TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (4) TMI 858
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the "Act"), dated 27.12.2019, for Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. Grounds taken by the Revenue are reproduced as under: 1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld CIT(A) was justified in directing the Assessing Officer to delete the addition made u/s, 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on account of bogus share premium even though the creditworthiness of the M/s. Warner Metalic Pvt. Ltd. and M/s. Agnikal Vyapar Private Limited is not proven beyond reasonable doubt. 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld.CIT(A) was justified in directing the Assessing Officer to delete the addition made u/s, 68 of the Income Tax....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....folio Pvt Ltd. on 22 November, 2013 held that Mere production of incorporation details, PAN Nos. or the fact that third persons or company had filed income tax details are not sufficient as the genuineness, creditworthiness, identity are deeper and obtrusive? 6. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld.CIT(A) erred in wrongly relaying on remand report of Assessing Officer without proper appreciating the findings of the Assessing Officer during the assessment proceedings and statement recorded of Director of Company during the Survey u s. 133(A) of the Act. 7. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld.CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition on account of....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....mpleted at total assessed income of Rs. 20,66,66,310/- by making the following additions: i. Share capital and premium received from Agnikal Vyapar Pvt Ltd - Rs. 3,31,42,084/- ii. Share capital and premium received from Warner Metallic Pvt Ltd - Rs. 2,58,67,969/- iii. Estimated gross profit on understated sales - Rs. 8,37,71,903/- 6. Aggrieved, assessee went in appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) who after elaborate discussion on the submissions made by the assessee corroborated by documentary evidences, gave his fact-based findings, deleting the additions so made by the ld. Assessing Officer. Aggrieved, revenue is in appeal before the Tribunal. 7. We have heard both the parties and used the material placed on reco....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... said two parties. 9. It is further noted that the said two investing companies are existing shareholders of the assessee from past several years fact of which has never been disputed. Thus, their identity cannot be challenged. Further, part of the share capital and premium resulted out of conversion of unsecured loans from these investor companies into equity capital and another part as fresh investment. For the infusion of fresh funds, source of source was explained which has been accepted by the ld. Assessing Officer in the remand proceedings as stated in the report. Furthermore, these investing companies are based at Mumbai and not from Kolkata, which was evidently demonstrated by the assessee by furnishing their details from the MCA....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the total income of the assessee. 12. In this respect, assessee evidently demonstrated that sales upto the date of survey included branch transfers of Rs. 29,28,57,985/-. Correct sales upto the date of survey excluding branch transfers was Rs. 55,35,47,151/- only. Perusal of the profit and loss statement of the assessee upto the date of survey evidently shows separate amounts for branch transfers which forms part of Rs. 84,64,05,136/- taken by the ld. Assessing Officer as the total sales for extrapolation for the whole year. Ld. Assessing Officer has completely ignored the branch transfer figure which gets excluded when the financial statement is drawn for the whole year for the purpose of compliance and reporting as well as computing t....