Latest Expert Exchange Queries

GST Demo Service software link:
Username: demouser Password: demopass
Get your inventory and invoicing software GST Ready from Binarysoft
sitemapHome | Registration | Job Portal for CA's | Expert Exchange | Currency Converter | Post Matrimonial Ads | Post Property Ads
News shortcuts: From the Courts | News Headlines | VAT (Value Added Tax) | Placements & Empanelment | Various Acts & Rules | Latest Circulars | New Forms | Forex | Auditing | Direct Tax | Customs and Excise | ICAI | Corporate Law | Markets | Students | General | Mergers and Acquisitions | Continuing Prof. Edu. | Budget Extravaganza | Transfer Pricing | GST - Goods and Services Tax
Popular Search: VAT Audit :: ARTICLES ON INPUT TAX CREDIT IN VAT :: articles on VAT and GST in India :: ACCOUNTING STANDARDS :: empanelment :: Central Excise rule to resale the machines to a new company :: due date for vat payment :: cpt :: ACCOUNTING STANDARD :: list of goods taxed at 4% :: VAT RATES :: TAX RATES - GOODS TAXABLE @ 4% :: TDS :: ICAI offer Get Windows 7,Office 2010 in Rs.799 Taxes :: form 3cd
From the Courts »
 Samvardhana Motherson International Ltd. (Formerly Known As(M/s Samvardhana Motherson Finance Ltd.)a Vs. Assitant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle 22(1) & Anr.
 Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Central)-2 Vs. M/s Frontline Business Solutions Pvt. Ltd. & Ors.
 Ram Kumar Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-64(2) & Anr.
 Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax-8 Vs. St Microelectronics Private Ltd.
  The Chamber Of Tax Consultants vs. UOI (Delhi High Court)
 M/s Ess Distribution (Mauritius) S.N.C.Et Compagnie Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle -1(2)(2) International Taxation, New Delhi
 Commissioner Of Income Tax (Ltu) Vs. ESPN Software India Ltd.
 Bses Rajdhani Power Ltd. Vs. Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax,
 ITO vs. Gymkhana Club (ITAT Chandigarh)
 SRD Nutrients Private Limited vs. CCE (Supreme Court)
 The Commissioner Of Income Tax-Exemption Vs. The Fertilizers Association Of India

Income Tax Officer - 9(2)(3) M/s. Magic Park (India) P. Ltd. Room No. 225, Aayakar Bhavan 3B, Girnar Apts, 55 Pali Hill M.K. Road, Mumbai 400020 Vs. Bandra (W), Mumbai 400050
October, 23rd 2013
                           "B" Bench, Mumbai

                  Before Shri D. Manmohan, Vice President
                 and Shri Sanjay Arora, Accountant Member

                            ITA No. 9091/Mum/2010
                            (Assessment Year: 2007-08)

     Income Tax Officer - 9(2)(3)          M/s. Magic Park (India) P. Ltd.
     Room No. 225, Aayakar Bhavan      Vs. 3B, Girnar Apts, 55 Pali Hill
     M.K. Road, Mumbai 400020              Bandra (W), Mumbai 400050
                                           PAN - AAECM3597M
                Appellant                           Respondent

                     Appellant by:     Ms Divya Bajpai
                     Respondent by:    None

                     Date of Hearing:       17.10.2013
                     Date of Pronouncement: 17.10.2013


Per D. Manmohan, V.P.

       This appeal is filed at the instance of the Revenue and it pertains to
A.Y. 2007-08.

2.      The only ground urged by the Revenue reads as under: -

       "1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the
           Ld. CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition of Rs.1,86,19,875/-
           comprising share application money (Rs.1,85,97,640/-) and
           unsecured loan (Rs.22,235/-) ignoring the facts on record which
           indicates that these amounts were found credited in the book in
           the relevant assessment year."

3.      The case was originally posted for hearing on 22.07.2013 wherein the
learned counsel for the assessee, Shri Stany Saldanha, submitted that there
is no fresh loans/increase in share application money during the year and
hence there is no case for making an addition under section 68 of the Act
and in support thereof a paper book was filed. Schedule forming part of the
Balance Sheet as on 31.03.2006, shows unsecured loan of `22,235/- as well
as share application money of `1,85,97,640/- was reflected in the Balance
Sheet for the previous year ending on 31st March 2006 and the same figures
appear as on 31st March, 2007 which implies that there is no fresh capital
                                      2                  ITA No. 9091/Mum/2010
                                                     M/s. Magic Park (India) P. Ltd.

introduction or loan in the year under consideration. The Revenue, however,
appears to have claimed that these amounts were credited in the relevant
assessment year and hence the learned DR was directed to furnish evidence
in support thereof and also directed to find out from the office of the
Registrar of Companies as to what was the share application money received
in the immediately preceding year and whether there is any fresh amount
received in the year under consideration. Accordingly the case was
adjourned for hearing on 17.10.2013. However, at this stage the learned
counsel requested for an adjournment on the ground that he has to appear
in a Civil Court in another matter and hence would not be able to appear in

4.    Under these circumstances we called upon the learned D.R. to furnish
the evidence, if any, to support the stand taken before us. The learned D.R.
fairly admitted that no information is supplied by the AO in support of the
contention that these amounts were found credited in the books of the
assessee in the previous year relevant to A.Y. 2007-08.

5.    The learned CIT(A), in fact, categorically mentioned that the financial
statements of the assessee clearly reflect that there is no fresh inflow in the
year under consideration and hence no case was made out by AO to make
the impugned addition. In the absence of any evidence to contradict the
findings of the CIT(A), we do not find any merit in the appeal filed by the
Revenue. We, therefore, proceeded to dispose of the appeal exparte, qua
assessee. Since no material, whatsoever, was furnished to contradict the
findings of the learned CIT(A), we affirm the order of the CIT(A) and dismiss
the appeal filed by the Revenue.

6.    In the result, as pronounced in the open court, appeal filed by the
Revenue is dismissed.

Order pronounced in the open court on 17th October, 2013.

                  Sd/-                                  Sd/-
             (Sanjay Arora)                        (D. Manmohan)
          Accountant Member                        Vice President

Mumbai, Dated: 17th October, 2013
                                       3                  ITA No. 9091/Mum/2010
                                                      M/s. Magic Park (India) P. Ltd.

Copy to:

   1.   The   Appellant
   2.   The   Respondent
   3.   The   CIT(A) ­ 20, Mumbai
   4.   The   CIT­ 9, Mumbai City
   5.   The   DR, "B" Bench, ITAT, Mumbai

                                                      By Order

//True Copy//
                                                   Assistant Registrar
                                           ITAT, Mumbai Benches, Mumbai
Home | About Us | Terms and Conditions | Contact Us
Copyright 2017 CAinINDIA All Right Reserved.
Designed and Developed by Binarysoft Technologies Pvt. Ltd.
Multimedia Presentations Multimedia Solutions 3D Solutions Corporate Presentations Business Presentations Multimedia Presentation India M

Transfer Pricing | International Taxation | Business Consulting | Corporate Compliance and Consulting | Assurance and Risk Advisory | Indirect Taxes | Direct Taxes | Transaction Advisory | Regular Compliance and Reporting | Tax Assessments | International Taxation Advisory | Capital Structuring | Withholding tax advisory | Expatriate Tax Reporting | Litigation | Badges | Club Badges | Seals | Military Insignias | Emblems | Family Crest | Software Development India | Software Development Company | SEO Company | Web Application Development | MLM Software | MLM Solutions