TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (9) TMI 881
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hem together and deem it appropriate to dispose of them by this common order. 2. Ground of appeal taken by the Revenue in each appeal reads as under:- IT(SS)A No. 34/KOL/2023 "Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, ld. CIT(A) is justified without going into merits of the case and deleting the addition u/s 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, of Rs. 5,20,60,073/- ignoring the facts that AO has made the additions based on the facts as all the limbs u/s 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, are not satisfied in this case" IT(SS)A No. 35/KOL/2023 "Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, ld. CIT(A) is justified without going into merits of the case and deleting the addition u/s 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, of Rs. 1,58,00,000/- ignoring the facts that AO has made the additions based on the facts as all the limbs u/s 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, are not satisfied in this case" IT(SS)A No. 36/KOL/2023 "Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, ld. CIT(A) is justified without going into merits of the case and deleting the addition u/s 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, of Rs. 1,89,00,000/- ignoring the facts that AO has....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....c media were seized. Consequently he issued a notice under section 153A of the Act, which was issued on 27.10.2021. Similar notices were issued in all the cases and all the assessees have filed their returns of income, which are equivalent to the amount disclosed in the return filed under section 139(1) of the Income Tax Act. In other words, these amounts are equivalent to the one disclosed in the regular return of income filed by the assessee. The details are being tabulated by the ld. Counsel for the assessee in his submissions filed before us, which read as under:- "The assessees filed their return of income in compliance of notice issued u/s 153A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 declaring same total income as declared in the return filed u/s 139(1) of the Act. The incomes disclosed by the assessees are as under:- Sr. No. Respondent-Assessee A.Y. Total income filed in ITR 1. Narsingh Ispat Limited 2012-13 1,74,09,340/- 2. Narsingh Ispat Limited 2013-14 2,12,96,960/- 3. Narsingh Ispat Limited 2014-15 1,44,94,040/- 4. Narsingh Ispat Limited 2018-19 6,47,55,183/- 5. Narsingh Ispat Udyog Pvt. Limited 2013-14 ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e in detail, ld. Commissioner recorded a finding that no incriminating material was unearthed during the course of search, which can justify of taking cognizance under section 153A of the Income Tax Act. Accordingly he deleted the additions. 8. The ld. CIT(DR) while impugning the order of the ld. CIT(Appeals) relied upon the orders of the ld. Assessing Officer. He submitted that the ld. Assessing Officer must have considered the material available before him in the form of appraisal report or other circumstances. He made reference to the statement of Shri Mukesh Banka, though recorded in some other investigation, but he admitted before the Investigating Agency that he was engaged in providing accommodation entries and the companies, from whom the assessee had availed the benefit of share application money, were shell companies. Therefore, the ld. Assessing Officer has considered sufficient material before disbelieving the genuineness of the share capital raised by these assessees. He relied upon the assessment orders in all these years. 9. On the other hand, ld. Counsel for the assessees has filed written submissions running into 27 pages. He took us through section 153A and ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
...., as the case may be, shall abate : PROVIDED ALSO THAT the Central Government may by rules made by it and published in the Official Gazette (except in cases where any assessment or reassessment has abated under the second proviso), specify the class or classes of cases in which the Assessing Officer shall not be required to issue notice for assessing or reassessing the total income for six assessment years immediately preceding the assessment year relevant to the previous year in which search is conducted or requisition is made and for the relevant assessment year or years: PROVIDED ALSO THAT no notice for assessment or reassessment shall be issued by the Assessing Officer for the relevant assessment year or years unless- (a) the Assessing Officer has in his possession books of account or other documents or evidence which reveal that the income, represented in the form of asset, which has escaped assessment amounts to or is likely to amount to fifty lakh rupees or more in the relevant assessment year or in aggregate in the relevant assessment years; (b) the income referred to in clause (a) or part thereof has escaped assessment for such year or y....