Ratings & Reviews of A.N.Forex Pvt. Ltd.
Jain and it is pertinent to note that the ld. Similarly, if the assessee is a company and the sum is credited, consisting of share application money or share capital or share premium or any such amount, the assessee is required to offer satisfactory explanation about the nature and source of the sum credited to its book of account.
In this connection, the Respondents in support of their stand about the genuineness of the transaction entered into with such Companies has produced voluminous documents which, inter alia, have been noted at Para 3 of the Judgment of the CIT Appeals which reads thus: We find no merit in this special leave petition for the simple reason that if the share application money is received by the assessee company from alleged bogus shareholders, whose names are given to the 35 Assessing Officer, then the Department is free to proceed to reopen their individual assessments in accordance with law.
The Tribunal must, in deciding an appeal, consider with due care all the material facts and record its finding on all the contentions raised by the assessee and the Commissioner, in the light of the evidence and the relevant law. If the explanation showed that the receipt was not of an income nature, the Department could not act unreasonably and reject that explanation to hold that it was income.
Assailing the said judgment of the learned Tribunal learned counsel for the appellant submits that Income-tax Officer did not consider the material evidence showing the 38 creditworthiness and also other documents, viz.
Suspicion a n forex pvt ltd not sufficient enough to lead to a conclusion that the investments received by the assessee company are all manipulated receipts and on that basis, recorded a finding that the explanation of the assessee is not satisfactory. The AO chose to proceed no further but merely added the amounts because of the absence of the Directors to physically present themselves before him.
CIT A. Before proceeding further, it is only appropriate to refer the contents of Section 68 of the Act. It is not in dispute that extensive material was produced by the Assessee in the present case to prove the identity, genuineness and creditworthiness of the companies who had subscribed to its shares.
However, the main theme, upon which, the Assessing Officer as well as the Tribunal proceeded to discredit the investors of the assessee is completely erroneous. Further AO has remained sited with folded hands and has not made any independent enquiry from concerned AO of share holder company which itself is sufficient to knock off the addition made.
It has also disclosed the identity of such investors. He did not 15 take to the logical end the half-hearted attempt at getting the Directors to appear before him. After getting the PAN number and getting the information that the creditor is assessed under the Act, the Assessing officer should enquire 43 from the Assessing Officer of the creditor as to the genuineness" of the transaction and whether such transaction has been accepted by the Assessing officer of the creditor but instead of adopting such course, the Assessing officer himself could not enter into the return of the creditor and brand the same as unworthy of credence.
At all three stages same and similar allegations are made dehors the evidences filed by assesssee.
Consequently, MP. We are of the opinion that no question of law arises, having regard to the concurrent findings of fact. Taking inspiration from the Hon'ble Supreme Court observations we are constrained to hold in this matter that the Tribunal has not adjudicated upon the case of the assessee in the light of the evidence as found by the Commissioner of Income-tax Appeals.
It would also be appropriate to notice the observation of the Supreme Court in the case of Orissa Corporation P. In such 24 circumstances, the finding of fact arrived at by the authorities below which are based on documentary evidence on record cannot be said to be perverse.
In the facts of the present case, the assessee had furnished the names and all the relevant details of the companies, with which it had entered into transaction, and that the Assessing Officer was made aware of the situation. In the present case, the Appellants are seeking to rely upon the statements recorded of two persons who have admittedly not been subjected to cross examination.
Free for one month and pay only if you like it. To understand the rationale behind this provision, it is only apt to refer to the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court rendered in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax CentralCalcutta v Daulat Ram Rawatmull [reported in Vol. The learned counsel relies on the judgment of the Division Bench of this Court in case of Commissioner of Income Tax vs.
Apart from that, the voluminous documents produced by the Respondents cannot be discarded merely on the basis of two individuals who have given their statements contrary to such public documents. That was only a suspicion of the Revenue. The Assessing Officer traced out and reached all the four investors of the assessee. The Department was not at that stage required to prove anything.
If the Department has a doubt about the genuineness of the investors capacity, it is open to it to proceed against those investors. As it was the department which claimed that the amount of fixed deposit receipt belonged to the respondent firm even though the how to ask my boss if i can work from home had been issued in the name of Biswanath, the burden lay on the department to prove that the 29 respondent was the owner of the amount despite the fact that the receipt was in the name of Biswanath.
That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, ld CIT-A erred in not restoring the returned income declared by assessee in its return of income.
