TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (4) TMI 2063
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e Income Tax Act, 1961 ('Act' for short) by computing the income of the Assessee at Rs. 77,73,450/- as against declared loss of Rs. -1,46,26,547/-. Aggrieved by the assessment order dated 22/12/2017, the Assessee preferred an Appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) vide order dated 14/08/2019, dismissed the Appeal filed by the Assessee. As against the order of the Ld. CIT(A), the Assessee preferred the present Appeal. 3. None appeared for the Assessee. Ongoing through the order sheet, it is found that the Assessee has been remained absent continuously and not adduced any arguments. Considering the above facts and circumstances, we deem it fit to decide the Appeal after hearing the Department's Representative. 4. The Departmen....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ken as a loan from Sh. Mr. Hari Pawan Vellanki. It is noted that Sh. Hari Pawan Vellanki is another major shareholder investing an amount of Rs. 50,65,000/- and Rs. 4,00,00/-, however, neither his ITR, Confirmation, Bank Statement, etc. is furnished on record to prove the identity, creditworthiness and genuineness of the transaction. Furthermore, there is no document on record, which provides approval of Mr. Hari Pawan Vellanki to allow the company to issue shares to Ms. Sumathi Vutukari and Mr. Nagavalli Vellanki for the amount directly transferred by him to the company. 5.11 Furthermore, the reliance of the appellant on the petition filed before the Hon'ble NCLT is also not of much help. It, at the best, proves the identity o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... addition of the said amount to the income of the Assessee. 5.14 Hon'ble Supreme Court noted as under: i. There was no material on record to prove, or even remotely suggest, that the share application money was received from independent legal entities. The survey revealed that some of the investor companies were non-existent, and had no office at the address mentioned by the assessee. ii. The enquiries revealed that the investor companies had filed returns for a negligible taxable income, which would show that the investors did not have the financial capacity to invest huge funds. iii. There was no explanation whatsoever offered as to why the investor companies had applied for shares of the Assessee C....