TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (6) TMI 147
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 84 lacs u/s 68 of the Income-tax Act on account of bogus share capital and share premium. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the Ld CIT(A) failed to appreciate the fact about non-production of any single party for examination by the AO. 3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the Ld CIT(A) failed to appreciate the fact that Shri Pravin Kumar Jain was indulged in issuing bogus accommodation entries in different forms including share capital and share premium." 2.1 Facts in brief that the assessee being a resident corporate assessee stated to be engaged in Share Market....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s were issued u/s 133(6) to confirm the transactions which were duly responded to by three entities whereas one notice was returned back unserved. The assessee was directed to produce the said parties for confirmation of the transactions. 2.5 The assessee submitted that all the companies were regular Income Tax assessee and reflected the aforesaid investment in their respective Balance Sheet. Form No.2 filed with Registrar of Companies with respect to Allotment of Shares was also filed to support the same. In the above background, the assessee claimed to have fulfilled aforesaid primary ingredients as desired by Ld. AO. 2.6 However, the same could not find favor with Ld. AO who observed that all the above entities were hawala operator ent....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the land. 3.2 In the above background, it was noted that the assessee had produced the following documentary evidences during assessment proceedings as well as during appellate proceedings in support of the impugned transactions: - 1. Share Application forms duly signed by each of the four companies 2. Resolution of the Board Authorizing the company to invest in share capital of the appellant company 3. Covering letter of investment in share capital 4. Confirmation of investment by each of the four companies 5. Financial Statements of the investing companies 6. The copies of ITR acknowledgements of the four companies 7. The copies of the bank statement of the four companies 8. The copy of the bank statement of the appellant....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... placed on the recent decision of Hon'ble Apex Court rendered in PCIT Vs. NRA Iron & Steel Pvt. Ltd. [412 ITR 161]. The Ld. Authorized Representative for assessee [AR], supporting the impugned order, submitted that fulfilment of primary ingredients of Section 68 was demonstrated by the assessee with documentary evidences which remain unrebutted by the revenue. The attention was drawn to the fact that Ld. AO had sufficient power u/s 131 to summon any of the investor company and inquire about the same particularly when the assessee has duly discharged the primary onus casted upon him. It was submitted that additions could not be made merely on the basis of conjectures, surmises or doubts relying upon third party statements. 5.1 We have care....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ave carefully studied. Upon perusal, we note certain distinguishing features vis-à-vis factual matrix of the present case. Upon perusal of para 3.7 & 3.8 of the said judgement, it is noted that Ld. AO had issued summons to as many as 19 investor entities but nobody appeared on behalf of the investor companies. The submissions were received through DAK only which created a doubt about the identity of the investor company. Further, Ld. AO independently got field inquiries conducted at the location of investor companies, the result of which has been tabulated in the said para. Notice was served on few entities but the same were not replied to. In few cases, the notices were returned back. Submissions were received in few cases though DA....