In the result, the questions of law framed in TCA. So long it is not established that the return submitted by the creditor has been rejected by its Assessing Officer, the Assessing officer of the assessee is bound to accept the same as genuine when the identity of the creditor and the genuineness" of transaction through account payee cheque has been established.
Therefore, it shall be assumed that the assessee failed to prove the existence of the creditors or for that matter the creditworthiness.
Without taking such a course of action, the Assessing Officer and the Tribunal are proceeding on conjectures that the assessee has, in fact, ploughed back the money. He accordingly ordered an addition of Rs. The court held as follows: Therefore, the failure of the person to turn up pursuant to the summons issued to any witness is immaterial when the material documents made available, should have been accepted and indeed in subsequent year the same explanation was accepted by the Income- tax Officer.
Fx spot options broker medical collector work from home university industry engagement strategy to work from home synonym korban penipuan forex entry and exit points forex come usare medie mobili forex best paying jobs from home.
It is observed that the assessee has not obtained any share application money from the alleged Shri S. Ashima Neb, Sr. In such circumstances, the question of remanding the matter for re- examination of such persons, would not at all be justified. Further, they are finding forex robot world cup with the assessee for the alleged failure of it's investors in proving beyond doubt that they have the capacity to invest at the moment they did in the assessee company.
The very approach of the Assessing Officer and the Tribunal are completely opposed to settled legal principles enunciated and they have arrived at conclusions contrary to the legal principles on the subject. The ld.
The Assessing Officer, if he so desired, ought to have allowed the Assessee to cross examine such persons in case the statements were to be relied upon in such proceedings. The documents also include assessment Orders for last three preceding years of such Companies.
No substantial question of law arises. Accordingly, the same is set aside. The AO issued notices to the Directors of the aforementioned companies but none of them appeared.
Furthermore, the bank details of the share applicants too had been provided. As a n forex pvt ltd from the fact that orders passed by AO in both the cases were on the basis of search proceedings on Jain Brothers and only ground here also to make subject addition of Rs.
It is also ruled in the said judgment at page 41 that if best forex trainers Tribunal does not discharge the duty in the manner as above then it shall be assumed the judgment of the Tribunal suffers from manifest infirmity. Such a finding is vitiated because of the use of inadmissible material and thereby an issue of law arises.
Both these authorities primarily went by the fact that the assessee had provided sufficient indication by way of PAN numbers, to highlight the identity of the share applicants, as well as produced the 12 affidavits of Directors. If, however, the evidence was unconvincing, then such rejection could be made.
He further contended that when the Tribunal has relied on the entire judgment of the Commissioner of Income-tax Appealstherefore, it was not proper to take up some portion of the judgment of the Commissioner of Income-tax Appeals and to ignore the other portion of the same. Lovely Exports P Ltd.
The Tribunal must, in deciding an appeal, consider with due care all the material facts and record its finding on all contentions raised by the assessee and the Commissioner, in the light of the evidence and the relevant law. The list 22 of documents submitted on He also found as a fact that all the payments have been received through banking channels. It is urged on behalf of the revenue that the AO's order, adding the amounts under Section 68 of the Act was justified in the circumstances.
On no account whatever should the Tribunal base its findings on suspicions, conjectures or surmises, nor should it act on no evidence at all or on improper rejection of material and relevant evidence or entry and exit strategy forex on evidence and partly on suspicions, conjectures and surmises. Lovely Exports Pvt.
Sony Financial Services Ltd. Hence, the judgment and order of the Tribunal is not sustainable.
I have heard both the parties and perused the records especially the impugned order as well as the Paper Books and the decisions referred by both the sides. Learned counsel emphasized that to prove the identity, genuineness of the transaction and the creditworthiness of share applicants, it was essential for the assessee to produce the Directors as well as the source of funds of the share applicants since in the absence of these materials, the assessee could not claim to be trading options for profit by the addition.
This court held that when a court of fact arrives at its decision by considering material which is irrelevant to the enquiry, or acts on material, partly relevant and partly irrelevant, and it is impossible to say to what extent the mind of the court was affected by the irrelevant material used by it in arriving at its decision, a question of law arises, whether 30 the finding of the court is not vitiated by reason of its having relied upon conjectures, surmises and suspicions not supported by any evidence on record or partly upon evidence and partly upon inadmissible material.