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ing to the ld. Counsel for the assessee, this section has two compartments. The first compartment deals with the situation upto 2nd proviso of the section. This compartment provides that section 153A applies to a person in respect of whom search is initiated under section 132 of the Act, or whose books of account, other documents or any asset are requisitioned under section 132A after May 31, 2003. The second proviso attached with this section further contemplates that the assessments/reassessments, relating to any assessment year falling within the period of six assessment years, which are pending on the date of initiation of the search under section 132 or requisitioned under section 132A shall stand abate. It was further submitted that the second proviso also provides that if on the date of initiation of search or requisition under section 132 or under section 132A of the Act, any assessment/reassessment proceedings relating any assessment year falling within the period of six assessment years is pending, then the pending proceeding shall stand abated and fresh assessment of the same can be done under section 153A of the Act. It is also emphasized that if no proceeding was pendi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rt, we deem it appropriate to make reference to the two decisions of the Hon'ble High Courts namely CIT -vs. Kabul Chawla of Hon'ble Delhi High Court and Saumya Construction of Hon'ble Gujarat High Court. 13. First we refer to the decision of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT v-vs.- Kabul Chawla, 380 ITR 573 (Del.). Hon'ble Delhi High Court after detailed analysis has summarized the following legal position: On a conspectus of Section 153A(1) of the Act, read with the provisos thereto, and in the light of the law explained in the aforementioned decisions, the legal position that emerges is as under: (i)Once a search takes place under Section 132 of the Act, notice under Section 153 A(l) will have to be mandatorily issued to the person searched requiring him to file returns for six AYs immediately preceding the previous year relevant to the AY in which the search takes place. (ii) Assessments and reassessments pending on the date of the search shall abate. The total income for such A.Y.s will have to be computed by the AOs as afresh exercise. (iii) The AO will exercise normal assessment powers in respect of the six years previous to t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the addition made in assessment made u/s 153A of the Act? (b) Whether the Tribunal is right in law in holding that the addition should be based on the incriminating material found during the course of search under new procedure of assessment u/s 153A which is different from earlier procedure u/s 158BC r.w.s. 158BB of the Act and by reading into the section, the words 'the incriminating material found during the course of search' which are not there in section 153A? (c) Whether the Tribunal erred in relying on the ITAT order in Sanjay Aggarwal v. DCIT (2014) 47 Taxmann.Com 210 (Del) which has interpreted undisclosed income unearthed during the search to imply incriminating material, as against the finding of the Delhi High Court in Filatex India Ltd. v. CIT- IV (2015) 229 Taxman 555 wherein it is held that during the assessment u/s 153A additions need not be restricted or limited to incriminating material found during the course of search?" 15. Hon'ble Court concurred with the decision of Hon'ble Delhi High Court. We deem it appropriate to take note of relevant part of the decision, which reads as under: "16. Section 153A bears the headi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... return of income on 18.11.2010. In terms of section 153B, the assessment was required to be completed within a period of two years from the end of the financial year in which the search came to be carried out, namely, on or before 31st March, 2012. Here, insofar as the impugned addition is concerned, the notice in respect thereof came to be issued on 19.12.2011 seeking an explanation from the assessee. The assessee gave its response by reply dated 21.12.2011 calling upon the Assessing Officer to provide copies of statements recorded on oath of Shri Rohit P. Modi and Smt. Pareshaben K. Modi during the search as well as the copies of the documents upon which the department placed reliance for the purpose of making the proposed addition as well as the copy of the explanation given by Shri Rohit P. Modi and Smt. Pareshaben K. Modi regarding the on-money received, copies of the assessment orders in case of said persons and also requested the Assessing Officer to permit him to cross-examine the said persons. The Assessing Officer issued summons to the said persons, however, they were out of station and it was not known as to when they would return. In this backdrop, without affording an....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....isallowance can be made in relation to that assessment year in exercise of powers under section 153A of the Act and the earlier assessment shall have to be reiterated. In this regard, this court is in complete agreement with the view adopted by the Rajasthan High Court in the case of Jai Steel (India), Jodhpur (supra). Besides, as rightly pointed out by the learned counsel for the respondent, the controversy involved in the present case stands concluded by the decision of this court in the case of Jayaben Ratilal Sorathia (supra) wherein it has been held that while it cannot be disputed that considering section 153A of the Act, the Assessing Officer can reopen and/or assess the return with respect to six preceding years; however, there must be some incriminating material available with the Assessing Officer with respect to the sale transactions in the particular assessment year. 20. For the foregoing reasons, it is not possible to state that the impugned order passed by the Tribunal suffers from any legal infirmity so as to give rise to a question of law, much less, a substantial question of law, warranting interference. The appeal, therefore, fails and is, accordingly, di....