MG PORTFOLIO PVT LTD

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI . . . ITA 1265/2011 . . . MG PORTFOLIO PVT LTD .... Appellant . Through: Mr.Satyen Sethi, Adv. . . . versus . . . CIT ..... Respondent . Through: Mr.Kiran Babu, Sr. Standing Counsel . . . CORAM: . HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA . HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.V.EASWAR . . . O R D E R . 02.12.2011 . . . 1. Learned counsel for the appellant-company has raised two contentions. Firstly, the assessment proceedings under Sections 147/148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 were initiated on the ground of mere suspicion and not for ?reasons to believe?. The Tribunal has rightly rejected the said contention observing that there was no regular assessment at the first instance. Secondly, in the reasons recorded it was stated that the assessee had received an entry of Rs.5,00,000/- on 25th March, 2008 from M/s. Shruti Finstock Ltd. It was further recorded that this amount represents assessee?s own undisclosed income which was . entered in the books of accounts. In these circumstances, there was sufficient prima-facie material to initiate assessment proceedings under Section 147/148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. . 2. Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the assessee was able to establish the identity, credit worthiness of the creditors and genuineness of the transaction, i.e., subscription of shares by M/s. Shruti Finstock Ltd. and Antriksha Securities Pvt. Ltd. from whom Rs.5,00,000/- and Rs.3,00,000/- respectively were received. Before the Assessing Officer, it was stated that there was change in the management and the registered office of the appellant-company was shifted in the assessement year 2003-04. The old records upto assessment year 2002- 03 were misplaced at the time of shifting of the registered office. The appellant-company had not submitted the required details before the Assessing Officer. . 3. Before the appellate authorities some details were submitted in the form of return of income, assessment order, balance sheets etc. of Shruti Finstock Ltd. In the case of M/s. Antriksha Securities Pvt. Ltd. it was stated that share capital, i.e., share certificates were issued to the said company and the said shares were subsequently transferred to others. . 4. The CIT (Appeals) and ITAT have examined the said contention and after examining the documents placed on record were of the opinion that the material did not show and prove genuineness of the transaction. No evidence adduced to show that M/s. Shruti Finstock Ktd. had applied for share capital or to establish the mode of payment of the share application money. It was further recorded that the balance sheets did not pertain to the relevant period. Similarly, with regard to M/s. Antriksha Securities Pvt. Ltd., no documentary evidence was adduced to show the genuineness or the manner/mode of payment of Rs.3,00,000/-. The findings recorded by the Tribunal are findings of fact which do not give rise to substantial question of law. . 5. The appeal is accordingly dismissed. . . . . . . . SANJIV KHANNA,J . . . . . R.V.EASWAR, J . DECEMBER 02, 2011 . vg . . . $ 50 .