TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (9) TMI 763
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....)(hereinafter referred to as the appellate authority) has failed to appreciate the contentions and submissions raised by the appellant, as it was out and out illegal to have disallowed the transactions procuring share capital for the appellant company, to the tune of 135,00,000 INR, on the sole reason that the directors of the 5 share holding companies did not personally appear in response to the summons issued under section 131 of the said Act, especially when the companies in question have entered appearances through authorized agents, produced and furnished all required documents, received the summons through speed post and they have also not been reported as SHELL companies by the ROC. ii. For that the appellate authority faile....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the appellate authority failed to consider that the assessee has his books of account audited by a reputed Chartered Accountant who has made no adverse comment in his report. vii. For that the appellate authority failed to appreciate that the value of the shares, as arrived by the assessing officer was totally wrong who had pegged such value at a meager 66 INR, while the actual value of the shares, considering the worth of construction work in progress (WIP) reflecting the un-build revenue, should have been slated more than 150 INR per share, while the transaction disbelieved by the Assessing Officer considered the value of shares at 100 INR only. viii. For that the appellate authority failed to appreciate that although t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ent order dated 24.03.2015. During the assessment proceeding, the AO has assessed the total income of the assessee for Rs. 2,35,00,000/- by making addition to the total income u/s 68 of the Act on account of unexplained credit in the books of the assessee in the form of share application money including premium. 4. Dissatisfied with the above order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the ld. CIT(A) wherein the appeal of the assessee was partly allowed. The ld. CIT(A) while deciding the issue divided into two parts for adjudication (i) addition for Rs. 1,00,00,000/- on account of amount received from M/s. Acetylene Trexim Pvt. Ltd. and (ii) addition for Rs. 1,35,00,000/- on account of amount received from five other parties. The ld. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ation to the query raised during the course of taking his statement. Further, summon u/s 131 of the Act were also issued to the share holder of the companies on 03.03.2015, in response to which no one appeared on behalf of these five companies. Neither the investor companies appeared before the AO in compliance to notice u/s 131 of the Act nor appellant-company could produce them before the ld. AO. The alleged share transaction involved in this assessment proceeding, the face value of share of Rs. 10/- were issued at premium of Rs. 90/- per share whereas on the date of issue of share, book value of which were Rs. 66/- per share. In this regard, the assessee could not furnish any justification for reasoned price. Moreover, to examine the iss....