Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

"9.11 9.11 Perusal of the assessment order reveals that the AO has not mentioned anything about any information available with him to arrive at the conclusion that the parties did not have creditworthiness. No inquiries were conducted to bring on records, Foodlink Services India Pvt. Ltd. 26 ITA Nos. 4851, 4863 & 4854/MUM/2024 any material to arrive at the conclusion of holding that the transactions ansactions were not genuine. The AO has not mentioned anything in the body of order to suggest whether he had any information or any incriminating evidences in his possession to come to the conclusion that the investment in shares were ungenuine. In this this regards, the AO failed to bring on records, any positive evidence of flow of cash or cash exchanged between the appellant and/or the final beneficiary. Further, the AO has nowhere discussed the issue or the modus operandi alleged to be carried out by the appellant. The AO has also not zeroed down on the specific modus operandi employed if any for carrying out the unexplained investment. The AO has not made any inquiries to establish that the investment was from a nonexistent entity. No have been brought on record to indicate that the evidences have investment in shares was not a genuine transaction. On the other hand the appellant has furnished all the documentary evidences during the assessment proceedings as well as appellate proceedings to support its contention to substantiate that it is a genuine transactions where various investors have applied for shares and the have been duly allotted these shares. Further, as laid down by the Hon'ble High Court as well as Supreme Court the addition u/s.68 o off the IT Act was not justified, without making proper inquiries and bringing on records any adverse findings in non receipt of reply u/s.133(6) was respect of the parties. Mere non-receipt not sufficient ground for making the addition.