TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2021 (5) TMI 540
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e sides have also filed written submissions in addition to their respective oral submissions supported by various judicial decisions. 4. We have carefully considered the written submissions. The ld. counsel for the assessee has reiterated what has been stated before the lower authorities. 5. The ld. DR has highlighted the findings of the Assessing Officer. The ld. DR has also relied upon several judicial decisions of the co-ordinate benches. In our considered opinion, there cannot be any decision which would be factually identical to the facts of the assessee mutatis mutandis. In fact, all the decisions of the co-ordinate benches, relied upon by the ld. DR, are based on specific facts of those cases and the co-ordinate benches have decided the issues after analyzing the facts of each case. Therefore, we do not find it necessary to consider the judicial decisions relied upon the peculiar facts of the case in hand discussed hereinbelow. 6. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that during the year under consideration, the assessee company was engaged in the business of construction, developing, promoting, managing, operating, leasing and dealing in all kinds of real esta....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s even the investment amounting to Rs. 10 cr. remains unexplained. 6. Similarly, the valuation of shares of the assessee company is being done on forward date 22.7.2016 while the issuance of shares and date of receipts of share premium in bank accounts are starting from the beginning of the year (April 2015), which raises the suspicion that back calculation has been done by the assessee after receiving the premium amount. 7. Two related companies, Nimit Builders Pvt Ltd and Verma Finvest Pvt Ltd, have no financials supporting their creditworthiness. Their balance sheet is symptomatic of paper companies/shell companies, i.e., heavy capital and premium, but nil underlying operations. Despite being provided with the show cause regarding the same, the assessee couldn't prove otherwise. 8. In case of not directly related companies, the assessee couldn't furnish the exact source of income It is pertinent to note that all 4 such companies are loss making and don't have any worth as such as shown in Table 2. Especially in the light of the cash deposits, and bank entries through same group concerns, poor financials, even these companies doesn't qualify the criteri....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nts and the primary source of income is through investment in FDs in the form of interest, while the source of this investment is money that it has received in the form of share capital and share premium through circuitous transactions. 10. The AO found that the assessee did not undertake a single project during the year and hence it is inexplicable how the capital appreciation has accrued to the investor companies. Drawing support from the ratio laiddown by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sumati Dayal 80 Taxmann.com 89, the AO applied the test of human probability and made addition of Rs. 88,30,29,000/-. 11. Assessment was assailed before the CITA. 12. Before the first appellate authority, the assessee reiterated what has been stated before the lower authorities and relied upon the very same documentary evidences which were filed during the course of assessment proceedings. 13. After perusing the written submissions and detailed documentary evidences, the first appellate authority partly confirmed the additions of Shri Anand Gupta, HUF and Shree Sanchit Gupta and all other additions were deleted. Hence these cross appeals by the assessee and the revenue. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....quired to prove the identity, genuineness of the transaction and capacity of the lender and by virtue of the first proviso to section 68 of the Act where the appellant has received share premium, then it has also to establish the source of source. 18. Considering the plethora of documentary evidences, we find that not only the assessee has established the source of the creditor, but it has also furnished documentary evidences to show the' source of source'. We find that the AO, while making addition, has made general observations relating to the circulation from one source to the other. 19. On the one hand, the AO observes that all the share applicants/individuals/HUF/companies are related to the assessee company and on the other hand the AO is doubting the identity of the share applicants. The AO cannot blow hot and cold in the same breath. Further, the first appellate authority, while deleting the additions on account of 10 share applicants on the same set of facts has erred in confirming the addition on account of two share applicants, namely, Shri Anand Gupta, HUF and Shri Sanchit Gupta. 20. We find that the entire share capital and premium has been received thro....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d. The order is pronounced in the open court on 26.04.2021. ============= Document 1 List of Shareholders to whom shares allotted during the year S. no. NAME OF ADDRESS PAN THE SHARE HOLDER Annexure-09 RATE OF SHARE INCLUDING PREMIUM TOTAL NUMBER CONSIDERATION OF TOTAL RECEIVED SHARES ALLOTED BANK ACCOUNT NUMBER IN WHICH MONEY CREDITED DATE OF RECEIPTS(DOR) IN BANK AND DATE OF ALLOTMENT(DOA) DOA DOR Amount(R 1. Anand R-6A, Green AGSPG8250C 500/- 73,200 3,66,00,000 15572320000412 25.06.15 25.04.15 1,53,00,00 Guptal Park 11.05.15 73,00,00 Extension, 16.09.15 25,00,00 New Delhi- 17.09.15 75,00,00 110016 18.09.15 83,00,00 Less: 4,09,00,00 Excess application amount Refund 16.05.15 42,00,00 26.05.15 TOTAL 1,00,00 3,66,00,00 Anand Gupta HUF R-6A, Green AAFHA1885A 500/- 65,600 3,28,00,000 15572320000412 25.06.15 25.04.15 1,64,00,00 Park Extension, 17.09.15 36,00,00 22.09.15 30,00,00 24.09.15 35,00,00 New Delhi- 110016 J 14.10.15 21.10.15 43,00....