Section 132 of the Act, notice under Section 153 A(1) will have to be mandatorily issued to the person searched requiring him to file returns for six AYs immediately preceding the previous year relevant to the AY in which the search takes place. ii. Assessments and reassessments pending on the date of the search shall ab....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....me already assessed." Thus the Hon'ble High Court has held that in the absence of any incriminating material, the completed assessment can be reiterated and the abated assessment or reassessment can be made. The Hon'ble High Court has also referred the term used in section 153A as "assess" which is relatable to abated proceedings and the word "reassess" related to completed assessment proceedings. Therefore, the completed assessments can be interfered with by the AO while making the assessment under section 153A only on the basis of some incriminating material unearthed during the course of search or requisition of document or undisclosed income or property discovered in the course of search which were not produced or not already disclosed or made known in the course of original assessment. The Hon'ble Delhi High Court has reiterated its view in case of Principal CIT vs. Kurele Paper Mills (supra) in para 1 to 3 as under :- "1. The Revenue has filed the appeal against an order dated 14.11.2014 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) in 3761/Del/2011 pertaining to the Assessment Year 2002-03. The question was whether the learned CIT (Appeals) had erred i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d that the invocation of Section 153A qua each of the AYs would be justified. 57. The question whether unearthing of incriminating material relating to any one of the AYs could justify the re-opening of the assessment for all the earlier AYs was considered both in Anil Kumar Bhatia (supra) and Chetan Das Lachman Das (supra). Incidentally, both these decisions were discussed threadbare in the decision of this Court in Kabul Chawla(supra). As far as Anil Kumar Bhatia (supra) was concerned, the Court in paragraph 24 of that decision noted that "we are not concerned with a case where no incriminating material was found during the search conducted under Section 132 of the Act. We therefore express no opinion as to whether Section 153A can be invoked even under such situation". That question was, therefore, left open. As far as Chetan Das Lachman Das (supra) is concerned, in para 11 of the decision it was observed: "11. Section 153A (1) (b) provides for the assessment or reassessment of the total income of the six assessment years immediately preceding the assessment year relevant to the previous year in which the search took place. To repeat, there is no condition in t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ndisclosed property has been found as a consequence of the search, the same would also be taken into consideration while computing the total income under Section 153A of the Act. The Court then explained as under: "22. In the firm opinion of this Court from a plain reading of the provision along with the purpose and purport of the said provision, which is intricately linked with search and requisition under Sections 132 and 132A of the Act, it is apparent that: (a) the assessments or reassessments, which stand abated in terms of II proviso to Section 153A of the Act, the AO acts under his original jurisdiction, for which, assessments have to be made; (b) regarding other cases, the addition to the income that has already been assessed, the assessment will be made on the basis of incriminating material; and (c) in absence of any incriminating material, the completed assessment can be reiterated and the abated assessment or reassessment can be made." 34. The argument of the Revenue that the AO was free to disturb income de hors the incriminating material while making assessment under Section 153A of the Act was specifically rejected by the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... shall abate. The total income for such AYs will have to be computed by the AOs as a fresh exercise. iii. The AO will exercise normal assessment powers in respect of the six years previous to the relevant AY in which the search takes place. The AO has the power to assess and reassess the 'total income' of the. aforementioned six years in separate assessment orders for each of the six years. In other words there will be only one assessment order in respect of each of the six AYs "in which both the disclosed and the undisclosed income would be brought to tax". iv. Although Section 153 A does not say that additions should be strictly made on the basis of evidence found in the course of the search, or other post-search material or information available with the AO which can be related to the evidence found, it does not mean that the assessment "can be arbitrary or made without any relevance or nexus with the seized material. Obviously an assessment has to be made under this Section only on the basis of seized material." v. In absence of any incriminating material, the completed assessment can be reiterated and the abated assessment or reassessment can....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....arch is conducted or requisition is made and assess or reassess the same. Since the assessment under section 153A of the Act is linked with search and requisition under sections 132 and 132A of the Act, it is evident that the object of the section is to bring to tax the undisclosed income which is found during the course of or pursuant to the search or requisition. However, instead of the earlier regime of block assessment whereby, it was only the undisclosed income of the block period that was assessed, section 153A of the Act seeks to assess the total income for the assessment year, which is clear from the first proviso thereto which provides that the Assessing Officer shall assess or reassess the total income in respect of each assessment year falling within such six assessment years. The second proviso makes the intention of the Legislature clear as the same provides that assessment or reassessment, if any, relating to the six assessment years referred to in the sub-section pending on the date of initiation of search under section 132 or requisition under section 132A, as the case may be, shall abate. Sub-section (2) of section 153A of the Act provides that if any proceeding or....