TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (5) TMI 694
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....IT(A) has erred in deleting the disallowance u/s 14A of expenditure of Rs. 17,604/- by ignoring the fact that there was material to establish the direct nexus between the expenditure incurred and the income not forming part of total income. 2. Deleting the addition of Rs. 7,40,40,000/- made by disallowing share application money & share premium and added back by the AO u/s 68 when the assessee had failed to discharge its onus of proving the geniuses of the transaction by not giving any justification in respect of share premium charged. 3. Deleting the addition of Rs. 5,550,300/- made by disallowing commission paid for obtaining the above bogus share application money & Share premium and added back by the AO u/s 68 when the assessee had ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... appeal filed by the assessee vide order dated 29/05/2015. Against the same, the revenue is in appeal before ITAT at present. Further, the Ld. AR also brought to our notice that subsequently, a search and seizure operation u/s 132 of the Act was conducted on 11/11/2014 on the premises of the assessee and its group concerns. Based on the above search, a notice u/s 153C of the Act was issued on 14/12/2016 and served on the assessee. Subsequent to proceedings initiated u/s 153C similar addition was made in the hands of the assessee and the same was appealed before the Ld. CIT(A)-4, Kanpur (the assessee company was amalgamated with M/s M.G. Metalloy Pvt. Ltd.). In the above proceedings, the Ld. CIT(A) decided the issue in favour of the assessee....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... issue of share at premium, it is submitted that restriction on quantum of premium has been brought in the Act in section 56(2)(vii b) which applicable from A.Y. 2013-14. Reliance in this regard is placed on the Bombay High Court decision in the case of Principal Commissioner of Income Tax Vs Apeak Infotech 2017 (9) TMI 1590-Bombay High Court." 5. Considered the rival submissions and material available on record. We observed that the issue under consideration on which the original assessment order was passed on 25/03/2015 and subsequent order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) on 29/05/2015 allowing the grounds raised by the assessee on merits of the case. However, in the subsequent proceedings initiated u/s 153C, the exactly similar additions were ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e search proceedings initiated in the group entities. However, before Ld CIT(A), the assessee submitted that the assessee has submitted all the relevant documents before AO substantiating the identity, capacity and genuineness of the transaction. With regard to genuineness, the assessee has submitted the foreign remittance, FIRC for such remittances, compliances to FDI and RBI guidelines. Further it was submitted that shares were issued and return of allotment of shares before ROC were duly furnished before AO and also submitted, there was no requirement for proving source of source before AO and also there were no restrictions on issue of share premium at that point of time. Considering the above facts on record, Ld CIT(A) has allowed the ....