TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (5) TMI 649
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Hon'ble Tribunal did not err in holding that the amount of Rs. 4,99,00,000/- received by the Assessee from Smt. N. Sunitha is not income of the Assessee and as such whether the finding of the learned Tribunal is perverse? (B) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Hon'ble Tribunal did err in not appreciating that the Assessee has received an amount of Rs. 4.99 crores for execution of a contract and therefore assessable in the hands of the Assessee as income from other sources? The case pertains to Assessment Year 2007-08. 2. It is the case of the Appellants that consequent to a search conducted under Section 132 of the Act at t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ssee Company, the Assessee failed to produce original documents whereby a request was made by Smt. N. Sunitha for allotment of shares or any other document to substantiate such a transaction. An assessment order was passed by the Assessing Officer, i.e. A.O. on 27/12/2011 making additions of Rs. 4,99,00,000/- to the income of the Assessee Company and taxing the same. The net tax payable was assessed at Rs. 2,61,07,507/-. 3. The Assessment Order was challenged by the Assessee before the Commissioner Income Tax (Appeals) (CIT(A)), who rejected the appeal by order dated 18/6/2013, upholding the assessment order of the AO. Against the order of the CIT(A), a further appeal was carried by the Assessee before ITAT, which passed the impugned order....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rsed. Repelling this submission, Mr Nikhil Pai appearing for the Respondent-Assessee submits that the findings of the AO and CIT(A) not being based upon any material, as claimed to have be unearthed during the search, the findings of the ITAT that the Assessee had supported its claim to deduct the amount of Rs.4.99 crore based upon various documents referred to in para 2.3 of its order do not call for any interference. It was submitted that the two substantial questions of law on which these appeal is admitted are to be answered in favour of the Assessee since the findings rendered by the ITAT are neither perverse nor can be termed to have been arrived de hors the material on record. 5. We have considered the rival submission and the mate....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....erial to substantiate these conditions, that the burden gets shifted to the Revenue to prove otherwise. We take note that in this judgment, the cash receipt was entered into the book of accounts of the assessee where the transaction was made through proper banking channels, but however, this Court rejected the assessee's contention, holding that merely because the transactions are through banking channels, the assessee's burden of demonstrating the genuineness of the transaction does not get discharged, unless requisite material is placed before the AO. 7. The facts in the present case stand on a slightly different footing. The admitted facts are that the amount in question which is Rs. 4.99 crores was received by the assessee company from....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rder was passed, on the basis of which the shares were allotted to Mrs. Sunita. All these records including the copies of the petition and orders of the Court were placed before the AO. 9. From this record, therefore, the entire transaction, supported by the above-referred documentation was before the AO, who, if one peruses the assessment order, does not dispute the genuineness of any of these documents but only make notes that the assessee failed to produce original papers indicating requests for share allotment from Sunita. On examining all this material, the ITAT concluded that there was no material with the Revenue to conclude that this money was received from Mrs. Sunita against rendering of service by the Company to treat this trans....