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... abate and the AO would assume the jurisdiction to assess or reassess the 'total income' for the entire six years period/block assessment period. The intention does not seem to be to re-open the completed/unabated assessments, unless any incriminating material is found with respect to concerned assessment year falling within last six years preceding the search. Therefore, on true interpretation of Section 153A of the Act, 1961, in case of a search under Section 132 or requisition under Section 132A and during the search any incriminating material is found, even in case of unabated/completed assessment, the AO would have the jurisdiction to assess or reassess the 'total income' taking into consideration the incriminating material collected during the search and other material which would include income declared in the returns, if any, furnished by the assessee as well as the undisclosed income. However, in case during the search no incriminating material is found, in case of completed/unabated assessment, the only remedy available to the Revenue would be to initiate the reassessment proceedings under sections 147/48 of the Act, subject to fulfillment of the conditions mentioned in s....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....(i) that in case of search under Section 132 or requisition under Section 132A, the AO assumes the jurisdiction for block assessment under section 153A; (ii) all pending assessments/reassessments shall stand abated; (iii) In case any incriminating material is found/unearthed, even, in case of unabated/completed assessments, the AO would assume the jurisdiction to assess or reassess the 'total income' taking into consideration the incriminating material unearthed during the search and the other material available with the AO including the income declared in the returns; and (iv) in case no incriminating material is unearthed during the search, the AO cannot assess or reassess taking into consideration the other material in respect of completed assessments/unabated assessments. Meaning thereby, in respect of completed/unabated assessments, no addition can be made by the AO in absence of any incriminating material found during the course of search under Section 132 or requisition under Section 132A of the Act, 1961. However, the completed/unabated assessments can be re-opened by the AO in exercise of powers under Sections 147/148 of the Act, subject to fulfi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....covered during the search proceeding. In response to the above letter of the ld. CIT(Appeals), ld. Assessing Officer has submitted his remand report in the letter dated 01.12.2022. The ld. CIT(Appeals) has reproduced such letter on pages no. 9 to 16 of the impugned order. While evaluating this remand report, ld. CIT(Appeals) has observed that ld. Assessing Officer failed to pinpoint any material found during the course of search which has unearthed the receipt of share application money not disclosed in the books or in the regular returns. The assessees have received the share application money in the accounting period relevant to the assessment year but those were to be construed as accepted by the ld. Assessing Officer by not scrutinizing the return under section 143(2). The acceptance of the share application money in a constructive manner by the Revenue cannot be revisited under section 153A by again analysing that very material as if ld. Assessing Officer is passing a regular assessment. Whatever evidence the Assessing Officer has referred, it was available much prior to the date of the search. The last statement referred by him is of Mukesh Banka, which was also recorded on 3....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ct from the date of receipt of the order of such annulment by the Principal Commissioner or Commissioner: PROVIDED THAT such revival shall cease to have effect, if such order of annulment is set aside. Explanation.-For the removal of doubts, it is hereby declared that,- (i) save as otherwise provided in this section, section 153B and section 153C, all other provisions of this Act shall apply to the assessment made under this section; (ii) in an assessment or reassessment made in respect of an assessment year under this section, the tax shall be chargeable at the rate or rates as applicable to such assessment year". 23. In his second fold of submission, the ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that by Finance Act, 2017, the legislature has extended the scope of section 153A. He submitted that earlier ld. Assessing Officer was empowered to make assessment or reassessment of six assessment years prior to the year of search as provided under section 153A(1) of the Act. With the help of 4th proviso of section 153A, power of making assessment or reassessment under section 153A has been extended upto earlier ten years prior to the year of search in....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... out of an assesse, he is empowered to issue notice under section 153A of the Income Tax Act in the assessment years, i.e. six years as well as relevant assessment years extended by way of 3rd proviso introduced in Finance Act, 2017. 