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nt would have to be reiterated, in case where pending assessments have abated, the Assessing Officer can pass assessment orders for each of the six years determining the total income of the assessee which would include income declared in the returns, if any, furnished by the assessee as well as undisclosed income, if any, unearthed during the search or requisition. In case where a pending reassessment under section 147 of the Act has abated, needless to state that the scope and ambit of the assessment would include any order which the Assessing Officer could have passed under section 147 of the Act as well as under section 153A of the Act. ** ** &....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....upra) and held that there had to be incriminating material qua each of the AYs in which additions were sought to be made pursuant to search and seizure operation. The Calcutta High Court in Salasar Stock Broking Ltd. (supra), too, followed the decision of this Court in Kabul Chawla (supra). In Gurinder Singh Bawa(supra), the Bombay High Court held that: "6. . . . . . once an assessment has attained finality for a particular year, i.e., it is not pending then the same cannot be subject to tax in proceedings under section 153A of the Act. This of course would not apply if incriminating materials are gathered in the course of search or during proceedings under section 153A of the Act which are contrary to and/or not disclosed during the regular assessment proceedings." 63. Even this Court has in Mahesh Kumar Gupta (supra) and Ram Avtar Verma (supra) followed the decision in Kabul Chawla (supra). The decision of this Court in Kurele Paper Mills (P.) Ltd. (supra) which was referred to in Kabul Chawla (supra) has been affirmed by the Supreme Court by the dismissal of the Revenue's SLP on 7th December, 2015. The decision in Dayawanti Gupta 64. That ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... The disclosure made in the sum of Rs. 1.10 crores was only for the year of search and not for the earlier years. As already noticed, the books of accounts maintained by the Assessee in the present case have been accepted by the AO. In response to question No. 16 posed to Mr. Pawan Gadia, he stated that there was no possibility of manipulation of the accounts. In Smt. Dayawanti Gupta(supra), by contrast, there was a chart prepared confirming that there had been a year-wise non-recording of transactions. In Smt. Dayawanti Gupta (supra), on the basis of material recovered during search, the additions which were made for all the years whereas additions in the present case were made by the AO only for AY 2004-05 and not any of the other years. Even the additions made for AYs 2004-05 were subsequently deleted by the CIT (A), which order was affirmed by the ITAT. Even the Revenue has challenged only two of such deletions in ITA No. 306/2017. 68. In para 23 of the decision in Smt. Dayawanti Gupta (supra), it was observed as under: "23. This court is of opinion that the ITAT's findings do not reveal any fundamental error, calling for correction. The inferences drawn ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... under section 153A in respect of the assessment year which was already completed on the date of search, the Hon'ble High Court has held that in the absence of any material which was subsequently unearthed during the search and was not already available to the AO, the additions made by the AO on account of security deposits were rightly deleted by the ld. CIT (A). The relevant observations of the Hon'ble High Court in case of Principal CIT vs. Meeta Gutgutia (supra) are in para 53 as under :- "53. At this stage, it is also to be noticed that an elaborate argument was made by Mr. Manchanda on the aspect of the security deposits accepted by the Assessee. These were of two kinds - one was of refundable security deposits and the other for non-refundable security deposits. As far as the refundable security deposits were concerned, the AO himself in his remand report accepted them as having been disclosed. This has been noticed by the CIT (A) in para 7.2.1 of his order for AY 2004- 05. As regards non-refundable security deposit, the CIT (A) accepted the AO's findings that treating the sum as 'goodwill written off on deferred basis' was not correct, hence the addition....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... income' of the six assessment years in question in separate assessment orders. This means that there can be only one assessment order in respect of each of the six assessment years, in which both the disclosed and the undisclosed income would be brought to tax. 20. A question may arise as to how this is sought to be achieved where an assessment order had already been passed in respect of all or any of those six assessment years, either under Section 143(1)(a) or Section 143(3) of the Act. If such an order is already in existence, having obviously been passed prior to the initiation of the search/requisition, the Assessing Officer is empowered to reopen those proceedings and reassess the total income, taking note to the undisclosed income, if any, unearthed during the search. For this purpose, the fetters imposed upon the Assessing Officer by the strict procedure to assume jurisdiction to reopen the assessment under Sections 147 and 148, have been removed by the non obstante clause with which sub-section (1) of Section 153A opens. The time-limit within which the notice under Section 148 can be issued, as provided in Section 149 has also been made inapplicable by the no....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed or requisition is made, they will abate making way for the Assessing Officer to determine the total income of the assessee in which the undisclosed income would also be included, but in case where the assessment or reassessment proceedings have already been completed and assessment orders have been passed determining the assessee's total income and such orders subsisting at the time when the search or the requisition is made, there is no question of any abatement since no proceedings are pending. In this latter situation, the Assessing Officer will reopen the assessments or reassessments already made (without having the need to follow the strict provisions or complying with the strict conditions of Sections 147, 148 and 151) and determine the total income of the assessee. Such determination in the orders passed under Section 153A would be similar to the orders passed in any reassessment, where the total income determined in the original assessment order and the income that escaped assessment are clubbed together and assessed as the total income. In such a case, to reiterate, there is no question of any abatement of the earlier proceedings for the simple reason that no procee....