DCIT, New Delhi V. M/s AVS Investments Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 5302/DEL/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 130 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7128 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 27 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 03-01-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC 2
• Next Hearing Date: 28-11-2016
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 07-10-2016
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S K JAIN
• Keywords: Unexplained cash credit; Additional evidence; Accommodation entries
• Section: 147; 131; 68; 148; 15; 139

Judgement Text

1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH SMC-II, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. NO. 5 302 /DEL/201 6 A.Y. : 20 1 0 - 1 1 DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 3(2), R.NO. 380-B, CR BUILDING, I.P. ESTATE, NEW DELHI VS. M/S AVS INVESTMENTS PVT. LTD., 312, DISTRICT CENTER, JANAKPURI, NEW DELHI 110 058 (PAN: AAGCA3680D) (APPELLANT) (APPELLANT) (APPELLANT) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) (RESPONDENT) (RESPONDENT) (RESPONDENT) DEPARTMENT BY : SH. S.K. JAIN, SR. DR ASSESSEE BY : SH. CHAMAN LAL SHARMA, ADV. ORDER ORDER ORDER ORDER THIS APPEAL BY THE REVENUE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-I, NEW DELHI D ATED 01.7.2016 PERTAINING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-11 ON THE FOLLOW ING GROUNDS:- 1. THE LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN DELETING THE ADDITION U/S. 68 OF THE ACT AMOUNTING TO RS. 40,00,000/- RECEIVED BY THE ASSESS EE COMPANY AS A BENEFICIARY OF ACCOMMODATION ENTRIES F ROM 7 COMPANIES IN QUESTION IN THE GARB OF SHARE APPLICA TION MONEY / PREMIUM. 1.2 LD. CIT(A) HAS FAILED TO APPRECIATE THAT SK JAIN/ V.K. JAIN IN THEIR ITA NOS. 6991 TO 6997/DEL/2014 AND ITA NOS. 6 998 2 TO 7004/DEL/2014 ADMITTED BEFORE ITAT THAT THE NATU RE OF THEIR ACTIVITIES WAS OF ENTRY OPERATORS, THUS THERE WAS NO SANCTITY OF CONFIRMATION OF SHARE APPLICATION MONEY PROVIDED BY 3 COMPANIES UNDER THEIR CONTROL. 1.2 LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN ACCEPTI NG THE CREDITWORTHINESS OF THE 7 COMPANIES BASED MERELY ON THEIR BALANCE SHEET ENTRIES DESPITE THE FACT THAT THESE C OMPANIES WERE USED AS CONDUIT BY SH. SK JAIN / SH. VINAY JAI N FOR PROVIDING ACCOMMODATION ENTRY. 2. THE APPELLANT CRAVES LEAVE FOR RESERVING THE RIG HT TO AMEND, MODIFY, ALTER, ADD OR FOREGO ANY GROUND(S) OF APPEA L AT ANY TIME BEFORE OR DURING THE HEARING OF THIS APPEAL. 2. THE BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT ASSESSMENT WAS REOPENED ON THE BASIS OF INVESTIGATION REPORT RECEIVED FROM ADIT, UNIT VI (2), WHEREIN IT WAS INFORMED THAT SH. SURENDRA KUMAR JAIN AND SH. VIRENDERA KUM AR JAIN AND COMPANIES CONTROLLED BY THEM ARE ENGAGED IN PROVIDING ACCOMMO DATION ENTRIES. ON THE BASIS OF SAID INFORMATION, THE ASSESSMENT WAS REOPE NED U/S. 147 OF THE I.T. ACT AND NOTICE U/S. 148 OF THE I.T. ACT WAS ISSUED ON 17.4.2013. IN RESPONSE TO THE SAID NOTICE, ASSESSEE FILED A LETTER DATED 6.6.2013 STATING THAT RETURN FILED U/S. 139 OF THE ACT DECLARING NIL INCOME MAY BE TREATED AS RETURN FILED IN RESPONSE TO 3 NOTICE U/S. 148 OF THE I.T. ACT. ASSESSMENT U/S. 1 43(3) READ WITH SECTION 147 OF THE ACT WAS MADE ON 30.3.2015 DETERMINING TOTAL INC OME AT RS. 40,00,000/-. THE ADDITION OF RS. 40,00,000/- WAS MADE ON ACCOUNT OF SHARE APPLICATION MONEY RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE FROM VARIOUS COMPANI ES. AGGRIEVED WITH THE ADDITION, ASSESSEE FILED THE APPEAL BEFORE THE LD . CIT(A) WHO VIDE HIS IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 1.7.2016 DELETED THE ADDITION BY PARTLY ALLOWING THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE. 3. AGGRIEVED WITH THE IMPUGNED ORDER, THE REVENUE I S IN APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. 