Jai Durga Trade Link Pvt.Ltd., Ahmedabad v. The Income tax Officer,Ward-4(2),, Ahmedabad

ITA 75/AHD/2011 | 2007-2008
Pronouncement Date: 29-04-2015 | Result: Allowed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 7520514 RSA 2011
Assessee PAN AABCJ8005E
Bench Ahmedabad
Appeal Number ITA 75/AHD/2011
Duration Of Justice 4 year(s) 3 month(s) 17 day(s)
Appellant Jai Durga Trade Link Pvt.Ltd., Ahmedabad
Respondent The Income tax Officer,Ward-4(2),, Ahmedabad
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 29-04-2015
Appeal Filed By Assessee
Order Result Allowed
Bench Allotted C
Tribunal Order Date 29-04-2015
Date Of Final Hearing 07-04-2015
Next Hearing Date 07-04-2015
Assessment Year 2007-2008
Appeal Filed On 11-01-2011
Judgment Text
C IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL C BENCH AHMEDABAD 00 ! ' #$ % & BEFORE SHRI N.S. SAINI ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI KUL BHARAT JUDICIAL MEMBER !./ ITA NO. 75/AHD/2011 % ) *)/ ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2007-2008 JAI DURGA TRADE LINK PVT. LTD. 704 HARE KRISHNA COMPLEX OPP: KOTHAWALA FLATS PRITAM NAGAR ELLISBRIDGE AHMEDABAD. PAN : AABCJ 8005 E VS ITO WARD - 4(2) AHMEDABAD. + / (APPELLANT) -. + / (RESPONDENT) REVENUE BY : SHRI ASSEEM THAKKAR AR ASSESSEE(S) BY : SHRI M.K. SINGH SR.DR / DATE OF HEARING : 07/04/2015 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 29 /04/2015 // O R D E R PER N.S. SAINI ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX-VII AHMEDABAD DATED 02.11.2010. 2. THE SOLE GROUND OF APPEAL TAKEN BY THE ASSESSEE READS UNDER: 1. THE LD.CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ADDI TION MADE BY THE AO OF RS.32 50 000/- BEING AN AMOUNTS OF SHARE CAPITAL OF RS.6 50 000/- AND SHARE PREMIUM OF RS.26 00 000/- T REATING THE SAME AS ALLEGED UNEXPLAINED CASH CREDITS U/S.68 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT 1961. 3. BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT DURING THE COUR SE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS THE AO NOTICED THAT THE ASSESSEE-COMPA NY WAS ITA NO.75/AHD/2011 2 INCORPORATED ON 6.3.2007 AND SUBSEQUENTLY INTRODU CED SHARE CAPITAL OF RS.7 50 000/- AND SHARE PREMIUM OF RS.26 00 000/- I N THE MONTH OF MARCH 2007. THE SHARE CAPITAL AND SHARE PREMIUM C LAIMED TO HAVE BEEN INVESTED BY THE FOLLOWING PERSONS: NAME OF THE PERSON SHARE CAPITAL PREMIUM (A) SH PRAKASH S. BAGRECHA (DIRECTOR) RS.50 000/- NIL (B) SMT REETABEN J. PATEL (DIRECTOR) RS.50 000/- NIL (C) ANKUSH FINSTOCK LTD. RS.4 00 000/- RS.16 00 000/- (D) MARROT STOCK HOLDING (P) LTD. RS.2 00 000/- RS.8 00 000/- (E) STEP SECURITIES P. LTD. RS.50 000/- RS.2 00 000/- TOTAL RS.7 50 000/- RS.26 00 000/- 4. THE AO OBSERVED THAT THE PERSONS AT SR.NO.(A) & (B) ARE THE PROMOTERS OF THE COMPANY AND THE PERSONS AT (C) ( D) AND (E) ARE NOT RELATED TO PROMOTERS. IN ORDER TO VERIFY THE IDEN TITY CREDIT-WORTHINESS AND GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTIONS MADE BY THE INV ESTORS SUMMONS U/S.131 OF THE ACT WAS ISSUED TO THE DIRECTOR OF TH E INVESTOR COMPANIES AND THEIR STATEMENT UNDER OATH WERE RECORDED WHERE IN THE DIRECTOR OF ANKUSH FINSTOCK LTD. SHRI BHARATBHAI MANUBHAI SHAH HAS STATED IN HIS STATEMENT DATED 14.9.2009 AS UNDER: 'IN FACT AS A CHAIRMAN CUM MANAGING DIRECTOR OF M/S ANKUSH FINSTOCK LTD WANTS TO SUBMIT THAT THE PROMOTER OF M/S JAY DU RGA TRADE LINK PVT LTD SHRI PRAKASH S BAGRECHA RESIDENT OF SHAHIBA UG OF AHMEDABAD EACH MY OLD ACQUAINTANCE AND V/E KNOW EAC H OTHER FOR 10 TO 12 YEARS HE WAS ENGAGED IN INVESTMENT BUSINES S. IN THE MONTH OF MARCH 20007 HE MADE A PROPOSAL TO MY COMPANY FOR PURCHASE OF PREMIUM SHARES OF HIS NEWLY PROMOTED COMPANY WITH A CONDITION TO ISSUE CHEQUES FOR RS. 20 LACS FROM M/S ANKUSH FINSTOCK LTD IN RETURN HE AGREED TO PAY ONE PERCENT OF COMMISSION AND TWENTY LACS IN CASH (SHARES OF PREMIUM AMOUNT) WHICH HE PAID BEFORE ISSUE OF CH EQUES. IN FACT OUR COMPANY HAS NOT PURCHASED OR INVESTED ANY AMOUNT AS A SHARE CAPITAL EITHER ON PREMIUM OR OTHERWISE IN M/S JAY DURGA TRA DE LINK (P) LTD. THE TRANSACTION WAS MADE FOR EARNING ONE PERCENT OF TOT AL INVESTMENT 'CLAIMED AS SHARE PREMIUM BY M/S JAY DURGA TRADE LINK (P) LT D.' ITA NO.75/AHD/2011 3 5. THE AO FURTHER OBSERVED THAT SHRI DESAI PINTOO M OTIBHAI DIRECTOR