AI Drafter 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (7) TMI 499
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ri Rameshji Gobarji Thakor and Shri Hansaben Manilal Patel as follows: Sr. No. Date Amount of credit Name of person giving the cheque Cheque No. cleared through batch credit 1 27.07.2009 1,00,000 Self-deposited 526863 2 11.08.2009 2,00,00,000 Ramesh G. Thakor 529611 3 11.08.2009 2,00,00,000 Ramesh G. Thakor 529618 4 11.08.2009 85,00,000 Ramesh G. Thakor 529610 5 11.082009 2.00,00,000 Ramesh G. Thakor 529612 6 11.08.2009 2.00,00.000 Ramesh G. Thakor 529619 7 11.08,2009 1,18,30,000 Ramesh G. Thakor 529617 8 11.08,2009 44,20,000 Ramesh G. Thakor 529615 9 12.08.2009 2,00,00,000 Ramesh G. Thakor 529616 10 12.08.2009 2,00,00,000 Ramesh G. Thakor 529614 11 1,00,00,000 Ramesh G. Thakor 529620 12 12.08.2009 1,95,00,000 Ramesh G. Thakor 529607 13 12.08.2009 1,50,00000 529606 14 11.11.2009 4,75,00,000 Hansaben Manilal Patel 525878 15 12.11.2009 5,00,00,000 Hansaben Manilal Patel 525589 Total 28,68,50,000 ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....at appeals in the cases of two assesses viz. Capaxo Logistics Pvt. Ltd. and Ambe Trade Corp. Pvt. Ltd., have been decided by the CIT(A)-1 and CIT(A)-12 and the additions made on account of receiving the funds from Shri Rameshji Thakor and Smt. Hansaben Manilal Patel were deleted. The copies of these appellate orders have also been filed in the paper book which have been carefully perused. As per these appellate orders dated 21.05.2019 and 27.05.2019 respectively, it has been held that the persons giving money to both these companies as share application money were having creditworthiness and proved their identities and since the transactions were through banking channels, the genuineness cannot be doubted and deleted the additions made in both the cases The finding of the CIT(A)-I in the case of Capaxo Logistics Pvt. Ltd. is reproduced as under- "4.7 In view of the above, as the appellant has established identity, creditworthiness and genuineness of the share application money, the addition of share application money u/s. 68 is not justified Further, the Honourable Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Lovely exports Pvt. Ltd., prior to amendment to p....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ing furnished the details of source of the source of the source as to the fund and thus establishing the identity and creditworthiness, the addition of Rs. 39,05,50,000/- cannot be sustained. The addition is directed to be deleted." 6.7 The undersigned has also recently decided the appeal filed by Shri Rameshbhai G. Thakor (Appeal No. CIT(A)/GNR/11/2017-18) vide appellate order dated 22.10.2019 and held that the amounts deposited in his bank account with Indian Bank were received from the three persons including Smt. Hansaben Manilal Patel, Shri Mukesh J. Shah and Shri Kamal Gohil who have sold the lands at Village Sanathal, Tal. Sanand and received the value of the land for which the copies of sale deeds have been made available in that case. The observations made in the case of Shri Ramesh G. Thakor are also relevant for deciding the issue at hand in the case of the appellant. .......................... 6.8 As observed in the case of Shri Ramesh G. Thakor while deciding the appeal in his case, the money were originated from the four persons to the appellant in that case who ultimately transferred the money to the appellant- company as per the chart draw....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....stored. iv) The appellant prays for leave, to amend or alter any ground or add a new ground which may be necessary. 5. The Ld. CIT-DR Shri A.P. Singh appearing for the Revenue strongly supported the order passed by the Assessing Officer and submitted the Ld. CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 28.68 crores made in the hands of the assessee on protective basis. The Ld. CIT(A) failed to consider that the substantial additions made in the hands of Shri Rameshji Thakor was also deleted by Ld. CIT(A). Thus the Ld. CIT(A) ought to have upheld the addition in the hands of the assessee. 6. Per contra, the Ld. Counsel Ms. Nupur Shah appearing for the assessee submitted that there is no provision in the Act to make addition once the persons giving money was taxed substantively and the source of source was verified by the respective Assessing Officer. More particularly, the provisions of Section 68 of the Act as stood prior to its amendment w.e.f. 01-04-2013 wherein assessee is required to establish and explain the source of the credit in the books of accounts and do not require to prove the "source of the source" for the Assessment Year 2010-11. The assessee has prove....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the transaction which is available on paged 245 to 248 and 251 to 252 of paper book. 14.2 In view of the above, there remains no ambiguity that amount of Rs. 5 crore each received from Shri Ramesh Thakor and Shri Vinod Sharma represent repayment of advances given by the assessee in the month of February 2009. Therefore the provision of section 68 will not be applicable on this transaction. Hence the ground of appeal of the Revenue is hereby dismissed. 14.3 In the result appeal of the Revenue is dismissed." In the case of Ambe Tradecorp Pvt. Ltd (in ITA No. 1235/Ahd/2019 "....9.2 Furthermore, once the source of fund in the hand of above company was held as explained by learned CIT (A) then amount received by the assessee from that company cannot be held as unexplained under section 68 of the Act in the absence of contrary information. Likewise, there cannot be addition of one item in the hands of two different persons. 9.3 Nevertheless, the assessee has submitted PAN, address, ledger confirmation, own bank statement and bank statement of M/s Rachna Finelease Pvt. showing amount received through banking channel. The assessee also claimed before....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....oving the genuineness of transaction by adducing bank statements and also explained the sources of fund in the hands of the party, which are placed on pages of the paper book as discussed above, no addition is warranted. 9.7 In view of the above facts and after considering the details in totality, we do not find any reason to interfere in the finding of the learned CIT (A) and direct the AO to delete the addition made by him. Hence, the ground of appeal of the Revenue is dismissed. 9.8 In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed." 7. Thus the Ld. A.R. pleaded that the deletion made by the Ld. CIT(A) does not require any interference and the Revenue appeal is liable to be dismissed. 8. We have given our thoughtful consideration and perused the materials available on record. It is settled principle of law the Income Tax Act nowhere provides that parallel assessments can be made in respect of the same income on two different persons. The assessee right from the beginning of the reassessment proceedings submitted that the source of the funds from the creditors and their source (i.e. source on source) is also proved by the assessee. Therefore the Assessing....