TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (7) TMI 1793
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s 142(1) of the Act filed the relevant documents such as Certificate of Incorporation, MoA/AoA, auditor's report along with Balance Sheet and Profit and Loss Account for the relevant year, valuation report of shares, bank statements and bank ledger accounts. Further, the assessee furnished the documents w.r.t. investor companies, such as, confirmation of accounts, share application form, Certificate of incorporation, MoA/AoA, auditor's report along with Balance Sheet and Profit and Loss account for the relevant year in concern. All the documents furnished with the AO have been placed in the Paper Book. 4. The AO issued notice u/s 133(6) to the investor companies requiring them to furnish relevant information and confirm the investment made in the subscription of the shares in the assessee company. In response to the same, investor companies confirmed the investment made in the assessee company and filed the relevant documents with AO as observed by AO at Page 2, Para 5 of its order by stating that "after going through the details filed by the assessee company and the information gathered u/s 133(6) from investor companies.". However, ignored the submissions made by the assessee an....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....set Value Method, which is one of the prescribed methods for valuation of shares." The above grounds of appeals are independent of and without prejudice to each other. 7. Ld. AR of the assessee submitted filed written submissions which read as under :- 5. "It is further pertinent to mention that during the course of assessment proceeding, Ld. AO at Page 1 Para 2 observed that assessee company has not furnished the requisite documents to prove the identity and creditworthiness of the investors and the genuineness of the transaction. Against this it is necessary to state that during the course of assessment proceeding few of the documents could not be uploaded properly on the E filing portal due to technical glitches and therefore assessee was left with no other option except to re-file the evidences to avoid any controversy. Additional evidences filed before the Ld. CIT(A) were admitted during the course of appellate proceeding as observed by Ld. CIT(A) at para "5.1. During the course of appellate proceedings, the appellant had requested for admission of additional evidence under rule 46A and the same is admitted.". 6. Below is the brief summary/chart showing sole issue invol....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....long with the application for admission of additional evidences before the Ld. CIT(A). Against the evidences filed, the Ld. CIT(A)appreciated the documents by accepting the same, as sated at Para 5.1, page 15 of the order, but still dismissed the appeal of assessee for the reason that assessee has failed to produce the director of investor company during the course of assessment proceeding and merely on doubts dismissed the appeal of assessee. 8. Further from the perusal of the table placed above it is relevant to note that Rs. 5 Lacs was received from M/s RSM Construction against the share application money and share premium received by the assessee company in preceding years. (The same could be corroborated from the bank statement placed in the PB along with various documents). However, the shares were allotted by the assessee company in the relevant assessment year in concern. Hence, the investors from whom the share application money was received in preceding years, but to whom the shares were allotted in the current assessment year, their investment could not be added in the income of the assessee in the current AY. 9. In the Paper book filed before this Hon'ble Bench the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tax returns etc. in the Paper Book. Apart from this, these companies are active in the MCA website i.ewww.mca.gov.in. The creditworthiness of the share applicants, these companies are having sufficient capital and reserves to make the investment in the assessee company and the same could be evident from their audited financial statements. Thus, creditworthiness of the applicants is proved beyond doubt. Since, the monies have been directly paid to the assessee company by account payee checks out of the bank balances available in their respective bank accounts, genuineness of the transactions cannot be doubted. 12. It is relevant to state that the Ld. AO has recorded that some of the documents were not filed by the assessee in relation to aforesaid investors however Ld. CIT(A) appreciated the documents but did not agree despite there was nothing brought on record contrary to these documents. It is submitted that AY 2016-17 was the first year of assessment under faceless scheme and due to technical glitches sometimes despite uploading the documents it could not reach. The IT department also found faults and so upgraded their website later and various other issues are very well known....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s Ltd. ITA No. 335/2015 (Del) 3. AO got information from the source such as investigation wing and in response to enquiry the assessee filed all the relevant documents as stated above. AO failed to conduct any enquiry and merely relied on the report of the investigation wing. 333 ITR 119 (Del) CIT vs. Oasis Hospitalities (P) Ltd 299 ITR 286 (Del) CIT vs. Divine Leasing & Finance Ltd. 330 ITR 298 (Del) CIT vs. Dwarkadhish Investment (P.) Ltd. Pr.CIT v. Laxman Industrial Resources Ltd. ITA No. 169/2017 (Del) 4. AO got the information from the source such as investigation wing or found documents provided are insufficient such as bank statements not provided or confirmation not furnished and merely documents related to identity were filed such as PAN, ITR and payment through account payee cheques. AO made enquiry and found that companies are non-existent or after recording statement of the directors has not found sufficiently explained or brought the chain of investment from the coffers of the assessee In such circumstances, courts held that the addition has to be sustained such as by not filing the bank particulars (NR Portfolio, NRA Iron & Steel), the assessee did not coop....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sessee." Therefore, it is most humbly prayed that the addition made by Ld.AO and confirmed by Ld.CIT(A) u/s 68 of the Act may kindly be deleted and the appeal of the assessee may kindly be allowed." 8. On the other hand, ld. DR of the Revenue relied on the orders of the lower authorities and submitted that the AO found that the investor companies were not in existence. 9. Considered the rival submissions and material placed on record. I observed that during the year, assessee has issued share capital to M/s. Rishi Credit & Industries Pvt. Ltd. of 31250 shares at Rs. 80 per share and M/s. Pearl Durobuild Pvt. Ltd. of 18750 shares at Rs. 80 per share. With regard to shares issued to M/s. RSM Construction on 20.02.2014, the same was issued in previous assessment year. I observed that assessee has submitted all the relevant documents relating to the issue of shares and also confirmations and copies of ITR, PAN, Audit reports and bank statements in respect of shareholders. In order to verify the same, notices were issued u/s 133(6) also, however the investors were failed to appear before the AO. I observed that the assessee has submitted all the relevant documentations before the AO....