OF STEP SECURITIES (P) LTD. IN HIS STATEMENT RECORD ED UNDER SECTION 131 OF THE ACT ON 22.9.2009 ON OATH HAS STATED THAT HE HAS SIGNED THE CONFIRMATION DATED 13.8.2009 ON THE INSTRUCTION OF SHRI SAMIR P. SHAH DIRECTOR OF STEP SECURITIES (P) LTD.. HE FURTHER S TATED THAT AS PER HIS KNOWLEDGE STEP SECURITIES (P) LTD. HAS NOT PURCHAS ED ANY SHARES WITH PREMIUM OF JAY DURGA TRADE LINK (P) LTD. 6. IN ORDER TO EXAMINE THE VERACITY OF STATEMENT MA DE BY SHRI DESAI PINTOO MOTIBHAI SUMMONS UNDER SECTION 131 OF THE A CT WAS ISSUED TO SHRI SAMIR P. SHAH AND HIS STATEMENT WAS RECORDED U NDER OATH ON 23.9.200. HE INTER ALIA IN HIS REPLY TO QUESTION REGARDING INVESTMENT MADE BY THE COMPANY STATED THAT HE WAS NOT AWARE B UT SHRI BHARATBHAI MANUBHAI SHAH RESIDENT OF A/2/53 ARJUN TOWER GHATLODIYA AHMEDABAD KNEW THE AFFAIR OF THE STEP SECURITIES (P ) LTD. HE FURTHER STATED THAT HE HIMSELF AND SHRI DESAI PINTOO MOTIBH AI WERE WORKING ON THE INSTRUCTION OF SHRI BHARATBHAI MANUBHAI SHAH. SHRI SAMIR P. SHAH HAS CONFIRMED THAT STATEMENT MADE BY SHRI DESAI PIN TOO MOTIBHAI REGARDING NON-INVESTMENT IN SHARES AND SHARE PREMIU M IN JAY DURGA TRADE LINK (P) LTD. WAS TRUE AND CORRECT. THE AO FURTHER OBSERVED THAT SHRI PANKAJ MANUBHAI SHAH DIRECTOR OF MARROT STOCK HOLDING (P) LTD. WAS SUMMONED UNDER SECTION 131 OF THE ACT AND HIS S TATEMENT WAS RECORDED UNDER OATH AND HE INTER ALIA STATED THAT MARROT STOCK HOLDING (P) LTD. HAS NOT MADE ANY INVESTMENT IN SHA RES OF JAY DURGA TRADE LINK (P) LTD. DURING THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERA TION AND FURTHER STATED THAT THE CONFIRMATION LETTERS WERE SIGNED BY HIM ON THE INSTRUCTION OF HIS YOUNGER BROTHER SHRI BHARATBHAI MANUBHAI SHAH AND REITERATED THAT THERE WAS NO BUSINESS CONNECTION BE TWEEN MARROT STOCK HOLDING (P) LTD. AND JAY DURGA TRADE LINK (P) LTD. 7. THE AO FURTHER OBSERVED THAT SHRI BHARATBHAI MAN UBHAI SHAH DIRECTOR OF ANKUSH FINSTOCK LTD. WAS RE-SUMMONED U/ S.131 OF THE ACT ITA NO.75/AHD/2011 4 AND HIS STATEMENT RECORDED ON 14.10.2009 AND HE INTER ALIA CONFIRMED THAT WHATEVER STATED BY SHRI SHRI SAMIR P. SHAH AND SHRI DESAI PINTOO MOTIBHAI BOTH DIRECTORS OF STEP SECURITIES (P) LTD . AND SHRI PANKAJ MANUBHAI SHAH DIRECTOR OF MARROT STOCK HOLDING (P) LTD. IN THEIR STATEMENT RECORDED U/S.131 OF THE ACT ON 23.9.2009 AND 22.9.2009 RESPECTIVELY WAS TRUE AND HE ABODE BY THE STATEMEN TS MADE BY THEM IN RESPECT OF INVESTMENT IN SHARE APPLICATION AND S HARE PREMIUM OF JAY DURGA TRADE LINK (P) LTD.. THE AO THEREFORE OPIN ED THAT IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE FACTS IT WAS CRYSTAL CLEAR THAT SHARE CAPITA L AND SHARE PREMIUM AMOUNTING TO RS.32.50 LAKHS HAS NOT BEEN INVESTED B Y ANKUSH FINSTOCK LTD. MARROT STOCK HOLDING (P) LTD. AND STEP SECURI TIES (P) LTD. AS CLAIMED BY THE ASSESSEE AND ACCORDINGLY SHOW CAUS E NOTICE WAS ISSUED TO THE ASSESSEE. 8. IN REPLY TO THE SHOW CAUSE THE ASSESSEE VIDE LE TTER DATED 26.10.2009 ASKED FOR CROSS-EXAMINATION OF THE INVES TORS. REQUEST WAS GRANTED AND THE ASSESSEE WAS INTIMATED THE DATE OF CROSS-EXAMINATION FIXED ON 5.11.2009 AT 10:00 AM. HOWEVER BEFORE AV AILING THE OPPORTUNITY FOR CROSS-EXAMINATION THE ASSESSEE CON TENDED VIDE LETTER DATED 28.10.2009 AS UNDER: WE ARE IN RECEIPT OF YOUR SHOW CAUSE NOTICE DATED 13.10.2009 PROPOSING TO CONSIDER SHARE CAPITAL & SHARE PREMIUM AMOUNT COLLECTED BY THE COMPANY AS CASH CREDIT U/S 68 WHIC H IS TOTALLY ARBITRARY ILLEGAL AND AGAINST THE PRINCIPLE OF NAT URAL JUSTICE ON THE FOLLOWING PROPOSITION. FIRST OF ALL WE HAD ALREADY FURNISHED XEROX COPIES OF SHARE APPLICATION FORMS RECEIVED BY THE COMPANY FROM M/S ANKUSH FINSTROCK LTD M/S MARROT STOCK HOLDING PVT LTD AND M/S STEP SECURITIES PVT LTD VIDE OUT SUBMISSION DATED 24.06. 2009. THEREAFTER WE HAD ALSO SUBMITTED BANK STATEMENTS OF THESE COMPANIES REFLECTING THE CHEQUES ISSUED FOR SUBSCRI BING THE SHARES IN THE COMPANY AND ALSO THEIR INCOME TAX RETURN COPY F OR SAID FINANCIAL YEAR. WE ARE ALSO SUBMITTING COPY OF BALA NCE SHEET OF M/S ANKUSH FINSTOCK LTD IN WHICH INVESTMENT OF 20 LACS MADE BY THEM IN ITA NO.75/AHD/2011 5 OUR COMPANY IS SHOWN AS LONG TERM INVESTMENT IN SCH EDULE-5 OF THE BALANCE SHEET OUT OF 166.25 LACS OF INVESTMENTS MA DE BY THE COMPANY IN VARIOUS COMPANIES. FURTHER WE HAD ALSO FILED MINUTES OF THE MEETING IN WHICH SHARES ARE ALLOTTED AND MEMBERS REGISTER WITH OUR SUBMISSION D ATED 24.06.2009. THUS WE HAD ALREADY PROVED THE IDENTITY OF THE SUBS CRIBER OF SHARES THE GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTION NAMELY IT HAS BE EN TRANSMITTED THROUGH BANKING CHANNELS AND CREDIT WORTHINESS OR F INANCIAL STRENGTH O THE SUBSCRIBER AND FURNISHED RELEVANT DETAILS OF TH E SUBSCRIBERS LIKE PAN IDENTITY COPY OF SHAREHOLDERS REGISTER SHARE APPLICATION FORMS ETC AND CONFIRMATION OF THE PARTIES. NOW COMING TO THE STATEMENT OF SM BHARAT M SHAH DAT ED 14.09.2009 IT IS OBSERVED THAT THE STATEMENT IS TA KEN UNDER THREAT AND MENTAL TORTURING CONDITION SINCE HE HAS ANSWER ED UP TO QUESTIONS NO. 5 AND TWO QUESTION ON PAGE NO. 4 PROPERLY AND O NLY THEREAFTER HE HAS SPOKEN SOMETHING DIFFERENT WHICH CONTRADICTORY TO HIS OWN EARLIER STATEMENTS. ACCORDINGLY IN ANSWER TO QUESTION 5 HE AFFIRMS TH AT HE HAS BUSINESS TRANSACTION WITH OUR COMPANY AND IN NEXT QUESTION IE ON PAGE OF HIS STATEMENT IN FIRST QUESTION ITSELF HE AFFIRMS THAT HE HAD INVESTED RS.20 LACS IN THE SHARE CAPITAL OF OUR COMPANY AT PREMIUM OF RS. 40 PER SHARE AND ALSO EXPLAINED THE SOURCE OF INVESTMENT O UT OF HIS COMPANY'S BANK A/C WITH UTI BANK A/C NO. 003010200031189 THU S ALL THESE AFFIRMATION TALLIES WITH HIS CONFIRMATIONS GIVEN TO THE COMPANY. IT IS ONLY AFTER THIS QUESTION HIS ROLE CHANGED DU O TO ONE OR THE OTHER REASON AND GIVEN THE STATEMENT WHICH TOTALLY CONTRA DICTORY TO THE FACT GIVEN EARLIER. FURTHER AS REGARDS HIS DENIAL TO THE CONFIRMATION GIVEN TO THE COMPANY IN LAST QUESTION IS ALSO NOT TENABLE AS THE DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE PRODUCED BY HIM AND BY US SUPPORT S THE OF INVESTMENT AND NOT OTHERWISE. 9. THE AO DID NOT ACCEPT THE EXPLANATION OF THE ASS ESSEE FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS. ( A) THE ASSESSEE HAS ALLEGED THAT STATEMENT OF SHRI BHARAT M SHAH RECORDED ON 14.09.2009 WAS TAKEN UNDER THREAT AND MENTAL TORTURING CONDITION WHICH IS FAR FROM TR UTH. AN OPPORTUNITY FOR CROSS EXAMINATION WAS PROVIDED TO THE DIRECTOR OF THE ASSESSEE WHICH WAS AVAILED BY THE ASSESSEE C OMPANY AND ITA NO.75/AHD/2011 6 IN THE CROSS EXAMINATION SHRI BHARAT M SHAH STOOD BY HIS STATEMENT RECORDED EARLIER. DURING THE COURSE OF CR OSS EXAMINATION OF SH BHARAT M SHAH ON 5LH NOVEMBER 20 09 BY THE DIRECTOR OF ASSESSEE COMPANY SH BHARAT M SHAH CAT EGORILY STATED THAT WHATEVER HE STATED IN HIS STATEMENT REC ORDED ON 14.09.2009 WAS VOLUNTARY IN REPLY TO THE QUESTION OF THE DIRECTOR AS TO WHETHER SH BHARAT M SHAH HAS RECEIVED CASH FR OM JAI DURGA TRADE LINK (P) LTD FOR ISSUE OF CHEQUE FROM THE ASS ESSEE COMPANY. (B) THE SO CALLED INVESTORS HAVE SUBMITTED THAT THE Y HAVE NOT INVESTED ANY FUND IN THE ASSESSEE COMPANY AS SHARE CAPITAL ON PREMIUM. ALL THE SO CALLED INVESTOR COMPANIES WERE BEING MANAGED BY ONE PERSON SH BHARAT MARTUBHAI SHAH WHO HAS ACCEPTED THE FACT. THE ASSESSEE COMPANY ITS SELF LA UNDERED ITS UNACCOUNTED FUND BY INTRODUCING THE SAME VIA SO CAL LED INVESTOR'S BANK ACCOUNTS WHICH IS EVIDENT FROM THE PERUSAL OF BANK ACCOUNTS OF THE INVESTORS. (C) AS REGARDS TO THE CONTENTION OF THE ASSESSEE CO MPANY THAT ALL SO CALLED INVESTORS HAD CONFIRMED THE INVESTMENT. T HE CONFIRMATION OF ACCOUNTS WAS PROVIDED BY THE ASSESS EE COMPANY. IN THE SUBSEQUENT STAGE OF INVESTIGATION THE FACT THAT THESE WERE ACCOMMODATION ENTRIES HAS BECOME CLEAR FROM THE STA TEMENTS OF SO CALLED INVESTORS RECORDED U/S 131 OF THE ACT TH E SO CALLED INVESTORS HAVE ACCEPTED HAVING GIVEN ACCOMMODATION ENTRIES TO THE ASSESSEE BY PROVIDING THEIR BANK ACCOUNTS TO LA UNDER UNACCOUNTED FUND OF THE ASSESSEE ON RECEIPT OF CONS IDERATION. (D) AS REGARDS TO THE DECISION OF THE HON 'ABLE APE X COURT THE FACTS ARE TOTALLY DIFFERENT FROM THE CASE UNDER CON SIDERATION AS IN THIS CASE THE SO CALLED INVESTORS HAVE DENIED HAVIN G INVESTED ANY AMOUNT IN THE ASSESSEE COMPANY. (E) WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO THE ABOVE IT CAN BE SEEN THAT THE ASSESSEE COMPANY WAS INCORPORATED IN THE MONTH OF M ARCH 2007 AND THE TOTAL OF BALANCE SHEET IS MERELY RS.1 05 40 0/- EXCLUDING SO CALLED NEW INVESTMENT. (F) IT IS NOTICED FROM THE BALANCE SHEET OF THE ASS ESSEE COMPANY FOR THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION THAT THE ASSESSEE COMPANY HAS INVESTED IN SHARE OF NAVKAR REALITY PVT LTD AMOUNTI NG TO RS.10 00 000/- AND MADE INTER CORPORATE DEPOSIT IN AAKAR INFRASTRUCTURE PVT LTD AMOUNTING TO RS.20 07 076/- BOTH THE CONCERNS ARE ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROMOTERS OF THE A SSESSEE COMPANY. ITA NO.75/AHD/2011 7 (G) THE ASSESSEE COMPANY WAS INCORPORATED ON 06.03. 2007 WITH A SHARE CAPITAL OF RS 1 LAC ONLY. THE SO CALLED INVES TORS HAVE ISSUED CHEQUES ON 12.03.2007 AND 15.03.2007 FOR TOTAL AMOU NT OF RS.30 00 000/- THAT TO FOR PURCHASE OF SHARE ON PRE MIUM OF RS. 40.00 OF EACH SHARE OF RS. 10.00 WITHOUT KNOWING TH E COMPANY BACK GROUND ITS WORKING ETC. THE ASSESSEE COMPANY HAD NO ASSETS WHICH WOULD INVITED PREMIUM OF RS. 40 ON A R S. 10/- SHARE. THE ARRANGEMENT WAS TO LAUNDER ITS OWN UNACC OUNTED FUNDS BY INTRODUCING THE SAME IN THE FORM OF INTERE ST FREE SHARE AND PREMIUM MONEY. 10. ACCORDINGLY THE AO MADE ADDITION OF RS.32 50 0 00/- AS UNEXPLAINED CASH CREDIT UNDER SECTION 68 OF THE ACT . 11. ON APPEAL THE CIT(A) CONFIRMED THE ACTION OF T HE AO BY OBSERVING AS UNDER: I HAVE CAREFULLY GONE THROUGH THE DECISIONS RELIED UPON BY THE LD. COUNSEL. IT WAS NOTICED ON EXAMINATION THAT EXC EPT A FEW ALL OTHER DECISIONS ARE NOT RELEVANT TO THE FACTS OF TH E CASE. THE LD. COUNSEL HAS NOT ESTABLISHED AS TO HOW THOSE DECISIO NS ARE RELEVANT AND HOW THE SAME ARE APPLICABLE ON THE FAC TS OF THE CASE. THE HON'BLE AMRITSAR TRIBUNAL HAS RIGHTLY OBS ERVED IN THE CASE OF SHREE BALAJI ALLOYS VS. ITO [2010] 127 TTJ 129 (ASR.) THAT 'IT IS CRUCIAL TO POINT OUT THAT THE JUDICIAL PRECE DENTS ARE TO BE APPLIED WITH CARE AND CAUTION AND NOT MECHANICALLY AS EACH CASE DEPENDS ON ITS OWN FACTS AND A CLOSE SIMILARITY BET WEEN ONE CASE AND ANOTHER IS NOT ENOUGH BECAUSE EVEN A SINGLE SIG NIFICANT DETAIL MAY ALTER THE ENTIRE ASPECT. IT IS CARDINAL PRINCIP LE IN APPLYING JUDICIAL PRECEDENT THAT ONE SHOULD AVOID THE TEMPTA TION TO DECIDE CASES BY MATCHING THE COLOUR OF ONE CASE AGAINST T HE COLOUR OF ANOTHER. TO DECIDE THEREFORE ON WHICH SIDE OF THE LINE A CASE FALLS THE BROAD RESEMBLANCE TO ANOTHER CASE IS NOT AT ALL DECISIVE. PRECEDENT SHOULD BE FOLLOWED ONLY SO FAR AS IT MARK S THE PATH OF JUSTICE BUT YOU MUST CUT THE DEAD WOOD AND TRIM OF F THE SIDE BRANCHES ELSE YOU WILL FIND YOURSELF LOST IN THICKE TS AND BRANCHES. THE PATH OF JUSTICE MUST BE CLEAR OF OBSTRUCTION WH ICH COULD IMPEDE IT. THE OBSERVATIONS OF THE COURT MUST BE RE AD IN THE CONTEXT IN WHICH THEY APPEAR TO HAVE BEEN STATED. T HE ASSESSEE HAS PLACED RELIANCE ON THE ABOVE DECISIONS WITHOUT DISCUSSING AS TO HOW THE FACTUAL SITUATION OF THE PRESENT CASE F ITS IN THE FACT- SITUATION OF THE CASES RELIED UPON.' SAME IS THE PO SITION HERE IN THIS CASE. THE LD. COUNSEL HAS PLACED RELIANCE ON T HE DECISIONS WITHOUT DISCUSSING AS TO HOW THE FACTUAL SITUATIO N OF THE PRESENT CASE FITS IN THE FACT-SITUATION OF THE CASES RELIED UPON. ITA NO.75/AHD/2011 8 7.4 IN VIEW OF THE DETAILED DISCUSSIONS HELD ABOVE I AM OF THE CONSIDERED OPINION THAT THE ADDITIONS MADE BY THE A .O. IS JUSTIFIED AND THEREFORE CONFIRMED. AS SUCH THE ADDITION OF RS . 32.50 LAKHS IS CONFIRMED. 12. BEFORE US THE AR OF THE ASSESSEE CONTENDED THA T THE ASSESSEE HAS DISCHARGED ITS BURDEN REGARDING IDENTITY OF THE PERSONS GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTION AND CAPACITY OF THE PERSON INVESTING IN THE SHARE CAPITAL BY FURNISHING CONFIRMATION OF ACC OUNTS SHARE APPLICATION MADE BY THE INVESTORS BANK STATEMENT O F SUCH INVESTORS COPY OF RETURN OF INCOME FOR THE SAID ASSESSMENT YE AR AND THE AUDITED ACCOUNTS OF SUCH INVESTOR REFLECTING THE INVESTMENT IN ASSESSEE- COMPANY DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS . IT WAS FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE AMOUNTS WERE RECEIVED AS SHARE A PPLICATION FROM INVESTORS THROUGH BANKING CHANNELS AND THE ASSESSE E WAS REQUIRED TO PROVE EXISTENCE OF THE PERSON IN WHOSE NAME THE S HARE APPLICATION WAS RECEIVED. ONCE THE EXISTENCE OF THE INVESTOR I S PROVED IT IS NOT FURTHER THE BURDEN OF THE ASSESSEE TO PROVE WHETHER THAT PERSON ITSELF HAS INVESTED THE SAID MONEY OR SOME OTHER PERSONS H AS MADE INVESTMENT IN THE NAME OF THAT PERSON. THE BURDEN THEN SHIFTS ON TO THE REVENUE TO ESTABLISH THAT SUCH INVESTMENT HAS C OME FROM THE ASSESSEE-COMPANY ITSELF. ONCE THE RECEIPT OF THE CO NFIRMATION LETTER FROM THE CREDITOR IS PROVED AND THE IDENTITY AND TH E EXISTENCE OF THE INVESTOR HAS NOT BEEN DISPUTED NO ADDITION ON ACCO UNT OF SHARE APPLICATION MONEY IN THE NAME OF SUCH INVESTOR CAN BE MADE IN THE ASSESSEES HAND AND FOR THIS HE RELIED ON THE DEC ISION OF HONBLE RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF SHREE BARKHA SY NTHETICS LTD. VS. ACIT (2006) 15 TAXMANN 289 (RAJ.). 13. HE FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE AO BEING NOT SATI SFIED BY THE SUBMISSION OF THE AFORESAID DOCUMENTS CALLED EACH I NVESTOR AND RECORDED THEIR STATEMENT UNDER SECTION 131 OF THE A CT AND ON THE BASIS OF SUCH STATEMENT HE HAD CONSIDERED SUCH SHARE APPL ICATION MONEY AS CREDIT AND ADDED THE SAME TO THE INCOME OF THE ASSE SSEE. HE ARGUED ITA NO.75/AHD/2011 9 THAT FROM THE STATEMENT OF SHRI PANKAJ MANUBHAI SHA H OF MARROT STOCK HOLDING (P) LTD. IT IS TO BE NOTED THAT WHEN THE C OMPANY HAD MADE INVESTMENT IN THE ASSESSEE-COMPANY HE HAS NOT A DI RECTOR AS CAN BE SEEN FROM SHARE APPLICATION MADE BY THE COMPANY AN D THE LIST OF THE DIRECTORS PROVIDED TO THE AO DURING THE COURSE OF A SSESSMENT. 14. FURTHER IT WAS CONTENDED THAT SHRI BHARATBHAI MANUBHAI SHAH OF ANKUSH FINSTOCK LTD. ALLEGED THAT THE SHARE APPLICA TION MONEY INVESTED BY THE COMPANY WAS GIVEN IN CASH TO HIM BY PRAKASH BAGRECHA FOR COMMISSION OF 1% . HOWEVER NOTHING WAS SHOWN BY THE AO THAT THERE WAS OTHER MATERIAL CORRELATED WITH THE DOCUMENT CLE ARLY SHOWING THAT IT BELONGED TO THE ASSESSEE. THE AO HAD DRAWN INFEREN CES MADE PRESUMPTIONS RELIED ON SURMISES AND THUS MADE UNSU STAINABLE ADDITIONS. 15. IT WAS FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT IN THE BANK STATE MENT SUBMITTED BY ANKUSH FINSTOCK LTD. DID NOT SHOW ANY CASH DEPOSIT IN THEIR BANK ACCOUNT FROM WHICH SUCH CHEQUE ISSUED FOR INVESTMEN T. FURTHER THERE WAS NO COMMISSION INCOME SHOWN IN THE BOOKS OF ANKU SH FINSTOCK LTD. NOR COMMISSION EXPENSES SHOWN IN THE BOOKS OF THE A SSESSEES COMPANY. 16. IT WAS FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT ACCORDING TO THE AO THE COMPANY WAS NEWLY INCORPORATED AND HAS NO ASSET TO CHARGE P REMIUM ON SHARES WAS ALSO NOT TENABLE SINCE THE ISSUING OF SHARES AT A PREMIUM DOES NOT NECESSARY TO HAVE SOME ASSETS WITH THE COMPANY OR T HERE IS NO DEFINITE GUIDELINES FOR ISSUE OF SHARES AT PREMIUM BUT IT DE PENDS ON PROMOTERS BACKGROUND AND FUTURE OF THE COMPANYS WORKING ETC. THE AO HAS ASSUMED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS LAUNDERED ITS OWN UNA CCOUNTED FUNDS WAS ALSO NOT TRUE FOR THE SAME REASONS. IT WAS FUR THER SUBMITTED THAT THE AO HAS STATED THAT THE INVESTMENT MADE BY THE A SSESSEE-COMPANY IN THE FORM OF LOANS AND ADVANCES TO M/S.NAVKAR REA LITY PVT. LTD. AND M/S.AAKAR INFRASTRUCTURE PVT.LTD. ARE ASSOCIATED WI TH THE PROMOTERS OF ITA NO.75/AHD/2011 10 THE ASSESSEE-COMPANY IS ALSO NOT CORRECT AS THE D IRECTORS AND ADDRESS OF BOTH THE COMPANY IS TOTALLY DIFFERENT AND NEITHE R OF THE COMPANY HAS INVESTMENT IN ASSESSEE-COMPANY NOR ASSESSEE COMPANY HAS INVESTMENT IN THE FORM OF SHARES IN THOSE COMPANIES WHICH WAS GIVEN TO THE AO DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS. 17. FINALLY IT WAS CONTENDED THAT IN THE CASE OF C IT VS. LOVELY EXPORTS PVT. LTD. 216 CTR (SC) 195 IT WAS HELD TH AT THE SHARE APPLICATION MONEY RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE-COMPANY FROM ALLEGED BOGUS SHAREHOLDERS THE AMOUNT OF SHARE MONEY CANNO T BE REGARDED AS UNDISCLOSED INCOME UNDER SECTION 68 OF THE ASSESSEE -COMPANY AND IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT THEREFORE THE ADDITION OF RS.32 .50 LAKHS MADE AS UNEXPLAINED CASH CREDIT UNDER SECTION 68 OF THE ACT SHOULD BE DELETED. 18. HE FURTHER RELIED ON THE DECISION OF THE HONBL E DELHI HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. VALUE CAPITAL SERVICES P. LTD. REPORTED 307 ITR 334 C|IT VS. STELLAR INVESTMENT |LTD. 192 ITR 287 AND CIT VS. SOPHIA FINANCE LTD. 205 ITR 98 AND SUBMITTED THAT IT HAS BEEN HELD THAT IF THE EXISTENCE OF APPLICATIONS OF SHARE APPLICATION MONE Y IS PROVED NO FURTHER INQUIRY WAS NECESSARY. 