TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (5) TMI 1264
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....unds of appeal: "1. That under the facts and circumstances of the case the Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming addition of a sum of Rs.9,67,00,000/- for the share capital raised by the assessee during the year, holding the same to be unexplained cash credit in terms of section 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The addition is unjustified and need to be deleted. 2. The assessee craves leave to add, alter or amend the ground or grounds of appeal before or at the time of hearing." 3. The brief facts of the case are that the case of the assessee was reopened u/s 147 of the Act and the reassessment was completed by the Assessing Officer for A.Y 2008-09 on 28.05.2010 determining the total income at Rs.47,280/-. Subsequently, the Commissioner of I....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... ld. CIT(A) confirmed the additions so made by the Assessing Officer. 5. We have heard the rival contentions and gone through the record. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee has contended that in this case, the assessee had filed all evidences to prove the identity and creditworthiness of the subscribers and genuineness of the transaction including the address, PAN & Form 2 & Form 5 filed with Registrar of Companies of the share subscriber companies, their audited financial statements, acknowledgement of filing their Income Tax Return, copy of bank statement of the allottee company highlighting the payment of the entire amount of share capital . That all the transactions were done through banking channel and duly confirmed by the share subscr....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r discrepancy in the evidences and the details furnished by the assessee, the AO proceeded to take adverse inference only on the ground that the directors of the subscriber companies did not appear personally before the AO. The ld. Counsel for the assessee in this respect has relied upon the decision of the Jurisdictional Calcutta High Court in the case of Crystal networks (P) Ltd. vs CIT (supra). The ld. Counsel has also relied upon the decision of the Co-ordinate Kolkata Bench of the tribunal in the case of 'M/s Satyam Smertexpvt. ltd. vs. DCIT', ITA No.2445/kol/2019 vide order dated 29.05.2020, wherein, the coordinate bench of the tribunal, while further relying upon the decision of the Hon'ble Allahabad High Court in the case of CIT vs ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ntioned the names of the share subscriber companies and even has not mentioned a word as to which of the share subscriber company or the corresponding transaction thereof was not genuine and on what grounds. The AO, in our view, could have taken an adverse inference, only if, he would have pointed out the discrepancies or insufficiency in the evidences and details received in his office and pointed out as to on what account further investigation was needed by way of recording of statement of the directors of the subscriber companies. Even if the directors of the subscriber companies have not come personally in response to the summons issued by the AO, in our view, adverse inference cannot be taken against the assessee solely on this ground ....