CIT vs. PREMIER AUTOMOTIVE PVT LTD

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI . 10.12.2010 . Present: Ms. Sonia Mathur, Advocate for the appellant/Revenue. . . + ITA 1989/2010 and CM APPL. 22179/2010 . The Assessing Officer made an addition of ` 15,55,400/- to the income of the respondent assessee herein under section 68 of the Income-Tax Act. It was on account of the share application money received by the assessee from various parties and as per the Assessing Officer, the respondent assessee was not able to give requisite proof of identification of those parties and/or their capacity to invest. Out of the aforesaid amount, a sum of ` 2 lacs was invested as share application money by one M/s Victoria Advertising Pvt. Ltd. Other amount of Rs. 13.55 lacs were from various other parties. The assessee preferred an appeal their against before the CIT (A). The CIT (A) sustained the additions of Rs. 2 lacs which represented the share application money allegedly received from M/s Victoria Advertising Pvt. Ltd. on the ground that the assessee was not able to satisfactory explain that source. However, in so far as other additions are concerned, the CIT(A) deleted those additions after satisfying itself that requisite documents establishing their identity and also receipt of payment from those parties were produced by the assessee. The ITAT has sustained the aforesaid order of the CIT (A). We find from the order of the CIT (A) that the share application money received from each and every party has been discussed in detail and on that basis, it is held that the money was actually received from those parties. The documents which are scanned through and examined by the CIT (A) in this behalf are the requisite details of share application, dates of receipts of those applications, mode of payments and even the confirmation from the share applicants. Their bank statements for the relevant period alongwith details of the share application money received, indicating the name, addresses, cheque numbers, drawee bank particulars and the amount of share application money received from respective applicants were filed by the assessee which were examined by the CIT (A) in detail and also by the ITAT. The findings of fact recorded by these two authorities, therefore, are without any blemish. These authorities have rightly deleted the addition. The case is now squarely covered by a judgment of Supreme Court in the case of Lovely Export, 216, CTR 115. . . Thus we are of the opinion that no question of law arises. This appeal is accordingly dismissed. . A.K. SIKRI, J. . INDERMEET KAUR, J. DECEMBER 10, 2010 skb . 33#