19. IT WAS ALSO ARGUED THAT IF THE ASSESSEE HAS DIS CHARGED PRIMA FACIE ONUS BY SUBMITTING VARIOUS DOCUMENTS SUCH AS CONFIR MATIONS OF ACCOUNTS SHARE APPLICATIONS MADE BY THE INVESTOR BANK STATEMENT OF SUCH INVESTORS COPY OF RETURN OF INCOME FOR THE SA ID ASSESSMENT YEAR AND AUDITED ACCOUNTS OF THE INVESTORS TO ESTABLISH THE IDENTITY OF THE INVESTOR AND THEREFORE NO ADDITION CAN BE MADE U/S .68 OF THE ACT AND FOR THIS HE RELIED ON THE DECISIONS OF HONBLE DEL HI HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. ILLAC INVESTMENT P. LTD. REPORTED IN 287 ITR 135 CIT VS. ANTARCTICA INVESTMENT P. LTD. 262 ITR 493 AND CIT VS. SOFIA FINANCE LTD. 205 ITR 98. IT WAS ALSO ARGUED THAT WHEN THE INITIAL BURDEN HAS BEEN DISCHARGED BY THE ASSESSEE IN RESPE CT OF IDENTITY OF INVESTORS AND THERE IS NO PRESUMPTION THAT THE ASS ESSEE IS THE BENAMI ITA NO.75/AHD/2011 11 OWNER OF THE INVESTMENT MADE BY THE EXISTING PERSON S AND THEREFORE ADDITION COULD NOT BE MADE U/S.68 OF THE ACT AND F OR THIS THE AR PLACED RELIANCE ON THE DECISION OF HONBLE RAJASTHA N HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. FIRST POINT FINANCE LTD. 286 ITR 4 77. 20. HE ALSO SUBMITTED THAT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. P . MOHANAKALA (2007 291 ITR 278 SC) THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT HA S HELD THAT THE OPINION OF THE AO IS REQUIRED TO BE FORMED OBJECTIV ELY WITH REFERENCE TO THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD AND ONLY BY SAYIN G THAT THE EXPLANATION OF THE ASSESSEE IS UNSATISFACTORY IT D OES NOT AUTOMATICALLY RESULT IN DEEMING AMOUNT OF CASH CREDIT AS ASSESSEE S INCOME. 21. HE FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE HONBLE GUJARAT H IGH COURT IN THE CASE OF DCIT VS. ROHINI BUILDERS VS. DCIT REPORTED IN 256 ITR 360 (GUJ) HAS HELD THAT THE TRIBUNAL FOUND THAT THE ASS ESSEE HAD DISCHARGED THE INITIAL ONUS LIES ON IT IN TERMS OF SECTION 68 BY PROVIDING IDENTITY OF THE CREDITORS BY GIVING THEIR COMPLETE ADDRESS GI R NUMBERS PAN AND COPIES OF ASSESSMENT ORDERS WHEREVER READILY AVAIL ABLE WITH IT AND ALSO PROVED CAPACITY CREDITORS BY SHOWING THAT THE AMOUN TS WERE RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE ACCOUNT PAYEE CHEQUES DRAWN ON BANK ACCOUNTS OF THE CREDITORS AND THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT ACCEPTED TO PROVE THE GENUINENESS OF CASH DEPOSITS IN THE BANK ACCOUNT OF THESE CREDITORS BECAUSE UNDER THE LAW THE ASSESSEE CAN BE ASKED TO PROVE THE SOURCE OF CREDITS IN ITS BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS BUT NOT THE SO URCE OF SOURCE. THUS TAKING INTO CONSIDERATION TOTALITY OF THE FACTS OF THE CASE AND IN PARTICULAR THE FACT THAT THE AO HAS NOT DISALLOWED THE INTEREST CLAIMED/PAID IN RELATION TO THESE CREDITORS IN THE ASSESSMENT YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION OR EVEN IN THE SUBSEQUENT YEAR AND THE TAX AT SOURCE HAS BEEN DEDUCTED OUT OF THE INTEREST PAID/C REDITED TO THE CREDITORS THE TRIBUNAL HELD THAT THE DEPARTMENTAL AUTHORITIES WERE NOT JUSTIFIED IN MAKING THE ADDITION OF RS.12.85 LAKHS AND THEREFORE THE TRIBUNAL WAS JUSTIFIED IN DELETING THE ADDITION. ITA NO.75/AHD/2011 12 22. HE SUBMITTED THAT IN THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE A LSO THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED COMPLETE ADDRESS OF SHARE APPLICANTS PAN S. COPIES OF INCOME- TAX RETURNS ALONG WITH THEIR BALANCE SHEETS AND HAS ALSO SHOWN THE CAPACITY OF CREDITORS BY SHOWING THAT ALL THE AMOUN TS WERE RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE BY ACCOUNT PAYEE CHEQUES DRAWN FROM BA NK ACCOUNTS OF THE SHARE APPLICANTS AND THAT AS ALLEGED BY THE A O THAT THE SHARE APPLICATION WAS RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE ON PAYMENT OF 1% COMMISSION TO THE PERSON FROM WHOM THE ASSESSEE REC EIVED SHARE APPLICATION MONEY BUT NO ADDITION FOR THIS HAS BEE N MADE BY THE AO IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE. THE FACTS OF THE CASE O F THE ASSESSEE ARE IDENTICAL TO THE FACTS BEFORE THE HONBLE GUJARAT H IGH COURT IN THE CASE OF ROHINI BUILDERS (SUPRA) AND THEREFORE NO ADDIT ION ON ACCOUNT OF SHARE APPLICATION AND SHARE PREMIUM AMOUNT WAS WARR ANTED UNDER SECTION 68 AS UNEXPLAINED CASH CREDITS. 23. THE DR ON THE OTHER HAND SUPPORTED THE ORDERS OF THE LOWER AUTHORITIES. 