4. LD. DR RELIED UPON THE ORDER OF THE AO AND REITE RATED THE CONTENTIONS RAISED IN THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL. 5. I HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE RELEVANT RECORDS, ESPECIALLY THE ORDER OF THE LD. CTI(A). I FIND TH AT LD. FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY HAS ELABORATELY DISCUSSED THE ISSUE IN DISPUTE BY CONSI DERING THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE LD. COUNSEL OF THE ASSESSEE AND ADJUDICATED THE I SSUES IN DISPUTE FROM PAGE NO. 25 TO 34 OF THE IMPUGNED ORDER. THE RELEVANT FINDING OF THE LD. CIT(A) IS REPRODUCED AS UNDER:- I HAVE CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSION OF THE APPELLANT AND OBSERVATION MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. THE FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT T HE APPELLANT COMPANY HAD 4 RECEIVED SHARE APPLICATION MONEY OF RS. 40,00,000/- FROM FOLLOWING SEVEN ENTITIES DURING THE YEAR: S.NO. NAME OF THE COMPANY AMOUNT OF THE SHARE C APITAL 1. M/S ZENITH AUTOMOTIVE PVT. LTD RS.6,OO,OOO/- 2 M/S MEGA TOP PROMOTERS PVT. LTD RS.7,OO,OOO/- 3 M/S VICTORY SOFTWARE PVT. LTD. RS.7,OO,OOO/- 4. M/S TRIMURTY VINIMAY PVT. LTD. RS.5,OO,OOOI- 5. M/S SHYAM INFRATECH PVT. LTD. RS.5,OO,OOOI- 6. MIS TRUSTWORTHY VINIYOG PVT. LTD. RS.5,OO,OOO I- 7 M/S DESHBANDHU SUPPLIERS PVT. LTD RS.5,OO,OOO/- RS. 40,OO,OOOI- IT IS MENTIONED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN THE AS SESSMENT ORDER THAT THE INVESTIGATION WING CARRIED OUT SEARCH IN THE CASE O F SH. SURENDER KR. JAIN AND SH. VIRENDER KR. JAIN GROUP OF COMPANIES AND IT WAS REV EALED THAT COMPANIES CONTROLLED BY THEM HAVE PROVIDED ACCOMMODATION ENTR IES IN THE FORM OF SHARE APPLICATION MONEY. ON THE BASIS OF WHICH IT HAS BEE N ALLEGED THAT ACCOMMODATION ENTRIES WERE PROVIDED BY THESE COMPAN IES NAMELY MIS ZENITH 5 AUTOMOTIVE PVT LTD, MEGA TOP PROMOTERS PVT. LTD. AN D VICTORY SOFTWARE PVT. LTD. TO THE APPELLANT COMPANY. THE ASSESSING OFFICER AFT ER CONSIDERING THE DOCUMENTS AND SUBMISSIONS MADE BY THE APPELLANT AND RESPONSE RECEIVED IN RESPONSE TO SUMMONS ISSUED U/S 131 TO ZENITH AUTOMOTIVE PVT. LT D, MEGA TOP PROMOTERS PVT. LTD. AND VICTORY SOFTWARE PVT. LTD. AND ON THE BASI S OF INSPECTOR'S ENQUIRY REPORT ADDED RS. 4O,OO,OOO/- AS UNEXPLAINED CASH CREDIT IN THE HANDS OF THE APPELLANT U/S 68 OF THE I.T. ACT. THE APPELLANT FILED SUBMISSIONS DURING THE COURSE O F RE-ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS AND THE DETAILS OF SHARE APPLICATION MO NEY RECEIVED FROM THE ABOVE MENTIONED SIX COMPANIES. IT IS ALSO MENTIONED BY TH E APPELLANT THAT IT HAD FILED CONFIRMATION FROM THE SAID COMPANIES, THEIR PERMANE NT ACCOUNT NUMBER, COPY OF THE RETURN OF INCOME FILED BY INVESTOR COMPANIES, D ETAILS OF THE CHEQUE AND THE BANK STATEMENT OF THE APPELLANT AS WELL AS THE COMP ANIES FROM WHOM SHARE APPLICATION MONEY WAS RECEIVED. THE APPELLANT FURTH ER STATED THAT MONEY WAS RECEIVED THROUGH BANKING CHANNELS AND WHICH WAS DUL Y VERIFIED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. AR ALSO STATED THAT COPIES OF SHARE APPLIC ATION FORM WERE FURNISHED BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER ALONG WITH THE ALLOTME NT OF SHARES AND FORM NO.2 FILED WITH THE REGISTRAR OF COMPANIES. THE APPELLAN T HAS SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS TO EXAMINE THE EVIDENCES FURN ISHED BY THE APPELLANT AND HE HAS TO ARRIVE AT HIS OWN CONCLUSION THE IN-BUILT S SAFEGUARD PROVIDED IN SECTION 6 68 CANNOT BE IGNORED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. THE ASSESSING OFFICER CAN ADD SHARE APPLICATION MONEY AS UNDISCLOSED INCOME IF NO EXPLANATION IS FURNISHED BY THE ASSESSEE. HOWEVER, IN THE CASE OF APPELLANT THE EXPLANATION WAS FURNISHED AND IT WAS INCUMBENT OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO EX AMINE THE SAME AND ARRIVE AT A CONCLUSION. THE AR OF THE APPELLANT FURTHER SUBMI TTED THAT BY FILING THE RELEVANT DOCUMENTS LIKE SHARE APPLICATION FORM, FORM NO.2 FI LED WITH ROC, CONFIRMATION OF SHARE APPLICANT, PERMANENT ACCOUNT NUMBER, COPY OF THE RETURN OF INCOME FILED BY THE INVESTOR COMPANIES, COPY OF BANK STATEMENTS, IT HAS DISCHARGED ITS ONUS AND THE ONUS WAS SHIFTED ON THE REVENUE TO PROVE IT OTHERWISE. THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS MENTIONED THAT ON 25.3.20 15 SUMMONS U/S 131 WERE SENT THROUGH INSPECTOR ON TEST CHECK BASIS ON THE ENTITIES NAMELY ZENITH AUTOMOTIVE PVT. LTD, MEGA TOP PROMOTERS PVT. LTD. A ND VICTORY SOFTWARE PVT. LTD. AT THE ADDRESSES PROVIDED BY THE APPELLANT TO OBTAI N PERSONAL DEPOSITION OF THE DIRECTORS FOR VERIFYING THE GENUINENESS OF THE SHAR E CAPITAL RECEIVED FROM THEM AND ALSO TO VERIFY THE CREDITWORTHINESS IN VIEW OF THE FINDINGS OF THE INVESTIGATION WING. THE INSPECTOR IN HIS REPORT DATED 25.03.2015 SUBMITTED THAT SAID COMPANIES ARE NOT EXISTING AT THE GIVEN ADDRESS AND FROM LOCAL ENQUIRIES IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD THEIR WHEREABOUTS COULD NOT BE ASCERTA INED. THE REPORT OF THE INSPECTOR WAS SHOWN TO THE APPELLANT AND IT WAS INF ORMED TO THE APPELLANT THAT IT HAS FAILED TO PROVE THE SOURCE OF THE SHARE CAPITAL RECEIVED DURING THE YEAR. THE 7 APPELLANT VIDE LETTER DATED 27/3/2015 STATED THAT D ETAILS OF SHARE CAPITAL HAS ALREADY BEEN FILED. APPELLANT HAS ALSO MENTIONED TH AT IT HAS FILED CONFIRMATION OF ALL THE COMPANIES DATED 17.03.2015. HOWEVER, ON ENQ UIRY BY THE INSPECTOR THE SAID COMPANIES WERE NOT FOUND EXISTING AT THE GIVEN ADDRESSES. WITH REGARD TO ABOVE OBSERVATIONS, THE APPELLANT HA S SUBMITTED THAT ASSESSING OFFICER HAS NOT PROVED THAT THE DOCUMENTS FILED IN SUPPORT OF THE IDENTITY OF THE PARTIES WERE FORGED. THE AO HAS NOT BROUGHT ANY EVIDENCE ON RECORD THAT THE SHARE APPLICANTS WERE NOT HAVING CR EDITWORTHINESS OR THEIR GENUINENESS HAS NOT BEEN DISPROVED. THE APPELLANT H AS FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT ALL THE NECESSARY DOCUMENTS, PERMANENT ACCOUNT NUMBER, I.T. RETURNS WERE SUBMITTED BY THE APPELLANT. THE APPELLANT HAS RELI ED UPON THE HON'BLE DELHI HIGH COURT JUDGMENT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. VICTOR E LECTRODES LTD. 329 ITR 271 WHEREIN IT IS HELD THAT MERELY BECAUSE ASSESSEE COM PANY FAILS TO PRODUCE THE DIRECTOR OF THE SHAREHOLDERS COMPANIES CANNOT BE GR OUND FOR MAKING ADDITIONS IN RESPECT OF SHARE CAPITAL. THE AR FURTHER RELIED UP ON THE DECISION OF HON'BLE DELHI HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. FAIR INVEST LTD. WHEREIN IT IS HELD THAT WHERE AO FAILS TO CONDUCT ENQUIRIES AND DEAL WITH THE MATTER IN DEPTH AFTER THE AFFIDAVIT / CONFIRMATION ALONG WITH BANK ACCOUNTS WERE FILED, T HEN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER CANNOT BE SUSTAINED. 8 THE APPELLANT FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT DURING THE YEA R APPELLANT HAS ALSO RECEIVED SHARE APPLICATION MONEY FROM M/S TRIMURTI VINMAY PVT. LTD. RS.5,OO,OOO/-, SHYAM INFRATECH PVT. LTD. RS.5,OO,OO O/-, TRUSTWORTHY VINIYOG PVT. LTD. RS.5,OO,OOO/- AND DESHBANDU SUPPL IERS PVT. LTD. RS.5,OO,OOO/-. ALL THE ABOVE FOUR COMPANIES ARE ASS ESSED TO TAX AND APPELLANT HAD FURNISHED THEIR CONFIRMATION, PERMANE NT ACCOUNT NUMBER, BANK STATEMENTS, COPY OF THE RETURN OF INCOME AND DETAIL S OF CHEQUE NO. THROUGH WHOM SHARE APPLICATION MONEY WAS RECEIVED. THE APPE LLANT ALSO FILED COPIES OF THE SHARE APPLICATION FORM BEFORE ASSESSING OFFICER AND DETAILS OF THE SHARE ALLOTMENT AND FORM NO. 2 FILED WITH ROC WITH REFERE NCE TO ALLOTMENT OF SHARES. THE AR SUBMITTED THAT ASSESSING OFFICER DID NOT CAL L FOR ANY INFORMATION FROM THE SAID FOUR PARTIES AND NO SUMMONS ULS 131 WERE ISSUE D. THE APPELLANT HAS FULLY ESTABLISHED THE NATURE OF THE ENTRIES AND FURNISHED EVIDENCE IN SUPPORT OF THE SHARE APPLICATION MONEY RECEIVED. DESPITE THESE FAC TS, THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS MADE ADDITION IN RESPECT OF ALL THE SHARE APPLICATI ON MONEY RECEIVED DURING THE YEAR. ALL THESE COMPANIES HAVE SUBMITTED CONFIRMATI ON, TO WHOMSOEVER IT MAY CONCERN, RECEIPT OF THE SHARE APPLICATION MONEY, CO PIES OF THE BANK STATEMENTS WHEREFROM MONEY WAS RECEIVED BY THE APPELLANT, COPI ES OF THE RETURN OF INCOME FILED BY ALL THE COMPANIES WITH THE DEPARTMENT, COP IES OF THE BALANCE SHEET OF 9 THE COMPANIES TO PROVE THE IDENTITY, CREDITWORTHINE SS AND GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTION. ON GOING THROUGH THE DETAILS FILED BY ZENITH AUTOMO TIVE PVT. LTD., IT IS SEEN THAT THIS COMPANY IS ASSESSED TO TAX AND HAS FILED ITS RETURN OF INCOME FOR A.Y. 2010-11 AND THE MONEY HAS BEEN RECEIVED FROM AXIS B ANK LTD., RAJENDER NAGAR WEST DELHI BRANCH ON 2204.2009. ON GOING THROUGH TH E BALANCE SHEET OF THE SAID COMPANY, IT IS S EN THAT THIS COMPANY HAS GOT SHARE CAPITAL OF RS.1,81,87,000/- AND RESERVE AND SURPLUS OF RS.15 ,15,60,000/- AS ON 31.03.2010. IT HAS SHOWN INVESTMENT OF RS.16,34,00, OOO/- IN THE BALANCE SHEET AT SL. NO.3 IN WHICH THE APPELLANT COMPANY'S NAME ALSO APPEARS. ON VERIFICATION OF THE DETAILS FILED BY MIS MEGA TO P PROMOTERS PVT. LTD., IT IS SEEN THAT THIS COMPANY HAS FILED COPY OF RETURN OF INCOME FILED BY IT FOR AY 2010-11, CONFIRMATION OF THE SHARE APPLICATION MONE Y, COPY OF THE BANK STATEMENT OF THE SAID COMPANY WITH AXIS BANK LTD , RAJENDER NAGAR WEST DELHI BRANCH WHEREFROM MONEY OF RS.7,00,000/- WAS GIVEN O N 22.04.2009 TO THE APPELLANT COMPANY. IT IS ALSO SEEN FROM THE BALANCE SHEET OF THE INVESTOR COMPANY THAT THIS COMPANY HAS GOT SHARE CAPITAL OF RS 1,85,00,000/- AND RESERVE AND SURPLUS OF RS.14, 76,41,809/-. I HAS SH OWN INVESTMENTS OF RS.11,69,50,000/- AS PER SCHEDULE 3 OF THE BALANCE SHEET IN THE SCHEDULE 3 NAME OF THE APPELLANT COMPANY APPEARS AS INVESTEE C OMPANY. 