2022 (9) TMI 506

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e assessee in this appeal has taken the following grounds of appeal: "1.FOR THAT the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-12, Kolkata failed to appreciate that none of the conditions precedent existed for and/or were fulfilled by the Ld. Income Tax Officer, Ward 3(2). Kolkata for his specious action of assuming jurisdiction u/s. 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 in respect of the share capital received by the appellant in the instant case and the alleged addition in the amount of Rs.1,00,00,000/- upheld under such pretext is therefore ab initio void, ultra vires and exfacie null in law. 2. FOR THAT on a true and proper interpretation of the scope of the provisions of s. 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, the Ld. Commissioner....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nable in law." 2. Ground Nos.1 to 3 - Vide Ground Nos.1 to 3, the assessee has contested the action of the lower authorities in treating the share subscription of Rs.1,00,00,000/- received by the assessee from the share subscriber M/s Lagan Vinicom P. Ltd. as unexplained cash credits u/s 68 of the Act. During the assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer investigated about the identity, creditworthiness of the share subscriber and genuineness of the transaction and asked the assessee to furnish the following details: i) Personal appearance of the directors of the assessee company as well as the directors of the share holding companies who had fresh share application and premium in the said A.Y. ii) Detailed narratio....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... on 14th day of January 2009 having Corporate Identity Number U51909WB2009PTC131974 and is independently assessed to income tax under Permanent Account Number AABCL5732E and had duly filed its return with its Assessing Authority i.e. the Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(4), Kolkata on 22-03-2013 disclosing a total income of Rs.1,70,693/- for the assessment year under dispute. The ld. Counsel further submitted that in the balance sheet for assessment year under consideration filed by Lagan Vincom P. Ltd. along with the return of income, the share application of Rs.4,00,000/- along with premium of Rs.96,00,000/- paid, against which 40,000 equity shares were allotted by the appellant have been duly disclosed. The investment in the equity shares of t....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e assessee can be assumed to be explained. The ld. Counsel, in this respect, has also relied upon the decision of the Coordinate Bench of the Tribunal in the case of DCIT vs. M/s Maa Amba Towers Ltd. in ITA No.1381/Kol/2015 vide order dated 12.10.2018 wherein, the Coordinate bench under similar circumstances has made the following submissions: "We find no merit in the Revenue's instant grievance in the light of relevant facts on record. There is no dispute about the assessee's having declared its share subscription premium from M/s Agrani Credit & Finvest Pvt. Ltd., Crown Mansion Pvt. Ltd., Liberal Infrastructure Pvt Ltd., Darshan Enclave Pvt. Ltd., Snow Fall Impex Pvt. Ltd. involving corresponding sums of Rs.27,60,000/-, R....