26. We have duly considered the rival submissions and gone through the record carefully. A bare perusal of second compartment of section 153A would indicate that by way of Finance Act, 2017, the Parliament has extended the scope of section 153A and its scope has been extended from earlier six assessment years immediately preceding assessment year relevant to the previous year in which search is conducted, or requisition is made to the relevant assessment years and the definition of relevant assessment year has been provided in Explanation (1) of 4th proviso to section 153A. The relevant assessment year shall mean an assessment year proceeding the assessment year relevant to the previous year in which search is conducted or requisition is made, which falls beyond six assessment years but not later than ten assessment years from the end of the assessment year relevant to the previous year in which search is conducted or requisition is made. Thus the s....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....caped assessment. This aspect would contemplate two mode of action, one may be construed as a procedural and the other is to be strict manner for exercising the powers. Even though there is no procedure laid down either in the Income Tax Act or provided in the Rules. The ld. Assessing Officer ought to have provide the assessee, during the assessment proceedings as to how he formed his opinion for assessing him under section 153A for the relevant assessment years, namely extended period of assessment years under the 4th proviso. Unless this seized material exhibiting discovery of assets having value of more than Rs. 50 lakhs is being shown to the assessee, action under section 153A could have not been initiated. 28. In the present sets of appeal, the question is whether share application money received by the assessee in the accounting year relevant to these A.Ys and shown in the books of account could be termed as undisclosed asset unearthed during the course of search. Though from the assessment order, it is not discernable what has weighed with the ld. Assessing Officer to harbour the believe for issuing the notice under section 153A, but if we make a speculation, then t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ded, income cannot be taxed twice. Furthermore, a taxing Statute should not be interpreted in such a manner that its effect will be to cast a burden twice over for the payment of tax on the taxpayer unless the language of the Statute is so compelling that the court has no alternative than to accept it. In a case of reasonable doubt, the construction most beneficial to the taxpayer is to be adopted. So, it is clear enough that the income in the present case is taxable only under one law. By virtue of clause (k) to Article 37 IF of the Constitution which starts with a non-obstante clause, it would be clear that only the Sikkim Regulations on Income-tax would be applicable in the present case. Therefore, the income cannot be brought to tax any further by applying the rates of the IT Act. Hence, the entire addition made in the hands of Narsingh Ispat Ltd for AY 2012-13, being double additions is liable to be deleted. 4.2 Narsingh Ispat Ltd and Narsingh Ispat Udyog Pvt Ltd (AY 2013-14 and 2014-15) There are common shareholders in both these companies for these assessment years. The synopsis of the share application money received in these years is tabulated be....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... regular income tax assessee. The share transactions are recorded in the books of both the parties. Hence, the identity, creditworthiness of this party and genuineness of the transactions is proven. 30. As far as A.Y. 2012-13 is concerned, it has been submitted before us that these additions were made in the regular assessment also, which was passed under section 143(3) on 04.03.2015. The second appeal against this assessment order has travelled upto the Tribunal and heard by 'B' Bench. Therefore, in this year, we do not record any finding qua the merits of additions, because we have already quashed the assessment passed under section 153A. In case, these additions sustained against the regular assessment order, then on quashment of search assessment passed under section 153A the regular would revive. Therefore, we do not make any comments on the position of additions made in A.Y. 2012-13. The only finding in this year is that assessment order passed under section 153A is without jurisdiction. 31. As far as other years are concerned, i.e. A.Y. 201314 and 2014-15 in the appeals of all respondents, it is observed that ld. Counsel for the assessee has raised two-fold submissions....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... cr. was refunded back to Seaview Agencies in the same year, being FY 2012-13. This repayment of loan was reinvested in the assessee company to the tune of Rs. 50,00,000/-. Since the source of Rs. 50,00,000/- had already been taxed, adding the same again will tantamount to double addition. Delta Dealers Pvt Ltd 4,58,00,000 Share Capital of Rs. 15,51,00,000/-was raised by Delta Dealers Pvt Ltd during FY 2008-09. The said sum of Rs. 15.51 crores had already been added in the assessment order of Delta Dealers Pvt Ltd for AY 2009-10 dated 17- 03-2015 passed u/s 144/263/143(3)/147 of the Act. This share application money received by the party was reinvested in share capital of the assessee company in the relevant year. Since the source of share capital raised by the assessee during the year has already been taxed, adding the same again will tantamount to double addition. Refer page 80-92 of the paper book. Innova Tie-up Private Limited 27,70,000 Share capital of Rs. 13,31,00,000/- was raised by Innova Tie-up Pvt Ltd during FY 2008-09. The said sum of