10 ON VERIFICATION OF THE DETAILS FILED BY VICTORY SOF TWARE PVT. LTD., IT IS SEEN THE SAID COMPANY HAS INVESTED RS.7,00,0001- IN THE APPELLANT COMPANY FOR WHICH THROUGH WHOM SHARE APPLICATION MONEY WAS RECE IVED. THE APPELLANT ALSO FILED COPIES OF THE SHARE APPLICATION FORM BEFORE A SSESSING OFFICER AND DETAILS OF THE SHARE ALLOTMENT AND FORM NO.2 FILED WITH ROC WI TH REFERENCE TO ALLOTMENT OF SHARES. THE AR SUBMITTED THAT ASSESSING OFFICER DID NOT CAL L FOR ANY INFORMATION FROM THE SAID FOUR PARTIES AND NO SUMMONS ULS 131 W ERE ISSUED. THE APPELLANT HAS FULLY ESTABLISHED THE NATURE OF THE ENTRIES AND FUR NISHED EVIDENCE IN SUPPORT OF THE SHARE APPLICATION MONEY RECEIVED. DESPITE THESE FAC TS, THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS MADE ADDITION IN RESPECT OF ALL THE SHARE APPLICATI ON MONEY RECEIVED DURING THE YEAR. ALL THESE COMPANIES HAVE SUBMITTED CONFIRMATION, TO WHOMSOEVER IT MAY CONCERN, RECEIPT OF THE SHARE APPLICATION MONEY, CO PIES OF THE BANK STATEMENTS WHEREFROM MONEY WAS RECEIVED BY THE APPELLANT, COPI ES OF THE RETURN OF INCOME FILED BY ALL THE COMPANIES WITH THE DEPARTMENT, COP IES OF THE BALANCE SHEET OF THE COMPANIES TO PROVE THE IDENTITY, CREDITWORTHINE SS AND GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTION. ON GOING THROUGH THE DETAILS FILED BY ZENITH AUTOMO TIVE PVT. LTD., IT IS SEEN THAT THIS COMPANY IS ASSESSED TO TAX AND HAS FILED ITS RETURN OF INCOME FOR AY. 11 2010-11 AND THE MONEY HAS BEEN RECEIVED FROM AXIS B ANK LTD., RAJENDER NAGAR WEST DELHI BRANCH ON 2204.2009. ON GOING THROUGH TH E BALANCE SHEET OF THE SAID COMPANY, IT IS S EN THAT THIS COMPANY HAS GOT SHARE CAPITAL OF RS.1,81,87,000/- AND RESERVE AND SURPLUS OF RS.15,1 5,60,000/- AS ON 31.03.2010. IT HAS SHOWN INVESTMENT OF RS.16,34,00, 000/- IN THE BALANCE SHEET AT SL. NO.3 IN WHICH THE APPELLANT COMPANY'S NAME A LSO APPEARS. ON VERIFICATION OF THE DETAILS FILED BY MIS MEGA TO P PROMOTERS PVT. LTD., IT IS SEEN THAT THIS COMPANY HAS FILED COPY OF RETURN OF INCOME FILED BY IT FOR AY 2010-11, CONFIRMATION OF THE SHARE APPLICATION MONE Y, COPY OF THE BANK STATEMENT OF THE SAID COMPANY WITH AXIS BANK LTD , RAJENDER NAGAR WEST DELHI BRANCH WHEREFROM MONEY OF RS.7,00,000/- WAS GIVEN O N 22.04.2009 TO THE APPELLANT COMPANY. IT IS ALSO SEEN FROM THE BALANCE SHEET OF THE INVESTOR COMPANY THAT THIS COMPANY HAS GOT SHARE CAPITAL OF RS 1.85.00.000/- AND RESERVE AND SURPLUS OF RS.14,76,41 ,809/-. I HAS SH OWN INVESTMENTS OF RS.11,69,50,000/- AS PER SCHEDULE 3 OF THE BALANCE SHEET IN THE SCHEDULE 3 NAME OF THE APPELLANT COMPANY APPEARS AS INVESTED C OMPANY. ON VERIFICATION OF THE DETAILS FILED BY VICTORY SOF TWARE PVT. LTD., IT IS SEEN TH THE SAID COMPANY HAS INVESTED RS.7,00,000/- IN THE APPELLANT COMPANY FOR WHICH HAS FILED CONFIRMATION COPY OF THE RETURN INC OME FILED FOR AY. 2010-11, COPY OF THE AXIS BANK STATEMENT, RAI.ENDER NAGAR WE ST DELHI BRANCH WHEREFROM 12 MONEY OF RS.7,OO,000/- WAS GIVEN ON 22.04.2009. IT IS ALSO SEEN THAT THIS COMPANY HAS GOT A SHARE CAPITAL OF RS.1,92,32,0001- IN ITS BALANCE SHEET AND HAS GOT RESERVE AND SURPLUS OF RS.17,22,26,886/-. I T HAS SHOWN INVESTMENT IN SCHEDULE 3 OF RS.18,70,00,500/- IN ITS BALANCE SHEE T. ON GOING THROUGH SCHEDULE 3, IT IS SEEN THAT APPELLANT COMPANY HAS S HOWN INVESTMENT OF RS.7,OO,000/- IN SHARE APPLICATION MONEY. ON VERIFICATION OF THE DETAILS FILED BY TRIMURTI VI NMAY PVT LTD., IT IS SEEN THAT THIS COMPANY HAS FILED COPY OF SHARE APPLICATION FO RM, CONFIRMATION, RETURN OF INCOME FILED BY THE SAID COMPANY FOR A Y. 2010-11, COPY OF THE BANK STATEMENT MAINTAINED WITH ING VYSYA BANK LTD. WHEREFROM THE MONEY WAS DEBITED ON 22.04.2009 OF RS.5,00,000/-, ON VERIFICATION OF THE BALANCE SHEET OF THE SAID COMPANY IT IS SEEN THAT IT HAS GOT SHARE CAPITAL OF RS. 75,38,150/-, RESERVE AND SURPLUS OF RS.14,13,60,265/-. IT HAS SHOWN INVESTME NT OF RS.7,73,15,750/- VIDE SCHEDULE 4 OF THE BALANCE SHEET. ON VERIFICATION OF THE DETAILS FILED BY M/S SHRI S HYAM INFRATECH PVT. LTD, IT IS SEEN THAT THIS COMPANY HAS FILED COPY OF SHARE A PPLICATION