TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (5) TMI 1858
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the assessee has moved condonation application along with affidavit dated 26.08.2024. The assessee submitted that Shri Kailash Chandra Soni, director of M/s Lime Fresh Properties Private Limited submitted has stated in the affidavit that Mr. Tapas Roy was entrusted with the accounts, taxation matters of the company including filing the appeal on behalf of the company. However, he was suffering from severe viral infection during the month of April, 2024 and therefore due to his critical health issues he was not attending office from 09.04.2024 to 21.05.2024 and accordingly, the delay of 107 days has happened in filing the appeal. The ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the since the delay in filing the appeal was for genuine and bon....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... written submission dated 11.03.2015, which are available at page no. 85 to 86, furnishing the details in respect of the share subscribers of sisters concerns and related persons, available from page no.25 to 267 of the paper book. However, the ld. AO disregarded and overlooked all the facts / evidences/ replies filed by the assessee. The replies / submissions/ evidences were duly acknowledged by the Department. The AO framed the assessment u/s 144 of the Act on 21.03.2015 by making an addition of Rs. 69 lacs on account of unexplained cash credit in respect of share capital and share premium. 07. In the appellate proceedings, the ld. CIT(A) passed a very cryptic order upholding the order of ld. AO without considering the reply of the asses....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
...., 250,251, 260 and 261. We note that the subscribers have also filed their PANs, audited accounts, bank statements, ITRs, etc. to prove the investments in the assessee company. However, the ld. AO by ignoring all the evidences with regard to the share subscribers and without making any examination or verification of these evidences simply passed the order u/s 144 of the Act by observing that the assessee was not complied with the notices. Pertinent to state that all these evidences are available in the paper book and duly acknowledged by the Department. We note that the ld. CIT(A) also passed the order in the same way upholding the order by ld. AO by giving a very cryptic finding without taking into account the reply of the assessee. We obs....