TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (10) TMI 347
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....led. At the time of hearing the counsel of the assessee explained the reason for delay in filing the appeal. The Ld. A.R did not raise any objection in condoning the delay. 3. After hearing the rival contentions and perusing the materials available on record, we find that the delay is for bonafide and genuine reason, hence, we condone the delay and adjudicate the appeal. 4. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee e-filed its return of income for assessment year 2012-2013 on 30.09.2012 declaring total income at Rs. 37,06,960/-. The case was selected for scrutiny and during the course of assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer noticed that the assessee has received share capital including share premium from Bircot Tracom Pvt....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he assessee to prove the identity of the creditors, genuineness of the transactions and creditworthiness of the parties. The ld.CIT(A) after considering the relevant submissions of the assessee and also taking note of various facts brought on record by the Assessing Officer, observed that although the assessee company has filed certain basic evidence, like confirmation of the parties along with financial statements, but failed to prove the genuineness of the transaction, which is evident from the financer of the investor company, namely, Utpal Trading Pvt. Ltd. who has shown meagre income of Rs. 179/- in its ITR for the relevant year and further the Bircot Tracom Pvt. Ltd. has shown Rs. 217 as income for the relevant year. In respect of thi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....lance available, the same has been converted into share capital. The assessee has furnished all details including confirmation letters from the parties, their bank accounts, financial statements etc. In fact, the Assessing Officer issued notice u/s.131 of the Act for which the companies have responded. The AO merely for the reason of non-appearance of the directors observed that the transaction between the companies and the shareholders are not genuine, even though various documents have been furnished, therefore, submitted that the Assessing Officer has erred in making the additions towards share capital and share premium treating the same as unexplained cash credit u/s.68 of the Act. The ld.CIT(A) without considering the relevant facts, s....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....three companies and all three companies are group companies of the assessee. The assessee has received Rs. 6 lakhs as share capital from Bircot Tracom Pvt. Ltd.. The above company is a group company of the assessee company, which is evident from the common director between assessee company and the shareholders company. Further the share capital amount of Rs. 6 lakhs was received in financial year 2010-2011 and the only allotment of shares have been given in financial year 2011-2012. The assessee had also filed various evidence including the name and address of the shareholders, their bank account statements along with financial statements. From the details filed by the assessee, it is very clear that the transactions between the assessee co....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....essee and it was not a case of the AO that these companies are shell/paper companies, once the relevant details have been filed to prove the identity of the creditors, genuineness of the transaction and the creditworthiness of the parties, merely for the reason that non-appearance of the directors of the above companies, the Assessing Officer cannot disbelieve the transaction between assessee company and the shareholders company. This legal proposition is supported by the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of M/s Paradise Inland Shipping Pvt. Ltd.(supra), wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court has very clearly held that it cannot be held that the transaction between the assessee company and the shareholder company not genuine. A s....