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ext of an abated proceedings and reassess has been used for completed assessment proceedings, which would not abate as they are not pending on the date of initiation of the search or making of requisition and which would also necessarily support the interpretation that for the completed assessments, the same can be tinkered only based on the incriminating material found during the course of search or requisition of documents. 27. The Allahabad High Court in Smt. Shaila Agarwal's (supra) has held as under:- "19. The second proviso to Section 153A of the Act, refers to abatement of the pending assessment or re-assessment proceedings. The word 'pending' does not operate any such interpretation, that wherever the appeal against such assessment or reassessment is pending, the same along with assessment or reassessment proceedings is liable to be abated. The principles of interpretation of taxing statutes do not permit the Court to interpret the Second Proviso to Section 153A in a manner that where the assessment or reassessment proceedings are complete, and the matter is pending in appeal in the Tribunal, the entire proceedings will abate. 20. Ther....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....eceived by the assessee firm. The AO has proposed to make the addition on account of unsecured loans and partners' capital under section 68 being unexplained cash credit solely on the basis of the information received from Investigation Wing Kolkata. It is pertinent to note that the said information was available with the AO prior to the search conducted under section 132 of the Act in case of the assessee on 2nd July, 2015. Therefore, even the sole basis of assessments framed under section 153A of the Act is the information received from Investigation Wing Kolkata and statement of one Shri Anand Sharma, who is stated to be an entry operator and managed various concerns/companies including M/s.Royal Crystal Dealers, one of the loan creditors of the assessee. Except the said statement and report of the Investigation Wing Kolkata, the AO has neither referred to or was having in possession of any material to indicate that the unsecured loans shown in the books of accounts as well as partners' capital received by the assessee are nothing but assessee's own unaccounted and undisclosed income routed back in the garb of unsecured loans and partners' capital. There is no dispute that these....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....cured loan and partner's capital from the above mentioned companies as bogus and in genuine. The findings of this office and Investigation report of the Investigation Directorate Kolkata are not based on any presumption, assumption, guess or bare suspicion. Where the nature and source of a receipt, whether it be of money or other property, cannot be satisfactorily explained by the assessee, it is open for the revenue to hold that it is the income of the assessee and no further burden lies on the revenue to show that the income is from any particular source as enumerated the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Roshan Di Hatti v. CIT (1977) 107 ITR 938 (SC) and Kale Khan Mohammad Hanif v. CIT (1963) 50 ITR 1 (SC). Prima facie onus is always on the assessee to prove the cash credit entry found in the books of account of the assessee. In land mark cases like Kale Khan Mohammad Hanif v CIT (1963) 50 ITR 1 (SC), Roshan Di Hatti v CIT (1977) 107 ITR (SC) it has been held that the law is well settled that the onus of proving the source of a sum of money found to have been received by an assessee, is on him. Where the nature and source thereof cannot be explained satisfactorily, i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....iling to establish lender's identity, forget the genuineness of transactions and creditworthiness of the lender. Hence, the unsecured loans and partner's capital shown to have been received from various Kolkata Based Companies and other Companies remained unexplained. In the circumstances, I am left with no option than to tax the entire unexplained credits by way of partner's capital and Unsecured loans received from the persons mentioned in para 5 above as unexplained cash credits u/s 68 of the Income Tax Act, chargeable to tax as income of the assessee firm for the respective assessment years." " 22. After examination of the information and details placed on record and discussion with the assessee, the total income of the assessee is computed as under :- Returned income as per ITR u/s 153A of the Act. Rs. 2,82,83,460/- Additions | Unexplained cash credits u/s | 68 of the Act in the form of | unsecured loan and partner's | capital Rs. 67,20,14,999/- Assessed income Rs. 70,02,98,459/- R/o Rs. 70,02,98,459/- The total income of the assessee in the status of Firm for Assessment Year 2010-11 rele....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....them. However, it is equally pertinent to mention here that the Department has not accepted the decisions of Hon'ble Mumbai High Court in the case of M/s All Cargo Global Logistics as well as Continental Warehousing (Nhava Sheva) Ltd., and SLP has been filed before the Hon'ble Supreme Court. The Hon'ble Supreme Court has granted leave vide order dated 12.10.2015 as reported in 64 taxmann.com 34 (S.C.). Similarly, in the case of Kabul Chawla SLP has also been filed. 3.2.4 In view of SLPs admitted in case of Kabul Chawla, M/s All Cargo Global Logistics as well as Continental Warehousing (Nhava Sheva) Ltd., (supra), assessee's contention cannot be accepted. Moreover, in any case, the additions are to be adjudicated on merits as per relevant ground of appeal, the issue raised in this ground for present remains for academic discussion only. Accordingly, issue raised in ground no. 12 is dismissed." Therefore, neither in the assessment order nor in the order of the ld. CIT (A) there is any mention or finding that the additions have been made by the AO on the basis of any incriminating material found during the course of search and seizure in the case of the a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....iples of natural justice for not granting the cross examination of the alleged accommodation entry provider. 15. Before us, the ld. A/R of the assessee submitted that the sole basis of addition is the report of investigation wing Kolkata which in turn based on the statement of one Sh. Amit Kedia and Sh. Alok Harlalka whereas the assessee was not given the opportunity of cross examination despite repeated requests and demands. The AO has violated the principles of natural justice by not providing the copies of material used against the assessee at the assessment stage and further not providing the opportunity of cross examination of the witness during the assessment stage as well as appellate stage. Though the ld. CIT (A) called for a remand report and asked the AO to provide opportunity of cross examination to the assessee, however, after the remand proceedings the AO did not afford an opportunity of cross examination rather the AO has asked the assessee to produce the witness instead of allowing the assessee to cross examine the witness. In support of his contention, the ld. A/R has relied upon the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Andaman Timber Industries vs. Commi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ith the results of all these enquiries and information shared by the Investigation Wing Kolkata. In these circumstances and in the interest of natural justice, the assessee was required to produce the alleged creditors for examination so that genuineness of share capital and premium etc. could be verified by the AO. Despite providing several opportunities, the assessee miserably failed to produce any creditor. The assessee never expressed its inability to produce the alleged creditor nor the assessee requested the AO to issue summon to the alleged creditor for verification of the genuineness of the cash credit in the form of share capital and premium etc. It is evident that the assessee never intended to produce the alleged creditor. The ld. D/R has further submitted that the present case is not one where assessee obtained small loans or insignificant share capital so that the assessee could take the plea that it is not in a position to ensure presence of alleged creditors. The size of the transactions which are tainted share capital and share premium etc. constitute the major portion of entire capital of the assessee and other group companies. Thus the assessee has failed to estab....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... "11. We have considered the rival submissions as well as the relevant material on record. For the assessment year 2010-11, the assessee has challenged the addition sustained by ld. CIT (A) in respect of unsecured loan from M/s. Jalsagar Commerce Pvt. Ltd. The other additions made by the AO on account of unsecured loans as well as partners' capital for the assessment year 2010-11 were deleted by the ld. CIT (A) on the ground that the AO was not having in his possession even the statement of the concerned persons in support of his finding that the alleged loan and partners' capital is nothing but bogus accommodation entries. Therefore, the revenue has challenged that part of the order in the cross appeal. The ld. A/R of the assessee has pointed out that for the assessment year 2010-11 there was no loan from the company controlled by Shri Anand Sharma, M/s. Royal Crystal Dealers Pvt. Ltd. but the assessee took the loan from M/s. Jalsagar Commerce Pvt. Ltd. which is not the company owned or controlled by Shri Anand Sharma. The ld. CIT (A) has sustained the addition in respect of loan from M/s. Jalsagar Commerce Pvt. Ltd. in para 5.1 to 5.12 as under :- "5.1 In this res....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s, layering the transaction by cheque deposit on the same day or preceding day of share application / deposits, the assertions of the AO for no-creditworthiness or in-adequate creditworthiness of the so-called shareholders / depositors holds fields. During the appellate proceeding before me, though paper books for relevant AY and common Paper Books have been submitted, the same does not adduce any evidence to rebut the adverse factual finding made by the AO in the assessment order as mentioned by me in Para 4.1 above and categorically mentioned in the reports as discussed in para 4.4.7 above. Under these adverse background of appellant employing modus-operendi of resorting accommodation entry provider to build-up share capital / unsecured loans by foul means, what the AO is vehemently making the case for is the law on the issue-section 68 of Income-tax Act has to be applied by evolving perceptions for the law on the issue and not on the basis of routine perceptions on the law on the issue that is losing their relevance. 5.4 With all due respect to authorities cited by the appellant for canvassing his stand point, I am not able to persuade my conscience to agree with appell....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ee has failed to prove the creditworthiness of all the creditors and no source of their income has been filed. At the best the assessee is able to prove identity of the creditors, but the assessee failed to prove the genuine credit in the matter. All the creditors have been rightly found to be men of meager means and no source of income have been filed to prove that they were having sufficient funds or savings in order to give loans to the assessee. On verification of the bank account of the depositors, it was specifically found that there were no sufficient funds available in their bank account and they were having only small bank balance, which was even not sufficient to meet out their household expenses or day-to-day requirements. Therefore, it is unbelievable to accept the contention of the assessee that said persons were having creditworthiness to advance any loan to the assessee. CIT(A) was justified in confirming the addition u/s. 68 of the IT Act. In the present case, the assessee has not adduced any sufficient evidence before the authorities below to prove the creditworthiness of the creditors and genuineness of the transactions in the matter. Therefore, the asses....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....its. In fact on 10th December, 2009, authorized representative had appeared and he was apprised that the summons issued to the shareholders under Section 131 had been received back unserved in five cases and he was requested to provide the present postal address of the parties. Inthemeanwhile, the Assessing Officer managed to get hold of the bank statements of the shareholders, who had allegedly made deposits by way of cheques and pay orders. The assessment order specifically records that huge cash deposits in lacs were being regularly deposited in the said accounts and then pay orders/cheques were issued to the respondent assessee. 8. On 14th December, 2009, authorized representative appeared and stated that the assessee was unable to produce directors or principal officers of the six shareholder companies pleading that they were not shareholders now and seven years had passed since the transactions took place. The assessment order records and mentions about the transactions recorded in the bank accounts of the shareholder/entry operator companies to show and establish that there was immediate deposit of cash and then issue of cheques. It was further mentioned that these ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ors of the shareholder companies, but thereafter no further inquiries were conducted. The second set of cases are those where there was evidence and material to show that the shareholder company was only a paper company having no source of income, but had made substantial and huge investments in the form of share application money. The assessing officer has referred to the bank statement, financial position of the recipient and beneficiary assessee and surrounding circumstances. The primary requirements, which should be satisfied in such cases is, identification of the creditors/shareholder, creditworthiness of creditors/shareholder and genuineness of the transaction. These three requirements have to be tested not superficially but in depth having regard to the human probabilities and normal course of human conduct. 14. Certificate of incorporation, PAN number etc. are relevant for purchase of identification, but have their limitation when there is evidence and material to show that the subscriber was a paper company and not a genuine investor. It is in this context, the Supreme Court in CIT vs. Durga Prasad More [1971] 82 ITR 540 (SC) had observed:- "Now we shall....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....inding is erroneous. We are unable to agree. Whether a receipt is to be treated as income or not, must depend very largely on the facts and circumstances of each case. In the present case the receipts are shown in the account books of a firm of which the appellant and Govindaswamy Mudaliar were partners. When he was called upon to give explanation he put forward two explanations, one being a gift of Rs. 80,000 and the other being receipt of Rs. 42,000 from business of which he claimed to be the real owner. When both these explanations were rejected, as they have been it was clearly upon to the Income-tax Officer to hold that the income must be concealed income. There is ample authority for the position that where an assessee fails to prove satisfactorily the source and nature of certain amount of cash received during the accounting year, the Income-tax Officer is entitled to draw the inference that the receipt are of an assessable nature. The conclusion to which the Appellate Tribunal came appears to us to be amply warranted by the facts of the case. There is no ground for interfering with that finding, and these appeals are accordingly dismissed with costs."(emphasis supplied) ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... or channel of investment as share capital must be firmly excoriated by the Revenue, but when there is preponderance of evidence to show absence of culpability, the assessee should not be harassed by the Revenue. A delicate balance must be maintained between the two interests. In Divine Leasing (supra), the following proposition was elucidated:- "In this analysis, a distillation of the precedents yields the following propositions of law in the context of Section 68 of the IT Act. The assessed has to prima facie prove (1) the identity of the creditor/subscriber; (2) the genuineness of the transaction, namely, whether it has been transmitted through banking or other indisputable channels; (3) the credit worthiness or financial strength of the creditor/subscriber. (4) If relevant details of the address or PAN identity of the creditor/subscriber are furnished to the Department along with copies of the Shareholders Register, Share Application Forms, Share Transfer Register etc. it would constitute acceptable proof or acceptable Explanation by the assessed. (5) The Department would not be justified in drawing an adverse inference only because the creditor/subscriber fails or neg....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the assessee has discharged the burden placed upon him under sec.68 to prove and establish the identity and creditworthiness of the share applicant and the genuineness of the transaction. In such a case, the Assessing Officer cannot sit back with folded hands till the assessee exhausts all the evidence ormaterial in his possession and then come forward to merely reject the same, without carrying out any verification or enquiry into the material placed before him. The case before us does not fall under this category and it would be a travesty of truth and justice to express a view to the contrary." 18. Lovely Exports Pvt. Ltd.(supra) was also considered and distinguished in N.R. Portfolio Pvt. Ltd. (supra) and it was held that the entire evidence available on record has to be considered, after relying upon CIT Vs. Nipun Builders and Developers, [2013] 350 ITR 407 (Delhi), wherein it has been held that a reasonable approach has to be adopted and whether initial onus stands discharged would depend upon facts and circumstances of each case. In case of private limited companies, generally persons known to directors or shareholders, directly or indirectly, buy or subscribe to sh....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tity of the person or a company was the business undertaken by them. This according to us is the correct and true legal position, as identity, creditworthiness and genuineness have to be established. PAN numbers are allotted on the basis of applications without actual de facto verification of the identity or ascertaining active nature of business activity. PAN is a number which is allotted and helps the Revenue keep track of the transactions. PAN number is relevant but cannot be blindly and without considering surrounding circumstances treated as sufficient to discharge the onus, even when payment is through bank account. 19. On the question of credit worthiness and genuineness, it was highlighted that the money no doubt was received through banking channels, but did not reflect actual genuine business activity. The share subscribers did not have their own profit making apparatus and were not involved in business activity. They merely rotated money, which was coming through the bank accounts, which means deposits by way of cash and issue of cheques. The bank accounts, therefore, did not reflect their creditworthiness or even genuineness of the transaction. The beneficiarie....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... In view of the aforesaid discussion, we feel that the matter requires an order of remit to the tribunal for fresh adjudication keeping in view the aforesaid case law. The question of law is, therefore, answered in favour of the Revenue and against the respondent-assessee, but with an order of remit to the tribunal to decide the whole issue afresh. As reported at 2015-TIOL-314-SC-IT, in the above case, the Hon'ble Supreme Court observed to effect that 'merely because the assessee has been able to show that the shareholder companies were duly incorporated and their identity & genuineness stands established, there were deposits of cash in the bank accounts prior to issue of cheque or pay orders, the same would raise suspicion and addition can be made on such account' 5.7 It may be mentioned that as reported at 2016-TIOL-207-SC-IT, the Hon'ble Supreme Court dismissed SLP by Rick Lunsford Trade & Investment Ltd in case of Rick Lunsford Trade & Investment Ltd Vs CIT 'upholding that it is open to the Revenue Department to make addition on account of alleged share capital u/s 68, where the assessee company has failed to show genuineness of its shareholders.' 