FORM, CONFIRMATION, COPY AT RETURN OF INCOME FOR A Y. 2010-11, COPY OF BANK ACCOUNT MAINTAINED WITH KOTAK MAHINDRA BANK, SALT LAKE BRANCH WHEREFROM TH E MONEY OF RS.5,00,000/- WAS TRANSFERRED ON 21.04.2009. ON VER IFICATION OF THE BALANCE SHEET OF THE SAID COMPANY, IT IS SEEN THAT THIS COM PANY HAS GOT SHARE CAPITAL OF 13 RS.1 0,52,500/- AND RESERVE AND SURPLUS OF RS.1,82, 13,865/-. IT HAS SHOWN INVESTMENT OF RS.1,87,OO,OOO/- IN ITS BALANCE SHEET . ON VERIFICATION OF THE DETAILS FILED BY M/S TRUSTWO RTHY VINIYOG PVT. LTD., IT IS SEEN THAT IT HAS FILED COPY OF SHARE APPLICATION FORM, ~PY OF CONFIRMATION, COPY OF THE RETURN OF INCOME FILED BY IT FOR A.Y. 2010-1 1 AND COPY OF THE BANK STATEMENT MAINTAINED WITH ING VYSYA BANK WHEREFROM MONEY OF RS.5,00,OOO/- WAS RECEIVED BY THE APPELLANT COMPANY ON 22.04.2009. ON GOING THROUGH THE BALANCE SHEET OF THE SAID COMPANY IT IS SEEN THAT THIS COMPANY HAS GOT SHARE CAPITAL OF RS. 73,88,100/- AND RESERV E AND SURPLUS OF RS.13,85,15,456/-. IT HAS SHOWN INVESTMENT OF RS.6, 81,500/- IN ITS BALANCE SHEET AT SCHEDULE 4. ON VERIFICATION OF DETAILS FILED BY M/S DEENBANDH U SUPPLIERS PVT. LTD, IT IS SEEN THAT THIS COMPANY HAS FILED COPY OF SHARE APPL ICATION FORM, CONFIRMATION, COPY OF THE RETURN OF INCOME FOR AY. 2010-11 FILED WITH THE DEPARTMENT, COPY OF THE BANK STATEMENT MAINTAINED WITH ING VYSYA BANK, KKT STREET BRANCH, KOLKATA WHEREFROM THE MONEY OF RS5,00,0001- WAS TRANSFERRED TO APPELLANT'S ACCOUNT ON 29.05.2009. ON VERIFICATION OF THE BALANCE SHEET OF THE SAID COMPANY IT IS SEEN THAT IT HAS GOT SHARE CAPITAL OF RS.33,24,250/ - AND RESERVE AND SURPLUS OF RS.6,13,08,639/- IN ITS BALANCE SHEET. IT HAS SHOWN INVESTMENT OF RS. 14 4,81,50,000/- IN ITS BALANCE SHEET WHICH INCLUDES T HE INVESTMENT OF RS.5,00,OOO/- MADE IN THE APPELLANT COMPANY. ON THE BASIS OF ABOVE OBSERVATION, IT CAN BE SAID T HAT THESE INVESTOR COMPANIES HAVE GOT THEIR BANK ACCOUNT, WHEREFROM TH E MONEY WAS PAID TO THE APPELLANT COMPANY AS SHARE APPLICATION MONEY AND SU CH INVESTMENTS ARE REFLECTED IN THEIR BALANCE SHEETS. IT IS ALSO SEEN THAT THESE COMPANIES HAVE NOT ONLY INVESTED IN THE APPELLANT COMPANY BUT THEY HAV E ALSO INVESTED IN THE SHARES OF OTHER COMPANIES AND SUCH INVESTMENTS ARE REFLECT ED IN THEIR BALANCE SHEETS. THE INVESTMENTS HAVE BEEN MADE OUT OF THE AUTHORIZE D SHARE CAPITAL OR LOAN RECEIVED BY THESE COMPANIES FROM OTHER COMPANIES. T HE TRANSACTIONS HAVE BEEN DONE THROUGH ACCOUNT PAYEE CHEQUE AND / OR PAY ORDE R ISSUED FROM THE BANK ACCOUNTS OF THE INVESTOR COMPANIES OR THROUGH RTGS. THEREFORE, THE OBSERVATIONS OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER THAT THE IDENTITY, CAPACIT Y TO ADVANCE MONEY AND GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTIONS WAS NOT PROVED BY T HE APPELLANT IS NOT BASED ON THE PROPER APPRECIATIONS OF THE FACTS. ON THE BASIS OF DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED BY THE APPELLANT DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCE EDINGS, IT CAN SAFELY BE SAID THAT IDENTITY OF THE INVESTOR COMPANIES, CAPACITY T O ADVANCE MONEY FOR SHARE APPLICATION AND GENUINENESS OF TRANSACTIONS HAVE BE EN ESTABLISHED AND SUCH COMPANIES HAVE FILED THEIR RETURN OF INCOME WITH TH E DEPARTMENT THEREFORE, THE 15 OBSERVATIONS MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER ARE NOT SUPPORTED BY ANY ADVERSE EVIDENCE. IT IS SEEN THAT APPELLANT COMPANY HAS FILED SOURCE TO PROVE TILE GENUINENESS OF THE FUNDS INVESTED IN THE SHARES OF THE APPELLANT COMPANY. THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAD NO INFORMATION ABOUT THE ACCO MMODATION ENTRY ALLEGED TO HAVE BEEN RECEIVED BY THE APPELLANT. THERE IS NO ST ATEMENT WITH REFERENCE TO THESE COMPANIES THAT THEY WERE PROVIDING ACCOMMODAT ION ENTRIES. THERE WAS NO CASH DEPOSIT FOUND IN THE BANK ACCOUNTS OF THESE CO MPANIES. THEREFORE, THE ADDITION MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER ON THE BASI S OF SIMPLY A LETTER RECEIVED FROM INVESTIGATION WING CANNOT BE TREATED AS ACCOMM ODATION ENTRY AND THE ADDITION CANNOT BE SUSTAINED ON THE BASIS OF SUCH L ETTER WITHOUT BRINGING ADVERSE MATERIALS ON RECORDS. THE APPELLANT HAS FURNISHED A LL NECESSARY DOCUMENTS TO PROVE THE GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTIONS AND CREDI TWORTHINESS OF THE INVESTOR COMPANY BEFORE ASSESSING OFFICER. HENCE, THE ADDITI ON MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER ULS 68 OF