2025 (7) TMI 1976

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he assessment year 2008-09. 2. The revenue has raised the following substantial questions of law for consideration: "(a) WHETHER in facts and in the circumstances of the case the Ld. Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was not justified in law in not considering the direct and circumstantial evidence brought on record by the Assessing officer to establish that the assessee had introduced its own unaccounted money in the form of share capital and share premium and deleting the addition made by the Assessing officer of Rs. 13,94,00,000/- as an unexplained cash credit U/s. 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961? b) WHETHER in facts and in the circumstances of the case the Ld. Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was not justified in law in den....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....r made the addition under Section 68 of the Act for unexplained share capital. During the year under consideration, the assessee company floated 6,97,000 equity shares of Rs. 10/- each at a premium of Rs. 190/- per share. Initially, the assessment was completed by the Assessing Officer accepting the stand taken by the assessee. Subsequently, an order was passed by the Commissioner under Section 263 of the Act and pursuant to the directions issued, the Assessing Officer reopened the assessment and called upon the assessee to explain the nature and source of the alleged sum to his satisfaction. It is not in dispute that the assessee had filed complete details of each of the shares to prove the identity and creditworthiness of the sh....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....t there was immediate source of funds available in the bank accounts which had been applied for making investments in the equity shares of the assessee company. One more particular important factor which was lost sight of is, that the matter pertains to the financial year 2007-08 and the scrutiny assessment was completed on 27.09.2021. After a gap of 13/14 years, after actual transactions had taken place and final assessment orders had been passed, proceedings was initiated. Thus, the predicament faced by the assessee was taken note by the learned Tribunal and it had observed that it is practically difficult that after a gap of 10 to 12 years, the assessee can call for the share subscribers who invested long time before and there is every p....