Rs. 13.31 cr. had already been added in the assessment order of Innova Tie-up Pvt Ltd for ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... AY-2014-15 SHARE APPLICANT AMOUNT IN (Rs.) SUBMISSION BEFORE AO Reliable Commodeal Pvt Ltd 5,36,80,000 Share Capital of Rs. 17,24,00,000/- was raised by this party in FY 2008-09. During reassessment proceedings of this party for AY 2009-10, the share capital raised by this party was duly examined by its learned AO and the same was accepted by him as genuine. Accordingly, no addition was made in the assessment order passed u/s 147/143(3) of the Act dated 06-08-2012, refer page 116-117 of the paper book. This share capital received by the party was re-invested in share capital of the assessee company in the relevant year. Thus, the source of share capital raised by the assessee during the year is an explained credit and no addition is warranted w.r.t the share capital raised by the assessee from this party as the source is explained. Seaview Agencies Ltd Pvt 30,00,000 Seaview Agencies Pvt Ltd gave a loan of Rs. 5.85 cr. to Shri Anil Goyal in FY 2012-13 (AY 201314). The said loan of Rs. 5.85 cr. has been added in the assessment order of Anil Goyal in AY 2013-14 dated 29-12-2017, refer page 151-164. Out of the said loan of Rs. 5.85 cr., a s....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rs Pvt. Ltd. 10,00,000 Share Capital of Rs. 15,51,00,000/- was raised by Delta Dealers Pvt Ltd during FY 2008-09. The said sum of Rs. 15.51 crores had already been added in the assessment order of Delta Dealers Pvt Ltd for AY 2009-10 dated 17-03-2015 passed u/s 144/263/143(3)/147 of the Act. This share application money received by the party was reinvested in share capital of the assessee company in the relevant year. Since the source of share capital raised by the assessee during the year has already been taxed, adding the same again will tantamount to double addition. Refer page 50-62 of the paper book. Bakshiram Uderam Holding Pvt. Ltd. 9,00,000 This party is a group concern of the assessee. The networth of this party as on 31-03-2014 was Rs. 12.20 crores which justifies the creditworthiness of the party to invest in the assessee company. Entire share application money was received through normal banking channels. This party is a regular income tax assessee. The share transactions are recorded in the books of both the parties. Hence, the identity, creditworthiness of this party and genuineness of the transactions is proven. Refer page 63-76....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....For appeal in the case of BakshiramUderam Holding Pvt. Ltd, AY 2018-19, IT(SS)A No.34/Kol/2023 it was submitted that no new fresh capital was raised during the relevant year to warrant any addition u/s 68 of the Act. The following six (6) companies were merged with M/s BakshiramUderam Holdings Private Limited pursuant to the Scheme of amalgamation sanctioned by the order dated 09.05.2019 of the Hon'ble National Company Law Tribunal, Kolkata Bench w.e.f. 01-04-2017. i. M/s Everlite Suppliers Private Limited; ii. M/s Keynote Suppliers Private Limited; iii. M/s VedantVincom Private Limited; iv. M/s Annex Distributors Private Limited; v. M/s LakshyaTradecom Private Limited; vi. M/s Bumpur Infrastructure Private Limited. The amalgamation order was received by the assessee in the month of May 2019. By that time the accounts of FY 2017-18 were already audited, therefore, the effect of the merger was incorporated in FY 2018-19, refer page 34-39 of the paper book. It was submitted that no fresh capital was raised by the assessee from these companies in the relevant year, refer audited accounts for FY 2017-18 placed ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... himself admitted of providing accommodation entries through shell companies M/s BakshiramUderam Holding Pvt Ltd. (b) It is relevant to mention here that whenever a sum is credited in the books of the assessee, the following three criteria should be passed on litmus test (i) Identity (ii) Creditworthiness (iii)Genuineness of the transaction. (c) It is observedfrom the financial analysis of M/s Delta Dealers Pvt Ltd, M/s Innova Tie-Up Pvt Ltd, M/s Honesty Dealers Private Limited, M/s BakshiramUderam Holding Pvt Ltd, M/s Seaview Agencies Pvt Ltd and M/s Everlite Suppliers Pvt Ltd that these allottee companies have no fixed assets and are not paying or paid any rent for years. This fact is further strengthened by the fact that all of the above companies' PBT meagre. Besides, these companies have no business establishment and they only exist on papers. (e) The above factual analysis clearly indicates that the allottee companies are merely paper/shell companies practically having no financial creditworthiness and their transactions are prearranged, disguised and cannot pass the test of genuineness. This is further fortified from the fact that all these compani....