M/s Splash Finvest Private Limited, Indore V. The ACIT, 2(1), Indore

ITA 340/IND/2012

• Counselvise Citation: 34022714 RSA 2012
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 10 month(s) 25 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 02-05-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 07-06-2012
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: R A VERMA
• Section: 68

Judgement Text

1 INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE SHRI JOGINDER SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI R.C. SHARMA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 340/IND/2012 A.Y. 2005-06 M/S. SPLASH FINVEST PVT. LTD., INDORE PAN AAEFS 7568 C :: APPELLANT VS DCIT-2(1), INDORE :: RESPONDENT ASSESSEE BY SHRI ANIL KAMAL GARG REVENUE BY SHRI R.A. VERMA DATE OF HEARING 28.4.2014 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 28 .4.201 4 O R D E R PER JOGINDER SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER THE ASSESSEE IS AGGRIEVED BY THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 30.3.2012 OF THE LEARNED CIT(A)-II, INDORE. THE SUM & SUBSTANCE OF THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL IS THAT ON THE FACTS AND 2 IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, LD. FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY HAS ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ADDITION OF RS.75,00,000/- MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER U/S 68 OF THE I.T. ACT. 2. DURING HEARING, WE HAVE HEARD SHRI ANIL KAMAL GARG, LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE AND SHRI R.A. VERMA, L D. SR. DR. AT THE OUTSET, MR. VERMA CONTENDED THAT THE ISSUE IS COVERED AGAINST THE ASSESSEE BY THE ORDER OF THE TR IBUNAL BY SUBMITTING THAT WITH RESPECT TO PRAMILA INVESTMENT & FINANCE LTD. AND MONEY PENNY PVT. LTD., THIS BENCH HAS ALREADY TAKEN A VIEW AGAINST THE ASSESSEE, THEREFORE, THE SAME VIEW WILL BE APPLICABLE WITH RESPECT TO OTHERS ALS O. IN REPLY, MR. GARG, LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE FAIRL Y AGREED THAT THE ISSUE IS COVERED AGAINST THE ASSESSEE ON LY WITH RESPECT TO THESE TWO COMPANIES BUT FOR REMAINING , NO INQUIRY WAS DONE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 3 3. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSE D THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, CONSIDERING THE SHARE CAPITAL/SHARE PREMIUM MONEY, RECEIVED FROM PRAMILA INVESTMENT & FINANCE LTD. AND MONEY PENNY PVT. LTD., THE ADDITIONS MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND CONFIRMED BY THE LD. CIT(A) AR E UPHELD, THEREFORE, TO THIS EXTENT, THE STAND OF THE LD. CIT(A) IS AFFIRMED. SO FAR AS ACCEPTANCE OF SHARE CAPITAL AND SHARE PREMIUM MONEY FROM REMAINING COMPANIES LIKE, SAGITTARIOUS SECURITIES & FINANCE LTD., SONAL TI-UP PVT . LTD., NAROTTAMKA MERCANTILE P. LTD. AND FREEWINGS EXPORT S LTD. ARE CONCERNED, NO GENERAL VIEW CAN BE TAKEN. THE ASSESSING OFFICER NOTED THAT ASSESSEE HAS NOT PROVIDED ANY DETAILS OF THESE COMPANIES EITHER IN THE RETURN OR IN REPLY TO THE NOTICE, ISSUED ON VARIOUS DATES. AS PER THE REVEN UE, ON INQUIRY BY THE DEPARTMENT, THESE COMPANIES WERE NOT FOUND AT THE ADDRESS, MENTIONED IN THEIR COPY OF 4 MEMORANDUM AND ARTICLE OF THE COMPANIES. THE REASONS ADVANCED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR CLAIMING THE ALLEGED PREMIU M WERE ALSO NOT FOUND CONVINCING. THE RECEIPT OF SHARE CAPITAL AND SHARE PREMIUM WAS FOUND TO BE SUSPICIOUS. IN VIEW OF THE DECISION FROM HON'BLE CALCUTTA HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. PRECISION FINANCE LTD. 208 ITR 465, DURGA PD. MORE 82 ITR 540 (SC), MCDOWELL & CO. 154 ITR 148 (S C) AND A DETAILED DECISION OF THIS BENCH IN AGRAWAL COAL CORPORATION LTD. (2011) 18 ITJ 717 (INDORE TRIBUNAL) AND SINCE THE IDENTITY OF THE SHARE APPLICANTS WAS NOT PROV ED, WE DIRECT THE LD. ASSESSING OFFICER TO EXAMINE THE C LAIM OF THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE IS ALSO EXPECTED TO FULFIL THE CONDITIONS AS ENSHRINED IN SECTION 68 OF THE ACT. R EFERENCE CAN BE MADE TO THE DECISION IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. NOV A PROMOTERS & FINANCE P. LTD. (2012) 18 TAXMAN.COM 217 (DEL), ORDER DATED 15.2.2012. AN ELABORATE DISCUSSION HAS BEEN MADE BY THIS BENCH ON THE CONNECTED ISSUE IN TH E 5 CASE OF AGRAWAL COAL CORPORATION (SUPRA). THE ASSESSEE I S ALSO DIRECTED TO PRODUCE THE DIRECTOR OF THE SHARE APP LICANT COMPANIES ALONG WITH OTHER RELEVANT RECORD TO PROVE TH E GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTIONS TO ESTABLISH THE IDENT ITY, CREDIT WORTHINESS AND GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTIONS BEFORE THE LD. ASSESSING OFFICER, FOR WHICH, DUE OP PORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD BE PROVIDED TO THE ASSESSEE WITH FURTH ER LIBERTY TO FURNISH EVIDENCES, IF ANY, IN SUPPORT OF THE CLAIM. FINALLY, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS PARTLY ALLOWED FO R STATISTICAL PURPOSES ONLY. THIS ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT IN THE PRESENCE OF LD. REPRESENTATIVES FROM BOTH SIDES AT TH E CONCLUSION OF THE HEARING ON 28.4.2014. SD/- SD/- (R.C.SHARMA) (JOGINDER SINGH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 2.5.2014 COPY TO: APPELLANT, RESPONDENT, CIT, CIT(A), DR, GU ARD FILE !VYS!