2022 (3) TMI 530

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... 2. Assessee has filed the cross objection raising following grounds in its appeal: - "1.0 On facts and circumstances of the case and in law, Ld. CIT(A), having held that the assessee had proved the identity, credit-worthiness and genuineness of share capital/premium received from disputed shareholders, ought to have deleted the addition on merits u/s.68 of Rs. 2,00,00,000/-; 2.0 A humble prayer is made to delete the addition on merits of Rs. 2,00,00,000/- since the assessee had proved the identity and credit-worthiness of the shareholders and genuineness of share capital/premium received during the year." 3. At the time of hearing, assessee has not pressed the grounds raised in the cross objection. Accordingly, groun....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....red an appeal before Ld.CIT(A) and again challenged the validity of notice u/s 148 since the recorded reasons contained incorrect fact that the assessee had received the share application monies from the parties allegedly belonging to tainted person named Shri Shirish C Shah. The assessee contended that such share applicants do not belong to Shri Shirish C Shah and furnished the supporting evidences on record. The Ld. CIT(A) directed the Assessing Officer to submit the Remand report. In remand report dated 19/2/2016, Assessing Officer fairly accepted that the share applicants do not belong to Shri Shirish C Shah and the name of such share applicants does not appear in the list of 212 companies operated by Shri Shirish C Shah. The relevant p....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ficer had accepted that the share applicants do not belong to Shri Shirish C Shah. The Assessing Officer, in assessment order, had also not made any allegation that such share applicants belong to Shri Shirish C Shah. The Ld. CIT(A) held that the notice u/s 148 could be issued on the basis of fresh tangible material, however Assessing Officer had issued the notice u/s 148 under an incorrect reason that the share applicants belong to Shri Shirish C Shah and such material had been found to be incorrect since Assessing Officer had accepted the fact in the remand report that such share applicants do not belong to Shri Shirish C Shah and name of such share applicants do  not appear in the list of 212 companies operated by Shri Shirish C Sha....