SHREEJEE APPARELS P.LTD,NEW DELHI vs. INCOEM TAX OFFICE, NEW DELHI
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH: ‘SMC’ NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI BENCH: ‘SMC’ NEW DELHI
BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 706/Del/2022 Assessment Year: 2010-11
Shreejee Apparels P. Ltd., Vs. ITO, Ward-8(3), C/o. Viney Pandey & Co., Panipat. CAs, 215-A Second Floor, D-288/10, Wadhwa Complex, Near Laxmi Nagar Metro Station Gate No.1, Laxmi Nagar, New Delhi PAN :AABCS7435D (Appellant) (Respondent)
Appellant by Shri Sachin Jain, CA Respondent by Shri D.K. Shrivastav, Sr. DR
Date of hearing 27.03.2023 Date of pronouncement 31 .03.2023
ORDER This is an appeal by the assessee against order dated 12.06.2014
of learned Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals)-XI, New Delhi
pertaining to assessment year 2010-11.
2 ITA No.706/Del./2022
The dispute in the present appeal is confined to addition of
Rs.27,50,300 made under Section 68 of the Income-Tax Act,1961.
Briefly, the facts are, the assessee is a resident corporate entity.
For the assessment year under dispute, assessee filed its return of
income on 15.10.2010 declaring income of Rs.7,25,659.
In course of assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer,
while examining the audit report, noticed that in the year under
consideration, the assessee had received share capital amounting to
Rs.27,50,300 from M/s. Fressia Infratech Ltd. and unsecured loan
Rs.5,00,000 from a shareholder Shri Vinod Chhabra. Alleging that the
assessee could not furnish the bank statement of the concerned
person/entity, the Assessing Officer treated the amount of
Rs.32,50,300 as unexplained cash credit under Section 68 of the Act
and added to the income of the assessee. Assessee contested the
aforesaid addition before learned Commissioner (Appeals).
After considering the submissions of the assessee in the context
in the facts and material on record, learned Commissioner (Appeals)
deleted the addition and Rs.5,00,000, being unsecured loan from Shri
3 ITA No.706/Del./2022
Vinod Chhabra. Whereas, he upheld the addition of Rs.27,50,300
being share capital received from M/s. Fressia Infratech Ltd.
Before me, learned counsel appearing for the assessee submitted
that in course of assessment proceedings itself, the assessee had
requested the Assessing Officer to issue summons to M/s. Fressia
Infratex Ltd. as the concerned entity was not cooperating with the
assessee. He submitted, neither the Assessing Officer nor learned
Commissioner (Appeals) conducted any independent inquiry with
M/s. Fressia Infratech Ltd. and made the addition simply because the
assessee could not furnish the bank statement of the concerned entity .
He submitted, M/s. Fressia Infratech Ltd. is still active as per the
status available in Ministry of Corporate Affair’s record. He
submitted, the assessee had allotted shares to the concerned entity.
Thus, he submitted, a direction may be issued to the Assessing Officer
to conduct necessary inquiry with the concerned entity.
Learned Departmental Representative submitted, issue can be
restored back to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication.
I have considered rival submissions and perused the material
available on record.
4 ITA No.706/Del./2022
Undisputedly, the assessee had received the amount of
Rs.27,50,300 towards investment in share capital from M/s. Fressia
Infratech Ltd., it is observed from Form 23 filed by the assessee
before the Registrar of Companies (ROC), the assessee had issued
shares to M/s. Fressia Infratech Ltd. during the financial year 2010-11.
Further, from the MCA data filed in the paper books, it is observed
that the status of this company shown as active as on 31.03.2022, the
balance sheet date. It was further observed, in course of assessment
proceedings itself, the assessee had requested the Assessing Officer to
issue summons under Section 131 of the Act to the company as it was
not cooperating with the assessee. It appears, the Assessing Officer
has neither acceded to the request of the assessee nor has himself
conducted, even, preliminary inquiry by issuing notice under Section
133(6) of the Act. Merely because, the assessee was unable to produce
the bank statement of M/s. Fressia Infratech Ltd., for that reasoning
alone, the share capital cannot be added under Section 68 of the Act.
Since, the departmental authorities, particularly, the Assessing Officer
have failed to carry out the necessary inquiry, I deem it appropriate to
restore the issue to the Assessing Officer for fresh examination after
5 ITA No.706/Del./2022
conducting necessary inquiry with M/s. Fressia Infratech Ltd. with
regard to the investment made in share capital.
Needless to mention, before deciding the issue the Assessing
Officer must afford reasonable opportunity of being heard to the
assessee.
Grounds are allowed for statistical purposes.
In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 31stMarch, 2023.
Sd/- (SAKTIJIT DEY) JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 31st March, 2023. Mohan Lal