THE I.T. ACT OF RS. 4O,OO,OOO/- I S DELETED. THE APPELLANT HAS RELIED UPON FOLLOWING JUDICIAL PR ONOUNCEMENTS IN SUPPORT OF ITS CONTENTION WHEREIN THE SHARE APPLICA TION MONEY HAS BEEN HELD TO BE GENUINE WHEREIN IT IS HELD THAT IF THE APPELLANT HAS FILED COPY OF THE CONFIRMATIONS, BANK STATEMENTS, COPY OF THE RETURN OF INCOME OF THE INVESTOR COMPANIES THEN IN SUCH CASES SHARE APPLICATION MONE Y RECEIVED IS FOUND TO BE 16 GENUINE AND NO ADDITION CAN BE MADE IN THE CASE OF RECIPIENT OF SHARE APPLICATION MONEY: (A) ITO VS. NEELKANTH FINBUILD LTD. ITA NO. 2821/0 EL/2009 DATED 01/4/2015 IT WAS HELD 'ONCE THE IDENTITY OF SHAREHOLDERS HAVE BEEN ESTABLISHED IT CANNOT BE ADDED IN THE HANDS OF COMPANY UNLESS ANY ADVERSE EVIDENCE ON RECORD. SOURCE OF SOURCE CANNOT BE ENQUIRED FROM ASSESSEE. ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE OTHER THAN INFORMATION RECEIVED FROM INVESTIGATION WING MUST BE BROUGHT ON RECORD BY ASSESSING OFFICER .' IN THIS CASE THE APPELLANT HAS ESTABLISHED THE IDEN TITY, CREDITWORTHINESS AND GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTIONS BY FILING NECES SARY DOCUMENTS BEFORE THE AO AS WELL AS BEFORE ME, THEREFORE, THE RATIO OF TH E ABOVE JUDGMENT IS SQUARELY APPLICABLE TO THE FACTS OF THE APPELLANT'S CASE AND THE ADDITION MADE ON ACCOUNT OF SHARE APPLICATION MONEY CANNOT BE SUSTAINED. (B) ITAT DELHI, ITO V . N.C. CABLES LTD. ITA NO. 41 22/0ELL2009 DATED 2210.2014 IT WAS HELD 'ARGUMENTS AND EVIDENCES PROVIDED BY AS SESSEE TO SUBSTANTIATE TRANSACTION ARE GENUINE. AO DID NOT FI ND ANY EVIDENCE AND 17 HAD NOT GIVEN ANY BASIS. NO DETAIL OF INVESTIGATION DONE BY INVESTIGATION WING WAS BROUGHT ON RECORD'. IN THE CASE OF APPELLANT NO EVIDENCES HAS BEEN BROU GHT ON RECORD BY THE AO TO PROVE THAT SHARE APPLICATION MONEY RECEIVED B Y THE APPELLANT WAS ACCOMMODATION ENTRY. ON THE CONTRARY THE APPELLANT HAS FILED THE COPIES OF THE BALANCE SHEET, COPIES OF THE RETURN OF INCOME FILED , CONFIRMATION OF THE TRANSACTIONS WITH THE APPELLANT COMPANY AND COPIES OF THE BANK STATEMENT WHEREFROM THE MONEY WAS RECEIVED BY THE APPELLANT. THE AO HAS NOT BROUGHT ANY ADVERSE INFORMATION ON RECORD TO PROVE IT OTHER WISE, THEREFORE, THE RATIO OF THIS JUDGMENT IS FULLY APPLICABLE TO THE APPELLANT' S CASE AND THE ADDITION MADE ON ACCOUNT OF SHARE APPLICATION MONEY RECEIVED WAS NOT JUSTIFIED, THEREFORE, THE SAME IS DELETED (C) ITAT DELHI, ITO V. RAKAM MONEY MATTERS P. LTD. ITA NO.2821/DE1/2011 DATED 16.10.2014 IT WAS HELD' ALL THE DOCUMENTS IN RESPECT OF SHAREH OLDERS WERE FILED AO HAD NO EVIDENCE EXCEPT THE STATEMENT OF THIRD PARTI ES RECORDED BY THE INVESTIGATION' IN THE CASE OF APPELLANT ALSO ALL DOCUMENTS IN RESP ECT OF SHAREHOLDERS WERE FILED BEFORE THE AO BY THE APPELLANT AS WELL A S THE INVESTORS IN RESPONSE TO 18 NOTICE U/S 133(6), THEREFORE, THE RATIO OF THIS JU DGMENT IS SQUARELY APPLICABLE IN THE CASE OF APPELLANT D) HIGH COURT OF DELHI, CIT V. KAMDHENU STEEL AND ALLOYS LTD. REPORTED AT 19TAXRNANN.CORN 26 (2012) (DELHI) IT WAS HELD 'WHERE ASSESSEE HAD GIVEN PARTICULARS O F REGISTRATION OF INVESTING / APPLICANT COMPANIES, CONFIRMATION FROM SHARE APPLICANTS; BANK ACCOUNT DETAILS; AND HAD SHOWN PAYMENT THROUGH ACCO UNT PAYEE CHEQUES ETC., IT COULD BE SAID THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD DISCHARGES I TS INITIAL ONUS AND JUST BECAUSE SOME OF CREDITORS I SHARE APPLICANTS COULD NOT BE F OUND AT ADDRESS GIVEN, IT WOULD NOT GIVE REVENUE A RIGHT TO INVOKE SECTION 68 WITHOUT ANY ADDITIONAL MATERIAL TO SUPPORT SUCH A MOVE'. IN THE CASE OF APPELLANT ALSO PARTICULARS OF SHARE APPLICANT COMPANIES LIKE BALANCE SHEET, CONFIRMATION, BANK STATEMENT, COPY O F THE RETURN OF INCOME WERE FILED, THEREFORE, THE APPELLANT HAS DISCHARGED ITS ONUS. HENCE, RATIO OF THIS JUDGMENT IS SQUARE APPLICABLE IN THE CASE OF APPELL ANT. E) ITAT CHANDIGARH, ACIT V. KISCO CASTINGS PVT. LTD . REPORTED AT 34 TAXRNANN.CORN 37 (COPY ENCLOSED) (PAGES 132/144). 