AI Drafter 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2021 (4) TMI 950
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 2. The assessee is a company and had filed its return of income on 28/09/2012, disclosing loss of Rs. 31,431/-. The company had issued shares at a premium during the year. The Assessing Officer selected the case for scrutiny and issued notices u/s 143(2) and 142(1) of the Act. The assessee did not appear. Summons u/s 131 of the Act were issued to the directors of the share subscriber companies for personal attendance on 24/02/2015. None appeared. The Assessing Officer drew adverse inference and made an addition u/s 68 of the Act of the share capital and share premium received by the assessee during the year. On appeal, the ld. CIT(A) passed an ex-parte order. 3. Aggrieved the assessee is in appeal before us. 4. The ld. Counsel for ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....04/Kol/2016, Assessment Year: 2009-10 order dt. March 21, 2018, 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 treating the same as unexplained cash credits is restored back by the Tribunal to the file of the A.O. in almost similar situation after recording its observations / findings as under: We note that the AO pursuant to the order of Ld. CIT had taken note of the directions of the Ld. CIT and issued notice u/....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....mpany 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 opinion that the assessee did not get fair opportunity to present the evidences before the AO so, there was a lack of opportunity as aforesaid, therefore, it has to go back to AO. 8. We also note that Ld. Cit while setting aside the order of the AO which was passed u/s. 147/143(3) of the Act, the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....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 experience and wisdom has given certain guidelines in the backdrop of black money menace should have been properly enquired into as directed by him. The AO ought to have followed the investigating guidelines and method as directed by him to unearth the facts to determine whether the identity, genuineness an....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....dditions 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 in response to the notice under Section148 issued by the AO, as also the material submitted at the stage of appeals, if deemed proper by way of making or causing to be made a 'further inquiry' in exercise of the power under Section 250(4). His approach not having been adopted, the impugned order of ITAT....