The assessee was a group concern and subjected to search and seizure action under S.  132 of the Income-tax Act, 1961.  The Assessing Officer initiated proceedings under S.  153A pursuant to the and made various additions under section 68 on account of share application money and special deposits against the issue of preferential equity shares treating them as accommodation entries availed of by the assessee from entry providers. The CIT (A) deleted the major part of the addition on the ground that the Assessing Officer had no material in his possession but confirmed the addition in respect of which the statement of the entry provider was with the Assessing Officer.  On appeal held, (i) that the addition made by the Assessing Officer under section 153A was not sustainable and liable to be deleted when the assessment for the assessment year 2010-11 had been completed and was not pending as on the date of the search. (ii) That the assessee had repeatedly requested and demanded the cross-examination of the witnesses whose statements were relied upon by the Assessing Officer in the assessment order.  The denial of cross-examination was a gross violation of the principles of natural justice. (iii) That once the assessee had produced the relevant documentary evidence in support of the then in the absence of any contrary material the addition was not sustainable.  The Assessing Officer made an addition in respect of share capital received from three companies but it was deleted by the Commissioner (Appeals) for want of supporting material as well as statement of alleged entry operator. On appeal held, that the assessee had produced all the relevant documentary evidence to establish the identity, creditworthiness and genuineness of the transactions. Hence in the absence of any discrepancy or otherwise any material or record, the addition made by the AO was not justified.  (AY.  2010-11, 2011-12)