TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (11) TMI 667
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rred to as the "Act") dated 30.03.2015. 2. Grounds taken by the revenue are in respect of relief granted by the Ld. CIT(A) for the addition made by the Ld. AO towards share application money and premium claimed as received during the concerned period. Grounds of appeal raised by the revenue are reproduced as under: "1) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT (A) has erred to treat that there has been no fresh credit entry made in the books of ale of concerned period. But, it is very much clear from the assessment order that share application money and premium thereon was received during the concerned period. Hence, credit in the particular account of books is a fresh credit. 2) Whether on ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....und that almost similar amount was debited from the account of the assessee almost of same date when this share application money was credited to the account of the assessee. Considering these facts and circumstances, Ld. AO treated the sum so credited of Rs.2,21,00,000/- in the books of the assessee as bogus and made this addition to the total income u/s. 68 of the Act. Aggrieved, assessee went in appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). 4. In the course of first appeal, assessee submitted that it had accepted an advance of Rs.2,25,00,000/- from a group company viz., M/s. Ram Kumar Rajendra Kumar & Co. Pvt. Ltd. during the FY 2008- 09. It was submitted that assessee as well as the shareholder company is a group company having common director and h....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ced on record (pages 136 and 137 of the paper book). It was also submitted that no separate and specific summons u/s. 131 of the Act or notice under any other provisions of the Act were issued by the Ld. AO to the directors of the shareholding companies and assessee had complied fully with the requirements of the said summons by way of personal hearing of the directors. Assessee submitted all the details and documents on behalf of the shareholding company to substantiate the creditworthiness of the shareholding company and the genuineness of the transaction. 4.3. It was strongly contended that there was no fresh infusion of funds but the advances received earlier was capitalized as share application and premium during the year under cons....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hat the share issue price was agreed by both the parties for which necessary legal compliances were accomplished by the assessee. 4.5. In respect of non-production of directors of the shareholder company, ld. CIT(A) noted that Ld. AO in the summons issued by him, nowhere asked the directors of the assessee to produce the directors of the shareholder company. The only thing that was sought was the personal attendance of the directors of the assessee. He also observed that Ld. AO has not asked for personal attendance of the directors of the shareholder company through any separate notice or summon. 4.6. On the documents and details placed on record, Ld. CIT(A) noted that in the assessment order the Ld. AO nowhere made any observation or....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....iterated the submissions made before the authorities below which have been narrated above and are not repeated for the sake of brevity. From the audited financial statements of the assessee as well as the shareholder company, ld. Counsel demonstrated that assessee company had accepted an advance of Rs.2,25,00,000/- from one of its group companies i.e. Ram Kumar Rajendra Kumar & Co. Pvt. Ltd. during the FY 2008-09 and that two companies were having common director, agreed to issue equity shares instead of repaying back the full amount of advance of Rs.2,25,00,000/- for which equity shares were issued during the year under consideration for Rs.2,21,00,000/- and the balance Rs. 4 lakh was returned by the assessee company. On the issue relating....