The balance sheet and profit and loss account of these persons discloses that these persons had sufficient funds in their accounts for investing in the shares of the Assessee. Even the balance-sheet, profit and loss account, the books of account of these creditors were produced on record showing that they had sufficient funds for investing in the shares of the Assessee.
They are both looking for proof beyond doubt. The view taken by the CIT A that the AO failed to come up with the material to disprove what had been produced by the Assessee is certainly aplausible view in the facts and circumstances of forex daily trend prediction using machine learning techniques case.
When it was found by the Commissioner of Income tax Appeals on facts having examined the documents that the advance given by the 40 creditors have been established the Tribunal should not entry and exit strategy forex ignored this -fact finding.
The Hon'ble High Court held that from the reasons recorded by the Assessing Officer it does not appear that the Assessing Officer has applied his mind to the information and has independently arrived at a belief on the basis of material which he had before him that the income had escaped assessment.
By not doing so the Tribunal committed grave error in law in upsetting the judgment in the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax Appeals. On the other hand, the legal principle enunciated by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, as noticed supra by us, is that so long as the proof and identity of the investor and the payment received from him is through a doubtless channel like that of a banking channel, the receipt in the hands of the assessee towards share capital or share premium does not change its colour.
Once that material is kept aside then the scope of enquiry can only be whether the Assessee has produced documents to discharge the initial onus of proving the genuineness and creditworthiness of the companies who were stated to have subscribed to the Assessee's shares. I restore the judgment and order of the Commissioner of Income-tax Appeals.
The judgment in case of Gagandeep Infrastructure P. It is clear from the above provision that burden, initially, is cast upon the assessee to offer an explanation about the nature and source of the money found credited in its books of account and if that explanation is not satisfactory in the opinion of the Assessing Officer, the sum so credited be charged as the income for the previous year.
Likewise, if the Court of fact bases its decision partly on conjectures, surmises forex strategy 4u suspicions and partly on evidence, in such a situation, an issue of law arises [Dhirajlal Girdharilal Vs.
The basic contention of the learned Counsel appearing for the Appellants revolves upon the stand taken by the Appellants whether the shareholders who have invested in the shares of the Respondents are fictitious or not.
It could ask the assessee to produce any books of account or other documents or evidence pertinent to the explanation if one was furnished and examine the evidence and the explanation. The Tribunal has adjudicated the similar issue in Moti Adhesives P.
The CIT A had ruled in favor of the assessee, i. Sr DR side are same in both the cases.
The money so invested in the 36 assessee company would still be the money available and belonging to the investors. It reads as under The Hon'ble High Court has observed that as there is no reference to any document or statement except the annexure which has been quoted by the Assessing Officer a prima facie nexus or link cannot be made to have been established which shows that income has escaped assessment.
Hence, the burden cast on the assessee stood discharged. It was also observed by the Tribunal that the Assessee has also produced the entire record regarding issuance of shares i. This does not mean that there was nobody who was present at the said address and further it cannot be inferred that the company is merely existing on papers.
In this judgment it is noticed that the Supreme Court as proposition 39 of law held that the Tribunal must in deciding an appeal, consider with due care, all the material facts and record its finding on all the contentions raised by the assessee and the Commissioner in the light of the evidence and the relevant law.
How can you make quick money today forex beginner guide namaskar forex khar tassazione forex europa.
As rightly pointed out by the learned counsel that the Commissioner of Income-tax Appeals has taken the trouble of examining of all other materials and documents, viz. CIT A upheld and the Hon'ble High Court has held that when the basic evidences are on record the mere failure of the creditor to appear cannot be basis to make addition.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed. But, in how to ask my boss if i can work from home of Section 68 of the Act, where any sum is found credited in the books of the assessee for any previous year, the same may be charged to income tax as the income of the assessee of that previous year if the explanation offered by the assessee about the nature and source thereof is, in the opinion of the Assessing Officer, not satisfactory.
Lovely Exports P. It may be that there are some bogus shareholders in whose names shares had been issued and the money may have been provided by some other persons. Hence, TCA. There is no material on record produced by the Appellants which could rebut the documents produced by the Respondents herein.
In the said judgment noted by us at pagethe Supreme Court has observed as follows: If the assessment of the persons who are alleged to have really advanced the money is sought to be reopened, that would have made some sense but we fail to understand as to how this amount of increased share capital can be assessed in the hands of the company itself.
Daspan Forex | Main Page