24. WE HAVE HEARD RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE ORDERS OF THE LOWER AUTHORITIES AND MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. IN THE INSTANT CASE THE ASSESSEE HAS CLAIMED TO HAVE RECEIVED SHARE CAP ITAL AND SHARE PREMIUM AGGREGATING TO RS.32.50 LAKHS FROM THE FOLL OWING THREE PERSONS: NAME SHARE CAPITAL PREMIUM TOTAL ANKUSH FINSTOCK LTD. 4 00 000/- 16 00 000/- 20 00 0 00/- MARROT STOCK HOLDING PVT. LTD. 2 00 000/- 8 00 000/- 10 00 000/- STEP SECURITIES PVT. LTD. 50 000 2 00 000/- 2 50 00 0/- TOTAL 6 50 000 26 00 000 32 50 000/- ITA NO.75/AHD/2011 13 25. THE ASSESSING OFFICER RELYING ON STATEMENT OF S HRI BHARATBHAI MANUBHAI SHAH DIRECTOR OF ANKUSH FINSTOCK LTD. SRI DESAI PINTOO MOTIBHAI DIRECTOR OF STEP SECURITIES PVT. LTD. AND SRI PANKAJ MANUBHAI SHAH DIRECTOR OF MARROT STOCK HOLDINGS PVT. LTD. MA DE ADDITION OF SHARE CAPITAL AND SHARE PREMIUM AGGREGATING TO RS. 32.50 LAKHS AS CASH CREDIT. 26. BEFORE US THE AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ASSESSEE FILED A COPY OF BALANCE SHEET OF M/S ANKUSH FINSTOCK LTD. A ND POINTED OUT THERE FROM THAT THEY HAVE DULY SHOWN THEIR INVESTMENT OF RS. 20 LAKHS MADE IN THE SHARES OF THE ASSESSEE COMPANY. SIMILARLY TH E AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE FROM THE AUDITED ACCOUNTS OF MARROT STOCK HOLDINGS PVT. LTD. AND STEP SECURITIES PVT. LTD. POINTED OUT THER E FROM THAT THEY HAVE ALSO SHOWN THEREIN THEIR INVESTMENT OF RS. 10 LAKHS AND RS. 2.50 LAKHS RESPECTIVELY IN THE SHARES OF THE ASSESSEE COMPANY. THE AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ASSESSEE POINTED OUT FROM THE BANK STATEMENT OF ANKUSH FINSTOCK LTD. PLACED AT PAPER BOOK PAGE NUMB ER 74 THAT THE INVESTMENT OF RS. 20 LAKHS MADE BY ANKUSH FINSTOCK LTD. IN THE ASSESSEE COMPANY IS DULY ENTERED THEREIN. HE ALSO P OINTED OUT FROM THE BANK STATEMENT OF MARROT STOCK HOLDINGS PVT. LTD. A ND STEP SECURITIES PVT. LTD. PLACED AT PAGE NUMBERS 43 AND 24 RESPECTI VELY THAT THEIR INVESTMENT OF RS. 10 LAKHS AND RS. 2.50 LAKHS WAS A LSO EVIDENCED FROM THEIR BANK STATEMENTS. 27. HE SUBMITTED THAT IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE DOCUMENT ARY EVIDENCE EVIDENCES ALONG WITH THE CONFIRMATIONS FURNISHED BY THOSE COMPANIES WHERE IN THEY CONFIRMED OF MAKING INVESTMENT IN SHA RES OF THE ASSESSEE COMPANY ESTABLISHES THE GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACT ION. HE CONTENDED THAT IN VIEW OF ABOVE OVERWHELMING DOCUMENTARY EVID ENCES THE ASSESSING OFFICER WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN TREATING THE UN-SUBSTANTIATED AND UNRELIABLE STATEMENTS OF DIRECTORS OF THOSE COMPANI ES AS CORRECT. ITA NO.75/AHD/2011 14 28. THE DIRECTORS IN THEIR STATEMENTS COULD NOT BRI NG ANY MATERIAL TO CORROBORATE THEIR STATEMENT AND THEIR STATEMENT BEI NG CONTRARY TO EVIDENCE ON RECORD WERE NOT RELIABLE AND THEREFORE IN ADMISSIBLE. HE CONTENDED THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER WAS NOT JUSTIF IED IN IGNORING THE VARIOUS DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCES FILED BEFORE HIM ONLY ON THE BASIS OF UNSUBSTANTIATED STATEMENT OF THE DIRECTORS. HE POIN TED OUT THAT DIRECTOR OF ANKUSH FINSTOCK LTD. HAD GIVEN A STATEMENT THAT HE RECEIVED RS. 20 LAKHS IN CASH FROM SRI PRAKASH S BAGRECHA WHO IS ON E OF THE PROMOTER OF THE ASSESSEE COMPANY BEFORE ISSUING CHEQUE FOR M AKING INVESTMENT IN THE ASSESSEE COMPANY. HOWEVER THE BANK STATEMEN T OF M/S ANKUSH FINSTOCK LTD. SHOWS THAT THERE WAS NO CASH DEPOSIT BEFORE ISSUING OF CHEQUE FOR MAKING INVESTMENT IN THE ASSESSEE COMPAN Y. STILL FURTHER THE DIRECTOR OF ANKUSH FINSTOCK LTD. HAS STATED IN HIS STATEMENT THAT CHEQUE WAS ISSUED FOR EARNING COMMISSION OF 1% BUT THE AUDITED ACCOUNTS OF ANKUSH FINSTOCK LTD. DOES NOT SHOW ANY SUCH COMMISSION INCOME. NO MATERIAL COULD BE BROUGHT ON RECORD BY T HE DIRECTOR OF M/S.ANKUSH FINSTOCK LTD. TO SHOW THAT THE CLAIM MAD E BY HIM IN THE STATEMENT GIVEN BEFORE THE AO OF ACTUALLY RECEIVING OF ANY CASH FROM THE ASSESSEE-COMPANY BEFORE THE ISSUE OF CHEQUES TO THE ASSESSEE- COMPANY. FURTHER ON EXAMINATION OF STATEMENT OF T HREE DIRECTORS OF STEP SECURITIES P. LTD. AND MARROT STOCK HOLDINGS P VT. LTD. IT IS OBSERVED THAT THE DIRECTORS HAVE SIMPLY STATED THAT NO INVESTMENT WAS MADE IN THE SHARES OF THE ASSESSEE-COMPANY. WE FIN D THAT FROM THE BANK STATEMENT OF MARROT STOCK HOLDINGS