5.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....amily members and the remaining amount has been received from parties totally unrelated to the Assessee. Notices to some of the investors could not be served and even the Inspector who was deputed to serve the summons stated that none of the addresses could be found. The authorised representative of the Assessee refused to produce the parties who had invested in the share capital on the ground that they were not in a position to produce them. The fact that the Assessee failed to produce the persons who had invested towards share capital shows that these were people who were completely unrelated to the Assessee and as such, all the entries were merely accommodation entries. Otherwise, in a private limited company, it would not have been difficult on the part of the Assessee to produce persons who were investing substantial amount of money in the company towards share capital. 37. The Assessing Officer in his order has as a sample referred to the entries in the account of some of the share holders noticing that there are cash deposits of the exact amount for which cheque is subsequently issued to the Assessee. Perusal of the bank statements clearly establishes that these par....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... unserved with the comments from the postal authorities as "no such person in the above address". The AO accordingly brought this fact to the notice of the counsel of the assessee vide order sheet entry dated 18.12.2007 and he was given an opportunity to produce the functional directors of the above companies for verification. As mentioned in the assessment order, after certain adjournments, a letter was finally filed from the appellant mentioning that it is no in touch of the above share holders and their present whereabouts are not known to it. The appellant, however, relying upon the decision of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Sophia Finance Ltd. In which the powers of the Assessing Officer was not precluded from making enquiries in share application money, submitted that no addition can be made. 2.1.1 The AO however was not convinced with the submission of the appellant. He observed that that it was only in the course of enquiry that he tried to examine the above share applicants. Since the summons issued to such persons remained unserved, it became the duty of the appellant either to produce them for verification or to state their correct addresses....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... some of the companies show above by the appellant as its share holders were found to have stated before investigation wing that they were mere name lender for advancing money. To quote some of them, Shri Rajesh Bansal, Director of M/s. Rubicon Associates Pvt. Ltd., Shri Mahesh Garg, Director of M/s. S.J. Hosiery Pvt. Ltd. Etc. have categorically stated before the Investigation wing, in their statement taken on oath, that they used to take the amount in cash and give entries to different concerns as gift, loan or share application money. According to AO, to enquire into this aspect also, the appellant was asked to produce the functional directors of such share holders. 2.1.3. In view of these facts and circumstances, the Assessing Officer concluded that the credit in the name of these shareholders are not genuine and represents unexplained cash credits. Accordingly he made addition of Rs. 1.50 lakhs to the returned income. Then Hon'ble Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Delhi Bench: 'B' held in Para 6 as under: 6. As regards ground No. 2, we find that the assessee has stated to have received fresh share capital to the tune of Rs. 15 lacs and share premium ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....an the apparent shown on the paper. All these facts put together reveal that neither the identity of the share applicants are proved nor justification for share premium has been proved. In such circumstances the court cannot put blinker on the eye and look only at the papers presented before it. There is something more than that meets the eye. As rightly contended by Ld. DR in such situation the observation of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Durga Prasad More 82 ITR 540 and in the case of Sumati Dayal Vs. CIT 214 ITR 801 are apt for application. We therefore do not find any reason to hold that the share capital receipts by assessee were from persons whose identity is established and the amount is genuinely received towards share capital. 5.10 In a recent decision in case of Principal Commissioner Of Income vs Bikram Singh in ITA 55/2017, the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi held on 25 August, 2017 as under:- 25. The law applicable to transactions of this nature is well settled by this Court in Divine Leasing (supra). Both parties have referred to and relied upon this judgment. This Court, after analyzing the entire law on the subject in the context of ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
......................................................................................................... 43. The transactions in the present appeal are yet another example of the constant use of the deception of loan entries to bring unaccounted money into banking channels. This device of loan entries continues to plague the legitimate economy of our country. As seen from the facts narrated above, the transactions herein clearly do not inspire confidence as being genuine and are shrouded in mystery, as to why the so-called creditors would lend such huge unsecured, interest free loans - that too without any agreement. In the absence of the same, the creditors fail the test of creditworthiness and the transactions fail the test of genuineness. 5.11 In my considered view, the technical objections raised by the Appellant in respect of loan from M/s Jalsagar Commerce Pvt. Ltd. are of no avail to the appellant due to following undisputed facts:- i. It is undisputed fact that the Income Tax Department has made tremendous investigations in such shell companies of Kolkata, Mumbai and Delhi providing accommodation entry and statements made by several accommodation ent....