TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (3) TMI 34
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s under:- "1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition made u/s 68 of the Act amounting to Rs. 3,00,00,000/- received by the assessee company as unexplained cash credit in the garb of share application money/premium. 2. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has failed to prove the identity, genuineness and creditworthiness of the transactions as per judgement of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in case of M/s. Nova Promoters and Finlease Pvt. Ltd. where it was held that mere filing of PAN No., acknowledgment of ITRs, Bank Account Statements of the applicants was not sufficient to discharge the onus. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nt Appeal on the Grounds mentioned above. 4. The Ld. Departmental Representative submitted that the Assessee has not discharged the onus of proving the genuineness of transaction as contemplated u/s 68 of the Act. Further submitted that when the Inspector was deputed to serving the notices to the Companies, the investing Companies found to be not running at the business given in the address and during the service of summons also the Companies were not found in exist. Further submitted that in some of the cases share capital/share premium were not received through banking channel and has been received through book entry by increasing the share capital and share premium and correspondingly increasing the loans and share application money p....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he investor company, therefore, there is no doubt in so far as creditworthiness of the share applicant parties. All the transactions were done through banking channel and there was no deposit of cash found in the bank accounts of the Assessee. The Assessee has established the initial onus, however, without bring any material on record to controvert the claim of the Assessee, the A.O. made the addition which has been rightly deleted by the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. Assessee's Representative by relying on the findings and conclusion of Ld. CIT(A), sought for dismissal of the Appeal of the Revenue. 6. We have heard both the parties and perused the material available on record. During the assessment proceedings, the Ld. A.O. observed that the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ties are not in doubt. In so far as the genuineness of the transactions are concerned, the Ld. CIT(A) perused the bank statement of share subscribers and found that all the transactions were done through banking channel and there was no deposit of cash in the bank account of the Assessee before issue of funds in favour of the Assessee Company. Considering the fact that the transactions have been done through banking channel, one cannot doubt the genuineness of the transaction. The Assessee has established the initial onus as required u/s 68 of the Act, therefore, it is for the A.O. to bring the material on record to controvert the claim of the Assessee or to discredit the evidence produced by the Assessee. In the assessment order in one bre....