UTSAV COMMERCIAL PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER-WARD-11(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2586/KOL/2013Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 December 2015AY 2007-20082 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal set aside the orders of the lower authorities and remitted the matter back to the AO for fresh adjudication. This was based on the assessee's submission that the evidence was not properly considered and the concurrence of the Revenue's representative.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal concerns an addition of Rs. 9.88 lacs made by the AO on account of unexplained share application money under Section 68. The assessee contended that the lower authorities failed to examine the creditworthiness, genuineness, and identity of the share applicants despite submissions of relevant details.

What were the issues?

Whether the addition on account of unexplained share application money was justified without proper examination of the creditworthiness, genuineness, and identity of the investors.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 68

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

This appeal by assessee is arising out of order of CIT(A)-XII, Kolkata in Appeal No.728/XII/11(2)/09-10 dated 09.07.2012. Assessment was framed by ITO, Ward-11(2), Kolkata, u/s. 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act”) for AY 2007-08 vide its order dated 30.12.2009.

2.

The only issue in this appeal of assessee is against the order of CIT(A) confirming the action of AO in making addition of Rs.9.88 lacs on account of unexplained share application u/s. 68 of the Act.

3.

At the outset, Ld. Counsel for the assessee stated that neither the AO nor CIT(A) has gone into the creditworthiness, genuineness of transaction and identity of the parties despite the fact that all details were filed before the lower authorities. Ld. Counsel for the assessee referred to the findings of CIT(A) at page 3 of his order and also the findings of the AO and stated that despite specific information relating to the share applications were filed before both the authorities below but none of the authorities have deliberated on the same. In view of this, ld. Counsel for the assessee argued that the issue can be remitted back to the file of the AO for fresh examination and the evidence which are already available before the AO. On query from the bench, ld. Sr. DR did not controvert the statement of the Ld. Counsel for the assessee and concurred with the proposal of the Ld. Counsel that the issue can be remitted to the file of the AO for fresh adjudication. Accordingly, I set aside the orders of the lower authorities and remit the matter back to the file of the AO for fresh adjudication as per law. Appeal of assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

4.

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

5.

Order is pronounced in the open court. Sd/-(Mahavir Singh) Judicial Member Dated : 10th December, 2015 Jd. Sr. P.S

2 Utsab Commercial Pvt. Ltd. AY 2007-08 Copy of the order forwarded to: APPELLANT – Utsab Commercial Pvt. Ltd., C/o, D.J. Shah & Co., Kalyan 1. Bhavan, 2, Elgin Road, Kolkata-700 020 Respondent – ITO, Ward-11(2), Kolkata. 2 The CIT(A), Kolkata 3. 4. CIT Kolkata 5. DR, Kolkata Benches, Kolkata /True Copy, By order,

More judgments on Section 68

All 29,931 judgments and leading authorities on Section 68 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →