2023 (10) TMI 656

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....0/- as alleged concealed income simply on the basis of information received from DIT (Investigation Wing). The Ld. AO has not applied his independent mind on the tangible material which forms the basis of reason to believe. The conclusion of the AO are at best a reproduction of the conclusion in the investigation report. Indeed it is a borrowed satisfaction. 2. During the year under consideration (FY 2008-09) the company has received only total share application money of Rs. 30 Lacs (including share premium of Rs. 27,00,000/-), however Ld. AO made an addition of Rs. 60 Lacs as share application money received. This shows Ld. AO had not apply his independent mind to form reasons to believe for assessment u/s 147 of the Act. 3. The CIT(A)....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... of assessee, viz. first under section 68 of the Act amounting to Rs. 60,00,000/- shown by the assessee in its books of accounts as Share application money from M/s. Virgin Capital Services Pvt. Ltd. and second addition of Rs. 1,80,000/- on account of Commission @ 3% for arranging bogus accommodation entry of Rs. 60,00,000/- and assessed the same as undisclosed expenditure under section 69C of the Act. The assessee carried the matter before Learned CIT(A), the Learned CIT(A) reduced both the additions of Rs. 60,00,000/- and second addition of Rs. 90,000/- to 50% by observing that there was no credit entry Rs. 30,00,000/- under vide instrument no.028744 dated 24.09.2008. The assessee is before this Tribunal mainly with the two grievances, fi....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... dated 24.09.2008 in the bank statement furnished in the assessee company during the assessment proceedings. Thus, conclusion of Learned CIT(A) deleting part addition is quite correct and justified. 7. From the relevant para of first appellate order, we note that the Learned CIT(A) upheld the first addition of Rs. 60,00,000/- and has reduced the second addition of Rs. 1,80,000/- to Rs. 90,000/- with following observations and findings: "Adverting to the facts in the appellant's case, it is obvious that only documentary evidence by way of confirmation, bank statement, copy of acknowledgement of return is filed to explain the source of the impugned credit. Despite, repeated opportunities, the onus was not discharged before the AO. Copy....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....t entry of Rs. 30,00,000/- on 01.10.2008 vide instrument No.028744 in the bank statement furnish by the assessee company during the course of assessment proceedings." Therefore, the addition is restricted to Rs. 30,00,000/- only as the entry was credited in the bank and is part of the Balance Sheet. Accordingly, the addition made by the AO with regard to unexplained credit of Rs. 30,00,000/- is upheld. The AO has also brought to tax commission payment of Rs. 90,000/- to arrange for the impugned accommodation entry which is also part of elaborate modus operandi for obtaining accommodation entries In view thereof, addition of Rs 90,000/- is in order and is confirmed. These grounds of appeal are partly ruled against the appellant. 7. In ....