TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (5) TMI 1546
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hares to L.B. India Holdings Mauritious-II Limited. The Company had issued 26,21,579/- equity shares at the rate of Rs. 190/- per share (including premium of Rs. 180/- per share ( on 4th August, 2007). The name of M/s. Raipur Alloys and Steel Ltd. has been changed to M/s. Sarda Energy and Minerals Ltd. with effect from 2nd August, 2007 pursuant to the approval received from the Registrar of Companies. A search and seizure operation was carried out at the premises of the assessee and its various concerns. During the search operation, the amount received in the form of share capital and premium from L.B. India Holding Mauritius-II Limited Hong Kong was examined and the documents related to issuance of the shares to above mentioned foreign company were seized and marked as LPS 41 of Vanijya Bhawan Premises. In this respect the Statements of Shri Kamal Kishore Sarda, Managing Director of the assessee-company and Shri Ghanshyam Das Mundra, Director of the assessee company were recorded in the course of Search operation. Thereafter, it is observed by the Ld. Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax (Central) that no documents relating to payment of dividend, approval thereon or intimation letter t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....me Tax Act, 1961 during the previous your relevant to the assessment year mentioned above. The return should in appropriate form as prescribed in Rule 12 of the Income Tax Rules, 1962. A blank return for is enclosed. It should be duly verified and signed in accordance with the provisions of section 140 of the said Act and delivered at my office at Central Revenue Building, Civil Lines, Raipur (C.G.) on or before. (b) Produce or cause to be produced before me at my office , Central Revenue Building, Civil Lines , Raipur (C.G.) on 22.02.2016 at 11.30 AM the accounts and/ or documents specified below: (c) Furnish in writing and verified in the prescribed manner information called for as mentioned below and on the points and matter specified therein before me at my office at Central Revenue Building, Civil Lines, Raipur (C.G.) on or before 08.09.2015 at 3.30PM. Accounts/ documents/ information to be filed/produced 1. Computation of income for A.Y.2008-09 2. Copy of Audit Report, Balance Sheet, Profit & Loss Account for A.Y.2008-09 3. please submit documentary evidence in respect of share application received from M/s. L.B. India Holding Mauritius-II Limited and also state w....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....y Auditor of the Company indicating the manner of arriving the issue price of the equity shares. (v) Certificate of Foreign Inward Remittance made by M/s L.B. India Holdings Mauritius-II Limited. (vi) Copy of In-Principle approval received from Bombay Stock Exchange ' (BSE) for issue of shares. (vii) Copy of Filing of Form- FC-GPR and other documents with Reserve Bank India (RBI) through Union Bank of India (UBI). (viii) Copy of filing of Form- FC-GPR and other documents by UBI to RBI. (ix) Copy of certificate of KYC of M/s L.B. India Holdings Mauritius-Il Limited ' received from the Hongkong and Shanghai Banking Corporation Limited (HSBC). (x) Copy of listing confirmation of the private placement of shares received from BSE." 7. Page 48 of the Paper book is the second reply of the assessee. With regard to the query raised by the Assessing Officer, the assessee has filed detailed written submissions. The page 48 of the paper book is made part of this order: Annexure-3 Raipur, 09th March, 2016 To The Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Central Circle -1 Central Revenue Building, Civil Lines, Raipur-492001 (Chhattisgarh) Assessee : Sarda Energy & M....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ssing Officer after taking into account various details filed by the assessee and after specific enquiry, such order of the Assessing Officer is not erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue. It may be that the Assessing Officer has conducted his enquiry which is evident from facts on records but that enquiry may not be upto the satisfaction of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax. Therefore, in effect, it amounts to a plausible view emerging for which revisionary jurisdiction u/s.263 of the Act cannot be resorted to. 9. The Ld. AR of the assessee has referred to the decision of the Hon‟ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Max India Ltd. 295 ITR 282(SC) wherein it has been held that "the phrase "prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue" in section 263 of the Income- tax Act, 1961,has to be read in conjunction with the expression "erroneous" order passed by the Assessing Officer. Every loss of revenue as a consequence of an order of the Assessing Officer cannot be treated as prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue. For example, when the Assessing Officer adopts one of two courses permissible in law and it has resulted in....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....monstrated before us that on the same issue i.e. with regard to M/s. L.B. India Holding Mauritius-II Limited and its transactions, specific documentary evidences and details have been filed by the assessee before Assessing Officer along with detailed written submissions. This was done by the assessee since the Assessing Officer had specifically enquired from the assessee regarding transactions from the company. This is evident from the various documents placed before us and annexed in the paper book. The Assessing Officer had conducted enquiry and after various rounds of hearing and deliberation with the assessee and scrutinizing the documents filed before him as well as submissions of the assessee, the Assessing Officer had passed an order. Such assessment order is neither erroneous nor prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue. We further take guidance from the ratio laid down by the Hon‟ble Supreme Court of India in the case Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Max India Ltd (supra.) wherein it has been held that every loss of revenue as a consequence of an order of the Assessing Officer cannot be treated as prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue. For example, when the A....