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ut whether the share capital and share premium money received by the assessee during the year is required to be treated as their unexplained credit and deserves to be added under section 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. We deem it appropriate to bear in mind certain basic principles/tests propounded in various authoritative pronouncements of the Hon'ble High Courts and Hon'ble Supreme Court. It is also pertinent to observe that both the sides have made reference to a large number of decisions. We do not deem it necessary to recite and recapitulate them because that would make this order repetitive and bulky. We take cognizance of some of them. It is pertinent to observe that in so far as companies incorporated under Indian Companies Act are concerned, whether private limited or public limited companies, they raise their share capital, through shares though manner of raising share capital in private limited company on one hand and public limited company on other hand, would be different. The share capital and share premium are basically irreversible receipts or credits in the hands of the companies. Share capital is considered to be cost of shares on equivalent amount issued ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....planation about the nature and source of such credit found in the books, or (d) the explanation offered by the assessee is not, in the opinion of the Assessing Officer, satisfactory. The Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT v. Novadaya Castles (P.) Ltd. 367 ITR 306 has considered a large number of decisions including the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Durga Prasad [1971] 82 ITR 540 (SC). According to the Hon'ble Delhi High Court basically there are two sets of judgments. In one set of case, the assessee produced necessary documents/evidence to show and establish identity of the share-holder and bank account from which payment was made. The fact that payment was received through bank channels, filed necessary ITA No.3619/Ahd/2015 affidavit of the shareholders or confirmations of the directors of the shareholder company. But thereafter no further inquiry was made by the AO. The second set of cases are those where there was evidence and material to show that the shareholder company was only a paper company having no source of income, but had made substantial and huge investments in the form of share application money. The assessing officer ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....re into the matter by, if necessary, invoking his powers under section 131 summoning the share applicants or directors. No effort was made in that regard. In the absence of any such finding that the material disclosed was untrustworthy or lacked credibility the Assessing Officer merely concluded on the basis of enquiry report, which collected certain facts and the statements of Mr. Mahesh Garg that the income sought to be added fell within the description of section 68. Having regard to the entirety of facts and circumstances, the court is satisfied that the finding of the Tribunal in this case accords with the ratio of the decision of the Supreme Court in Lovely Exports (supra)". 37. We also deem it appropriate to take note of some of observations of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court from the decision of Fair Finvest Ltd. (supra). The Hon'ble Court has noticed proposition laid down by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Victor Electrodes Ltd., 329 ITR 271 (Delhi) regarding non-production of share applicants before the AO. The following observations are worth to note: ...In this connection the observation of the jurisdictional High Court ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ndustries -vs.- Commissioner of Central Excise (281 CTR 241). The Hon'ble Supreme Court has observed the statements, which are being used as a foundation for making any addition could not be used unless the assessee is being provided opportunity to cross examine. In these cases, the ld. Assessing Officer even not recorded the statements himself, these were recorded by some Investigating Agencies in some other proceedings in the past. This can be, at the most, information for initiating the assessment machinery in motion, but they cannot be considered conclusive in a search assessment proceeding under section 153A. Therefore, the additions in the assessments under section 153A are not sustainable. In view of the above finding, the appeals bearing IT(SS)A Nos. 35 to 39/KOL/2023 are dismissed. 39. Now we take IT(SS)A Nos. 34 & 40/KOL/2023, though these appeals are also covered. As far as the first fold of dispute is concerned, namely action under section 153A cannot be taken against the assessees in A.Y. 2018-19 also, because no incriminating material was found during the course of search. The finding of the ld. CIT(Appeals) is common in this year also for both these appeals. The l....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....wherein it has been held that, "Pursuant thereto, the Schemes were sanctioned by the NCLT, Chennai vide Orders, dated 16-10-2017, 20-10-2017, 26-102017, 28-12-2017, 10-1-2018, 20-4-2018 and 1-5-2018; and vide Orders, dated 18-5-2017 and 30-8-2017 by the NCLT, Guwahati. Accordingly, the Schemes attained statutory force not only inter se the Transferor and Transferee Companies, but also in rem, since there was no objection raised either by the statutory authorities, the Department, or other regulators or authorities, likely to be affected by the Schemes. [Para 4.6]" Thus, since no share application money was received by the assessee group in AY 2018-19, provisions of section 68 of the Act cannot be invoked in this year. Hence, in view of the above facts of the case, the assessee humbly request Your Honours to dismiss the present appeals filed by the Revenue. Hope the above submission is in order and to your satisfaction. 41. On the other hand, ld. D.R. submitted that these pleas were not taken either before the ld. Assessing Officer or before the ld. CIT(Appeals). Therefore, the assessee should not be permitted to raise these pleas. 42. The l....