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....is held that the addition made by the AO on account of unsecured loans amounting to Rs. 12,36,49,999/- from M/s Jalsagar Commerce Pvt. Ltd. sustainable and the same is confirmed." Thus the addition was confirmed based on the report of the DDIT (Inv.) Kolkata. We find that the report of the DDIT (Inv.) Kolkata is also based on the statements of various persons recorded during their investigation and the statement of Shri Anand Sharma was also sent along with the report of the AO. The ld. CIT (A) has confirmed the addition because of the reason that the statement of Shri Anand Sharma was very much in the possession of the AO who has admitted in his statement that M/s. Jalsagar Commerce Pvt. Ltd. was engaged in the activity of providing accommodation entry. However, we find that M/s. Jalsagar Commerce Pvt. Ltd is not managed or controlled by Shri Anand Sharma, rather the company M/s. Royal Crystal Dealers Pvt. Ltd. was stated to have been owned by Shri Anand Sharma and in his statement dated 6th February, 2014 Shri Anand Sharma has stated to have been providing entries from M/s. Royal Crystal Dealers Pvt. Ltd. to M/s. Jalsagar Commerce Pvt. Ltd. Therefore, there is no allegat....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the AO issued summons and also got the summons served through DDIT Kolkata under section 131 of the IT Act which were duly responded by the loan creditor. Except the statement of Shri Anand Sharma and the report of the Investigation Wing Kolkata, the AO has not brought on record any other material to controvert or disprove the documentary evidence produced by the assessee. It is pertinent to note that the loan creditor was assessed to tax and the AO completed the assessment under section 143 (3) for various assessment years which are relevant for the assessment year under consideration. The AO in case of loan creditor has not disturbed the transactions of loan given by this company to the assessee. From the financial statements of the loan creditor it is apparent that the loan creditor was having sufficient funds to advance the loan amount to the assessee and once the said financial statements were not disturbed, then the creditworthiness of the loan creditor cannot be doubted when it was accepted in the assessment order passed under section 143(3) of the IT Act. We further note that the AO insisted the assessee to produce the directors of the loan provider company. The assesee pr....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... credited in loan a/c during the year Interest credited in interest Paid/payable a/c Loan repayment/ TDS/transfer in partner capital during the year Closing balance Jalsagar Commerce Private Ltd 10-11 41,298 34,70,40,000 13,96,176 12,56,558 34,21,15,916 51,05,000 Jalsagar Commerce Private Ltd 11-12 51,05,000 77,18,70,000 16,71,599 15,04,439 77,18,37,160 53,05,000 Jalsagar Commerce Private Ltd 12-13 53,05,000 78,95,00,000 1,07,08,434 96,37,591 31,72,80,655 47,85,95,188 Jalsagar Commerce Private Ltd 13-14 47,85,95,188 2,76,31,50,000 0 0 2,97,53,40,000 26,64,05,188 Jalsagar Commerce Private Ltd 14-15 26,64,05,188 97,34,50,000 0 0 1,24,03,55,188 (5,00,000) Jalsagar Commerce Private Ltd 15-16 0 1,34,89,00,000 49,00,600 44,10,540 1,34,93,90,060 0 Jalsagar Commerce Private Ltd 16-17 0 87,11,00,000 1,67,23,178 1,50,50,860 87,27,72,318 0 All these details were before the AO as all these assessment years were passed by the AO pursuant to the search and seizure action under sectio....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s examination of the witnesses due to the reason that the witnesses belong to Kolkata and it is not possible for AO to make such arrangement. The ld. CIT(A) has finally denied the cross examination to the assessee by giving his finding in para 5.11 at page 188 already reproduced in the earlier part of this order and, therefore, the only reason for denial of cross examination by the ld.CIT(A) is that the statements are so vocal and undeniable that cross examination of such accommodation entry provided by thousands of beneficiaries across India is neither practicable nor viable and therefore uncalled for. We find that the assessee has demanded the cross examination only in respect of the alleged transactions of loans and not for the entire business of the entry providers providing the bogus entries. Undisputedly, the statement of Shri Anand Sharma was recorded by the Investigation Wing Kolkata at the back of the assessee, even the proceedings by the Investigation were conducted at the back of the assessee, therefore, the said statement of Shri Anand Sharma cannot be the sole basis of assessment without giving an opportunity of cross examination to the assessee. The Hon'ble Supreme Co....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....what could be the subject-matter of the cross-examination and make the remarks as mentioned above. We may also point out that on an earlier occasion when the matter came up before this court in CCE v. Andaman Timber Industries Ltd., order dated 17.3.2005 waws passed remitting the case back to the Tribunal with the directions to decide the appeal on merits giving its reasons for accepting or rejecting the submissions. 8. In view of the above, we are of the opinion that if the testimony of these two witnesses is discredited, there was no material with the Department on the basis of which it could justify its action, as the statement of the aforesaid two witnesses was the only basis of issuing the show-cause notice. 9. We, thus, set aside the impugned order as passed by the Tribunal and allow this appeal. No costs." Once the assessee has disputed the correctness of the statement and wanted to cross examine the witness which was not given by the AO as well as ld. CIT (A), then the orders passed based on such statement are not sustainable in law. The Hon'ble Delhi High Court in case of CIT vs. Ashwani Gupta, 322 ITR 396 (Delhi) while dealing with the issue of ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... of opportunity and consequently would be fatal to the proceedings. The Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of H.R. Mehta vs. ACIT, 387 ITR 561 (Bombay) has also considered the issue of not providing opportunity of cross examination in para 11 to 17 as under :- "11. We have therefore proceeded to hear and decide the matter unassisted by the revenue. In the course of his submissions Mr. Tralshawala had pressed into service inter alia the decision of the Calcutta High Court in Mather & Platt (India) Ltd.