19 IT WAS HELD WHERE ASSESSING OFFICER HAD FAILED TO BRING ON RECORD ANY RELEVANT AND CREDIBLE MATERIAL TO NEUTRALIZE DOCUME NTARY EVIDENCES FILED BY ASSESSEE, IMPUGNED ADDITION WAS TO BE DELETED' IN THE CASE OF APPELLANT ALSO THE ASSESSING OFFIC ER HAS FAILED TO BRING ANY CREDIBLE EVIDENCE ON RECORD TO NEUTRALIZE THE EVIDE NCES FILED BY THE APPELLANT, THEREFORE, THE ADDITION CANNOT BE SUSTAINED AND RAT IO OF THE SAID JUDGMENT IS SQUARELY APPLICABLE IN THE CASE OF APPELLANT F) CIT VS. FAIR FINVEST LTD. [2014) 44 TAXMANN.COM 356 (DELHI) HIGH COURT OF DELHI 'SECTION 68 OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961 - CASH CRED IT - ASSESSMENT YEAR 2002-03 - WHERE ASSESSEE HAD FILED DOCUMENTS INCLUD ING CERTIFIED COPIES ISSUED BY REGISTRAR OF COMPANIES IN RELATION TO SHA RE APPLICATION AND AFFIDAVITS OF DIRECTORS, ASSESSING OFFICER COULD NO T MAKE ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF SHARE APPLICATION MONEY SOLELY ON BASIS OF INVESTIGATION REPORT [IN FAVOUR OF ASSESSEE} WHERE ASSESSEE ADDUCES EVIDENCE IN SUPPORT OF SHARE APPLICATION MONIES, IT IS OPEN TO ASSESSING OFFICER TO EXAMINE IT AND REJECT IT ON TENABLE GROUNDS. IN CASE HE WISHES TO RELY ON REPORT OF INV ESTIGATION AUTHORITIES, SOME 20 MEANINGFUL ENQUIRY OUGHT TO BE CONDUCTED BY HIM TO ESTABLISH A LINK BETWEEN ASSESSEE AND ALLEGED HAWALA OPERATORS. WHERE ASSESSEE HAD FILED DOCUMENTS INCLUDING CERTIF IED COPIES ISSUED BY REGISTRAR OF COMPANIES IN RELATION TO SHARE APPLICA TION, AFFIDAVITS OF DIRECTORS, FORM 2 FILED WITH REGISTRAR OF COMPANIES BY SUCH APPLICANTS, CONFIRMATIONS BY APPLICANTS FOR COMPANY'S SHARES, C ERTIFICATES BY AUDITORS, ETC, ASSESSING OFFICER WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN MAKING ADDITION UNDER SECTION 68 ON ACCOUNT OF SHARE APPLICATION MONEY MERELY ON GENERAL INFERENCE TO BE DRAWN FROM THE READING OF THE INVESTIGATION REPO RT THE LEAST THAT ASSESSING OFFICER OUGHT TO HAVE DONE WAS TO ENQUIRE INTO MATTER BY, IF NECESSARY, INVOKING HIS POWERS UNDER SECTION 131 SU MMONING THE SHARE APPLICANTS OR DIRECTORS. IN THE CASE OF APPELLANT A LSO THE APPELLANT HAS FILED CONFIRMATION OF TRANSACTIONS OF SHARE APPLICA TION MONEY, COPIES OF THE BALANCE SHEETS, COPY OF SHARE APPLICATION MONEY TO PROVE THE GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTIONS. ON THE OTHER HAND THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS NOT BROUGHT ANY CREDIBLE EVIDENCE TO CONTRADICT THE INFORMATION FILED BY THE APPELLANT, THEREFORE, THE RATIO OF THIS JUDG MENT IS SQUARELY APPLICABLE TO THE FACTS OF THE APPELLANT'S CASE G) COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX V. EXPO GLOBE INDIA LTD. [2014] 51 TAXMANN.COM 208 (DELHI) HIGH COURT OF DELHI 21 'SECTION 68 OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961 - CASH CRED ITS (SHARE 'APPLICATION MONEY) - ASSESSMENT YEAR 2000-01 - ASSESSEE RECEIVE D SHARE APPLICATION MONEY DURING RELEVANT ASSESSMENT YEAR - ASSESSING O FFICER HELD THAT ASSESSEE HAD NOT GIVEN SATISFACTORY EXPLANATION AND INCLUDED ENTIRE AMOUNT UNDER SECTION 68 - ON APPEAL, ASSESSEE FURNISHED INCOME-TAX RETUR NS, BALANCE SHEETS, ROC PARTICULARS AND BANK ACCOUNT STATEMENTS OF SHAREHOL DERS COMMISSIONER (APPEALS) CONSIDERING SAID MATERIALS HELD THAT SHAR E APPLICATION MONEY OR SOURCE OF SHARE APPLICATION MONEY HAD BEEN SATISFACTORILY EXPLAINED AND DELETED ADDITION - TRIBUNAL CONFIRMED ORDER OF COMMISSIONER (APPEALS) - WHETHER ENTIRE ISSUE BEING PURELY FACTUAL, NO INTERFERENCE WAS CAL LED FOR WITH TRIBUNAL'S ORDER - HELD, YES [PARA 7] [IN FAVOUR OF ASSESSEE) IN THE CASE OF APPELLANT THE APPELLANT HAS FURNISHE D INCOME-TAX RETURNS, BALANCE SHEETS, ROC PARTICULARS AND BANK ACCOUNT ST ATEMENTS OF SHAREHOLDERS AND SHARE APPLICATION MONEY AND SOURCE OF SHARE APP LICATION MONEY HAD BEEN SATISFACTORILY EXPLAINED AND ADDITION HAS BEEN DELE TED. THE RATIO OF THE ABOVE JUDGMENT IS SQUARELY APPLICABLE TO THE APPELLANT'S CASE. THE APPELLANT HAS ALSO RELIED UPON THE DELHI HIGH C OURT JUDGMENT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. VICTOR ELECTRODES LTD. 329 ITR 271 TO SUBMIT THAT MERELY BECAUSE APPELLANT FAILS TO PRODUCE THE DIRECTORS OF THE SHA RE APPLICANT COMPANIES THE SAME CANNOT BE GROUND FOR MAKING ADDITION IN RESPEC T OF SHARE CAPITAL. 22 IN VIEW OF THE DISCUSSION MADE ABOVE AND VARIOUS JU DICIAL PRONOUNCEMENTS CITED ABOVE ON THE ISSUE, IT IS HELD THAT APPELLANT HAS RECEIVED SHARE APPLICATION MONEY FROM M/S ZENITH AUTOMOTIVE PVT. LTD, M/S MEGA TOP PROMOTERS PVT. LTD, M/S VICTORY SOFTWARE PVT. LTD., M/S TRIMURTY VINIMA Y PVT. L.TD., M/S SHYAM INFRATECH PVT. LTD., M/S TRUSTWORTHY VINIYOG PVT. L TD., MIS DESHBANDHU SUPPLIERS PVT. LTD. THEREFORE, THE FINDING GIVEN BY THE AO TH AT THESE WERE ACCOMMODATION ENTRIES AND APPELLANT HAD INVESTED ITS OWN MONEY WA S NOT BASED ON ANY MATERIAL FACT AVAILABLE ON RECORD AND SAME WAS NOT JUSTIFIED. HENCE, THE ADDITION MADE BY THE AO OF RS. 4O,OO,OOO/- ON ACCOU NT OF SHARE APPLICATION MONEY IS DELETED. 