TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2021 (6) TMI 397
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e order of assessment passed u/s.143(3) r.w.s.153C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as Act) dated 30/03/2015 & 31/03/2015 respectively by the ld. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-4(3), Central Range-4, Mumbai (hereinafter referred to as ld. AO). 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal for A.Y.2011-12:- "1. The ld. C.I.T(Appeals) erred in confirming the addition made by Ld. D.C.I.T by account of Share Application Money (Share Capital) holding the same as non-genuine. 2. The Ld. C.I.T(Appeals) erred in confirming the action of Ld. D.C.I.T of treating the Share Application Money (Share Capital) as bogus and thereby erred in making addition of Rs. 50,00,000/- 3.The Appellant reserves the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....unds (A.Y.2012-13) 1. The Ld. A.O. is unjustified in treating the share application money received by the Appellant amounting to Rs. 3,46,00,000/- as unexplained cash credit under section 68 of the Act relying on the statements of third parties without providing the Appellant an opportunity to cross examine those persons. Thus, the action of the Ld. A.O. is in breach of principles of natural justice. Thus, the assessment order dated 31/03/2015 passed under section 143(3) r.w.s. 153C of the Act is bad in law and void ab initio. Hence, the same may be quashed. 2. The Appellant craves leave to alter, amend or rescind any of the grounds of appeal. 2.3. We also find that assessee has filed the petition under Rule 29 of the ITAT Rules contai....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ng to M/s.Guru Ashish Texfab Ltd., (assessee herein) were found and seized. The relevant seized material and satisfaction note was forwarded to the present Assessing Officer to take suitable action in the case of the assessee. Consequently, a notice u/s.153C was issued to the assessee on 19/08/2013 for A.Y.2011-12. In the said Section 153C proceedings, the ld. AO sought to examine the veracity of the share application money received by the assessee in the sum of Rs. 50 lakhs from M/s. Emporis Projects Ltd and Rs. 346 lacs from few other concerns allegedly belonging to Shirish Chandrakant Shah. The assessee furnished the following documents with supporting evidences before the ld. AO to prove the veracity of receipt of share application mone....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....statement u/s.132(4) of the Act that he, through his entities / concerns is engaged in providing accommodation entries to various companies in the form of bogus share capital and bogus loans etc. Merely based on this statement from a third party i.e. Shri Shirish Chandrakant Shah, the ld. AO proceeded to add the said receipt as unexplained cash credit in the hands of the assessee. This action of the ld. AO was upheld by the ld. CIT(A) for A.Y.2011-12. 3.3. We find similar addition was made by the ld. AO by treating the receipt of share application money of Rs. 3,46,00,000/- as unexplained cash credit u/s.68 of the Act for A.Y.2012-13 in respect of monies received by the assessee from Parmeta Industries Ltd and Speciality Papers Ltd., both ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Representative Ms. Samantha Nullamudi submitted that addition has been made on the basis of clear and cogent finding of the investigation wing of the Income Tax department that Shri S.C. Shah operates bogus company to provide accommodation entries. The said M/s. Speciality Papers Ltd. from whom assessee has received share capital was one of them which have provided bogus accommodation entries to the assessee company. Learned Departmental Representative further submitted that at any time during time of proceeding authorities below, the assessee has never asked for an opportunity to cross examine the said person Shri S.C. Shah. She further submitted that the assessee has managed to obtain affidavit of the said person namely Shri S.C. Shah ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... statement of the investor company, for which the authorities below have observed that these are part of surreptitious routing of money and investor company was not doing proper business. In our considered opinion for addition u/s. 68 as undisclosed income following three ingredients have to be examined :- (i) Genuineness of the transaction (ii) Identity of the payer (iii) Creditworthiness 15. In the present case we note that the lower authorities have noted that notice u/s. 133(6) has not be responded. Learned Counsel of the assessee has submitted that the assessee was not required to produce the director of the investor company. We further note that the issue of additional evidence and additional ground are no more germane to the issue ....