TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (3) TMI 1174
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 50,00,000 made by the Assessing Officer u/s. 68 of the Act without appreciating the evidences filed and the explanations furnished by the appellant. Hence, invoking of section 68 is uncalled for, illegal and bad in law as well as on facts. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld.CIT(A) failed to appreciate that the appellant had duly established the Identity and creditworthiness of the shareholders, genuineness of the transaction and source of funds, and therefore the provision of section 68 is not applicable in the case of the assessee. Hence, invoking of section 68 is uncalled for, illegal and bad in law as well as on facts. 3. On the facts and in t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Act'). The assessee company during the year under consideration had issued share capital for Rs. 50,00,000/- consisting of Rs. 40,000/- equity shares of Rs. 100/- each at a premium of Rs. 25/- per share to 22 persons. The A.O held the share capital issued as unexplained cash credit u/s. 68 of the Act and added Rs. 50,00,000/- in the hands of the assessee. 3. The facts further reveal that the assessee had allotted 40,000 equity shares to different persons during the year under consideration wherein each share had face value of Rs. 100/- and premium of Rs. 25/- and has been allotted at Rs. 1250/- amounting to Rs. 50,00,000/- which includes Rs. 10 lakhs for share premium. The A.O asked the assessee to furnish complete details of share premi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....vide one para order and summarily dismissed the appeal of the assessee. 6. The fact of the matter is that the assessee company is maintaining regular books of account, quantity registers for production and sales, bills and vouchers and other relevant documents. The books of accounts were duly audited as per Section 44AB of the Act. There are no questions raised by the Department regarding validity of these documents which were produced before the A.O by the assessee during the assessment stage itself. The A.O had also issued notice u/s. 133(6) of the Act and all the shareholders who had invested in the assessee company, they have produced bank statement for the given period and filed individual return of income for the relevant year and ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the assessee had been duly furnished before the A.O and at the same time, all the shareholders have given their bank statements, ITR as well as cash book. The A.O had not negated or disbelieved these documents which have been furnished before him. The A.O had also not conducted any inquiry and has not brought on record any findings on facts as to why he had made the addition u/s. 68 of the Act. Similarly, the Ld. CIT(Appeals)/NFAC when mandated to pass order in terms with Section 250(4) & (6) of the Act, the said authority chooses to pass a summary and cryptic order and dismissed the appeal of the assessee without any independent application of mind or reasoning. There is no logical reasons in the order of the Ld. CIT(Appeals)/NFAC for sust....