(supra) and submitted that merely because a person is not found at an address after several years it cannot be held that he is non existent and that the assessee had discharged his primary onus by identifying the source of the amount paid. The Court observed that once the primary onus is discharged, the onus shifted to the revenue to verify genuineness of the transaction. In the present case no such effort was made by the revenue. We find that in S. Hastimal (supra) the Madras High Court observed that after a lapse of several years the assessee should not be placed upon the rack and called upon to explain not only merely, the origin and source of his capital contribution bu....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the tribunal merely observed that the cross examination of the dealers in that case, could not have brought out any material which would not otherwise be in possession of the appellant-assessee. The Supreme Court set aside the impugned order and observed that it was not for the Adjudicating Authority to presuppose as to what could be the subject matter of the cross examination and make the remarks such as was done in that case. 16. In the instant case although the appellant assessee has called upon us to draw an inference that the burden shifted to the revenue in the present case once it was established that the payments were made and repaid by cheque we need not hasten and adopt that view after having given our thought to various issues raised and the decisions cited by Mr. Tralshawalla and finding that on a very fundamental aspect, the revenue was not justified in making addition at the time of reassessment without having first given the assessee an opportunity to cross examine the deponent on the statements relied upon by the ACIT. Quite apart from denial of an opportunity of cross examination, the revenue did not even provide the material on the basis of which the depa....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ion has also been obtained by the Assessing officer to satisfy the cardinal test of identity, creditworthiness and genuineness of the loan transaction. However, the Assessing officer has not given any finding in respect of such explanation, documentary evidence as well as independent confirmation. Apparently, the reason for not accepting the same is that the Assessing officer was in receipt of certain information from the investigation wing of the tax department as per which the transaction under consideration is a bogus loan transaction. The said information received from the investigation wing thus overweighed the mind of the Assessing officer. The Assessing officer stated that the primary onus is on the assessee to establish the genuineness of the transaction claimed by it and if the investigation done by the department leads to doubt regarding the genuineness of the transactions, it is incumbent on the assessee to produce the parties alongwith necessary documents to establish the genuineness of the transaction. In response, the assessee submitted that Shri Bhanwarlal Jain is not known to him and regarding various incriminating documentary evidences seized during the course of s....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e at hand is that whether the principle of natural justice stand violated in the instant case. In other words, where the AO doesn't want to accept the explanation of the assessee and the documentation furnished regarding the genuineness of the loan transaction and instead wants to rely upon the information independently received from the investigation wing of the department in respect of investigation carried out at a third party, can the said information be used against the assessee without sharing such information with the assessee and allowing an opportunity to the assessee to examine such information and explain its position especially when the assessee has requested the same to the Assessing officer. 2.10 In this regard, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Dhakeswari Cotton Mills Ltd. v. CIT (1954) 26 ITR 775 (SC) (Copy at Case Law PB 812-818) has held that "The rule of law on this subject has been fairly and rightly stated by the Lahore High Court in the case of Seth Gurmukh Sinqh where it was stated that while proceeding under subsection (3) of section 23, the Income-tax Officer, though not bound to rely on evidence produced by the assessee as he considers to b....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....evidence supportive of its finding. In the first place, this letter was not disclosed to the assessee by the ITO and even though the AAC reproduced an extract from it in his order, he did not care to produce it before the assessee or give a copy of it to the assessee. The same position obtained also before the Tribunal and the High Court and it was only when a supplemental statement of the case was called for by this Court by its order, dated 16-8-1979 that, according to the ITO, this letter was traced by him and even then it was not shown by him to the assessee but it was forwarded to the Tribunal and it was for the first time at the hearing before the Tribunal in regard to the preparation of the supplemental statement of the case that this letter was shown to the assessee. It will, therefore, be seen that, even if we assume that this letter was in fact addressed by the manager of the bank to the ITO, no reliance could be placed upon it, since it was not shown to the assessee until at the stage of preparation of the supplemental statement of the case and no opportunity to cross examine the manager of the bank could in the circumstances be sought or availed of by the assessee. It i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....witnesses whose statements were relied upon by the AO in the assessment order and further the report of the DDIT Investigation Kolkata is also based on the statement of such person then the denial of cross examination by the AO as well as ld. CIT (A) despite the fact that the assessee was ready to bear the cost of the cross examination of the witnesses is a gross violation of principles of natural justice. Thus the additions made by the AO on the basis of such statement without any tangible material is not sustainable in law and liable to be deleted. Accordingly the addition made by the AO is also deleted on merits apart from the legal issue decided in favour of the assessee." Both the parties have fairly admitted that the fact as well as the issue is identical in both the cases. Therefore, in view of our finding on this issue in the case of Kota Dall Mill (supra), we decide this issue in favour of the assessee. 18. In the result, appeals of the revenue are dismissed and cross objections of the assessee are allowed. Order is pronounced in the open court on 11/01/2019. ============= Document 1 provided to Aradhana Estate Pvt Ltd. In the entire process the beneficiary ....