5.1 ON GOING THROUGH THE AFORESAID FINDING OF THE L D. CIT(A), I FIND THAT ASSESSEE COMPANY HAS FILED SOURCE TO PROVE THE GENU INENESS OF THE FUNDS INVESTED IN THE SHARES OF THE ASSESSEE COMPANY. THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAD NO INFORMATION ABOUT THE ACCOMMODATION ENTRY ALLEGED T O HAVE BEEN RECEIVED BY THE APPELLANT. THERE IS NO STATEMENT WITH REFERENCE TO THESE COMPANIES THAT THEY WERE PROVIDING ACCOMMODATION ENTRIES. THERE WAS NO CASH DEPOSIT FOUND IN THE BANK ACCOUNTS OF THESE COMPANIES. THEREFORE, THE AD DITION MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER ON THE BASIS OF SIMPLY A LETTER R ECEIVED FROM INVESTIGATION WING CANNOT BE TREATED AS ACCOMMODATION ENTRY AND THE AD DITION CANNOT BE SUSTAINED ON THE BASIS OF SUCH LETTER WITHOUT BRING ING ADVERSE MATERIALS ON 23 RECORDS. THE ASSESSEE HAS FURNISHED ALL NECESSARY D OCUMENTS TO PROVE THE GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTIONS AND CREDITWORTHINES S OF THE INVESTOR COMPANY BEFORE ASSESSING OFFICER. HENCE, THE ADDITION MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER ULS 68 OF THE I.T. ACT OF RS. 4O,OO,OOO/- WAS RIGHTLY DELETED BY THE LD. CIT(A). I FURTHER FIND THAT DURING THE APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS, THE ASSESSEE HAS RELIED UPON VARIOUS JUDICIAL PRONOUNCEMENTS IN SUPPORT OF ITS C ONTENTION AS MENTIONED IN THE IMPUGNED ORDER WHEREIN THE SHARE APPLICATION MONEY HAS BEEN HELD TO BE GENUINE WHEREIN IT IS HELD THAT IF THE APPELLANT HA S FILED COPY OF THE CONFIRMATIONS, BANK STATEMENTS, COPY OF THE RETURN OF INCOME OF THE INVESTOR COMPANIES THEN IN SUCH CASES SHARE APPLICATION MONE Y RECEIVED IS FOUND TO BE GENUINE AND NO ADDITION CAN BE MADE IN THE CASE OF RECIPIENT OF SHARE APPLICATION MONEY. I FURTHER FIND THAT ASSESSEE H AS FILED CONFIRMATION OF THE TRANSACTIONS OF SHARE APPLICATION MONEY, COPIES OF THE BALANCE SHEETS, COPY OF SHARE APPLICATION MONEY TO PROVE THE GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTIONS. HOWEVER, ON THE OTHER HAND, THE AO HAS NOT BROUGHT ANY CREDIBLE EVIDENCE TO CONTRADICT THE INFORMATION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE, T HEREFORE, THE ISSUE IN DISPUTE IS SQUARELY COVERED BY THE FOLLOWING CASES OF WHICH TH E LD. CIT(A) DISCUSSED IN HIS IMPUGNED ORDER : (A) ITO VS. NEELKANTH FINBUILD LTD. ITA NO. 2821/ 0EL/2009 DATED 01/4/2015 24 (B) ITAT DELHI, ITO V . N.C. CABLES LTD. ITA NO. 41 22/0ELL2009 DATED 2210.2014 (C) ITAT DELHI, ITO V. RAKAM MONEY MATTERS P. LTD. ITA NO.2821/DE1/2011 DATED 16.10.2014 D) HIGH COURT OF DELHI, CIT V. KAMDHENU STEEL AND ALLOYS LTD. REPORTED AT 19TAXRNANN.CORN 26 (2012) (DELHI) E) ITAT CHANDIGARH, ACIT V. KISCO CASTINGS PVT. LTD . REPORTED AT 34 TAXRNANN.CORN 37 (COPY ENCLOSED) (PAGES 132/144). F) CIT VS. FAIR FINVEST LTD. [2014) 44 TAXMANN.COM 356 (DELHI) HIGH COURT OF DELHI G) COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX V. EXPO GLOBE INDIA LTD. [2014] 51 TAXMANN.COM 208 (DELHI) HIGH COURT OF DELHI 5.2 I FURTHER NOTE THAT LD. CIT(A) IN VIEW OF THE A BOVE RIGHTLY HELD THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS RECEIVED SHARE APPLICATION MONEY FROM M/S ZENITH AUTOMOTIVE PVT. LTD, M/S MEGA TOP PROMOTERS PVT. LTD, M/S VICT ORY SOFTWARE PVT. LTD., M/S TRIMURTY VINIMAY PVT. L.TD., M/S SHYAM INFRATECH PV T. LTD., M/S TRUSTWORTHY VINIYOG PVT. LTD., MIS DESHBANDHU SUPPLIERS PVT. LT D, HENCE, THE FINDING GIVEN BY THE AO THAT THESE WERE ACCOMMODATION ENTRIES AND AS ESSEE HAD INVESTED ITS OWN MONEY WAS NOT BASED ON ANY MATERIAL FACT AVAILA BLE ON RECORD AND SAME 25 WAS NOT JUSTIFIED. HENCE, THE ADDITION OF RS. 4O,OO ,OOO/- WAS DELETED ON ACCOUNT OF SHARE APPLICATION MONEY, WHICH DOES NOT NEED ANY INTERFERENCE ON MY PART, HENCE, I UPHOLD THE SAME. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE S TANDS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 03/1/2017. SD- ( (( (H.S. SIDHU H.S. SIDHU H.S. SIDHU H.S. SIDHU] ]] ] JUDICIAL JUDICIAL JUDICIAL JUDICIAL MEMBER MEMBER MEMBER MEMBER DATE 03/1/2017 SRBHATNAGAR SRBHATNAGAR SRBHATNAGAR SRBHATNAGAR COPY FORWARDED TO: COPY FORWARDED TO: COPY FORWARDED TO: COPY FORWARDED TO: - -- - 1. APPELLANT - 2. RESPONDENT - 3. CIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR, ITAT TRUE COPY BY ORDER, ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, ITAT, DELHI BENCHES 26