PVT. LTD. T HAT CHEQUE WAS ISSUED TO THE ASSESSEE-COMPANY AND THE INVESTMENT I N SHARES OF THE ASSESSEE-COMPANY WAS ALSO APPEARING IN THE BALANCE SHEET OF MARROT STOCK HOLDINGS PVT. LTD. WE FIND THAT THE RECORDED STATEMENT OF SHRI PANKAJ MANUBHAI SHAH DIRECTOR OF MARROT STOCK HOLD INGS PVT. LTD. COULD NOT EXPLAIN THE CIRCUMSTANCES IN WHICH CHEQUE WAS I SSUED TO THE ASSESSEE COMPANY AND THE CIRCUMSTANCES IN WHICH TH E INVESTMENT IN THE SHARES OF THE ASSESSEE-COMPANY WAS REFLECTED IN THEIR AUDITED ACCOUNTS. IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES IN OUR CONSIDERED VIEW THE TESTIMONY ITA NO.75/AHD/2011 15 OF SHRI PANKAJ MANUBHAI SHAH CANNOT BE HELD TO BE R ELIABLE AND THE SAME IS MERELY UN-SUBSTANTIVE STATEMENT. SIMILARL Y WE FIND THAT THE RECORDED STATEMENT OF SHRI DESAI PINTOO MOTIBHAI D IRECTOR OF STEP SECURITIES P. LTD. COULD NOT EXPLAIN THE CIRCUMSTAN CES IN WHICH THE CHEQUE WAS ISSUED TO THE ASSESSEE-COMPANY AND THE C IRCUMSTANCES IN WHICH THE INVESTMENT IN THE SHARES OF THE ASSESSEE- COMPANY WAS REFLECTED IN THEIR AUDITED ACCOUNTS. IN THE CIRCUM STANCES IN OUR CONSIDERED VIEW THE TESTIMONY OF SHRI DESAI PINTOO MOTIBHAI CANNOT BE HELD TO BE RELIABLE AND THE SAME IS MERELY AN UN-S UBSTANTIVE STATEMENT. THUS THE STATEMENT OF THE DIRECTOR OF A NKUSH FINSTOCK LTD. WAS NOT AT ALL RELIABLE AND THEREFORE ON THE BASIS OF SUCH UNRELIABLE STATEMENT THE FACT REVEALED BY DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE S ON RECORD CANNOT BE IGNORED. 29. IN REPLY THE DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE SUPPOR TED THE ORDERS OF THE LOWER AUTHORITIES. 30. WE FIND THAT IN THE INSTANT CASE THERE IS CONTR ADICTION BETWEEN THE STATEMENT DEPOSED BY THE DIRECTORS OF THE ALLEGED T HREE INVESTMENT COMPANIES AND THE AUDITED STATEMENT BANK ACCOUNTS CONFIRMATIONS AND SHARE APPLICATION FORMS EXECUTED BY THE THREE I NVESTOR COMPANIES. IN THE ABOVE CIRCUMSTANCES IT IS TO BE ADJUDICATED THAT WHICH IS TO BE BELIEVED THE FACT REVEALED BY VARIOUS DOCUMENTS OR THE FACTS CLAIMED BY THREE DEPONENTS WITHOUT ANY CORROBORATIVE EVIDEN CES. 31. WE FIND THAT THE HONOURABLE BOMBAY HIGH COURT I N THE CASE OF ACIT VS. MISS LATA MANGESHKAR 97 ITR 696(BOM) HELD THAT ONCE THE TESTIMONY OF THE WITNESS IS UNRELIABLE THEN THE AD DITION ON THE BASIS OF SUCH TESTIMONY CANNOT BE MADE. 32. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE DECISION OF THE HONOURABLE BOMBAY HIGH COURT IN OUR CONSIDERED VIEW THE FACTS DISCLOSED BY THE DOCUMENTARY ITA NO.75/AHD/2011 16 EVIDENCES ON RECORD CANNOT BE IGNORED MERELY ON THE BASIS OF UNSUBSTANTIATED STATEMENT OF THE DIRECTORS. 33. FURTHER WE FIND THAT THE IDENTITIES OF THE THR EE INVESTORS IN THE SHARES OF THE ASSESSEE COMPANY ARE NOT IN DISPUTE A ND THE INVESTMENT WERE MADE THROUGH THEIR BANK ACCOUNTS IS ALSO ESTAB LISHED FROM THEIR BANK STATEMENTS AS WELL AS THEIR AUDITED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS. THE HONOURABLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VERSUS LOVELY EXPORTS (P) LTD.S.L.P. (CIVIL)NO.11530 OF 2008 ORDER DATED JANU ARY 11 2008 HELD AS UNDER: CAN THE AMOUNT OF SHARE MONEY BE REGARDED AS UNDIS CLOSED INCOME UNDER SECTION 68 OF THE I.T.ACT 1961 WE FIND NO MERIT IN THIS SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION FOR THE SIMPLE REASON THAT I F THE SHARE APPLICATION MONEY IS RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE-COMPA NY FROM ALLEGED BOGUS SHAREHOLDERS WHOSE NAMES ARE GIVEN TO THE AO THEN THE DEPARTMENT IS FREE TO PROCEED TO REOPEN THEIR INDIV IDUAL ASSESSMENTS IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. HENCE WE FIND NO INFIRMIT Y IN THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT. 34. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE WE FIND THAT THE ADDITION OF RS 32.50 LAKHS MADE IN THE INSTANT CASE CANNOT BE SUSTAINED. WE TH EREFORE DELETE THE ADDITION OF RS 32.50 LAKHS AND ALLOW THIS GROUND OF APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE. 35. IN THE RESULT THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS AL LOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON WEDNESDAY THE 29 TH APRIL 2015 AT AHMEDABAD. SD/ SD/- (KUL BHARAT) JUDICIAL MEMBER ( N.S. SAINI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AHMEDABAD; DATED 29/04/2015