TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (9) TMI 2170
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....;ble Apex Court in the case of Lovely Exports Pvt. Ltd. 216 CTR 195, CIT vs. Nr Portfolio Pvt. Ltd. and CIT vs. Nova Promotors & Finlease Pvt. Ltd. (2012) 342 ITR 169/206 from Hon'ble Delhi High Court. 2. During hearing of this appeal, Shri Rajendra Kumar, learned DR, explained that the assessee received share capital/share premium from sixteen entities by inviting our attention to the finding recorded in para 4.2 (page 4 of the assessment order). It was pleaded that notices under section 133(6) were issued to which there was no reply from the concerned parties and in some cases such notices were returned back and in some cases service was effected but still there was no reply/no compliance from such parties. It was explained that th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s. V R Global Energy Pvt. Ltd. vs. Income Tax Officer (Tax Case (Appeal) NO. 246 of 2017) and another decision in CIT vs. Electro Polychem Ltd. (294 ITR 661). In reply, the learned DR explained that the learned Assessing Officer vide letter dated 5.03.2015 called the details, which were not filed and, thus, there is a failure on the part of the assessee and again show cause notice was given on 19.03.2015. It was explained that the finding of the learned CIT(A) is based upon additional evidence for which no opportunity was given to the learned Assessing Officer. 4. We have considered the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. The facts in brief are that the assessee company is engaged in the business of civil cons....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....situation the only way of getting relevant information was from the assessee. But as seen from the discussion above, the assessee has completely failed to provide the relevant details and discharge its primary onus....." 4.1 In the light of the above, we are expected to analyze section 68 of the Act. As per the provisions of section 68 of the Act, the assessee is expected to offer an explanation with respect to the nature and source of cash credits to the satisfaction of the Assessing Officer. For ready reference section 68 of the Act is reproduced hereunder:- "68. Where any sum is found credited in the books of an assessee maintained for any previous year, and the assessee offers no explanation about the nature and source there....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f satisfactory explanation, the unexplained cash credit may be charged u/s 68 of the Act. Our view is fortified by the ratio laid down in Hon'ble Apex Court in P. Mohankala (2007)(291 ITR 278)(SC). A close reading of section 68 and 69 of the Act makes it clear that in the case of section 68, there should be credit entry in the books of account whereas in the case of 69 there may not be an entry in such books of account. The law is well settled, the onus of proving the source of a sum, found to be received/transacted by the assessee, is on him and where it is not satisfactorily explained, it is open to the Revenue to hold that it is income of the assessee and no further burden lies on the Revenue to show that income is from any other particu....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....appeal, the assessee has not discharged the onus cast upon it as provided under section 68 of the Act as the necessary details called by the learned Assessing Officer were not filed. The ratio laid down in ACIT vs Rajeev Tandon 294 ITR (AT) 219 (Del.), which was confirmed by Hon'ble High Court, in 294 ITR 488, supports the case of the Revenue. Identical ratio was laid down in CIT vs Anil Kumar 392 ITR 552 (Del.), wherein it was held that mere identification of the donor and movement of gift through banking channel is not sufficient to prove the genuineness of gift. 4.3 Uncontrovertedly, we note that the learned Assessing Officer calls the details vide letter dated 05.03.2015 and again vide show cause notice dated 19.03.2015. It is also u....