The AO doubted the genuineness of the transaction because notice under section 133(6) could not be served upon the investors but the assessee had provided correct and updated address of the entity in terms of the MCA web site. The Assessing Officer instead of issuing fresh notice under section 133(6) at the correct address of the investors, merely relied upon the fact that the earlier letter had been returned unserved. Since the Assessing Officer did not issue fresh notice at the correct address provided by the assessee and no coercive action had been taken for the production of investors, no adverse inference could be drawn against the assessee. The orders of the authorities were to be set aside and the addition was to be deleted.( AY. 2011-12)
Prabhatam Investment Pvt. Ltd. v. ACIT (2018) 61 ITR 352 (Delhi) (Trib) Prabhatam Buildtech Ltd. v. ACIT (2018) 61 ITR 352 (Delhi) (Trib) Prabhatam Build well Pvt. Ltd. v. ACIT (2018) 61 ITR 352 (Delhi) (Trib)
S. 68 : Cash credits -Share application money —Failure by AO to make inquiry on documentary evidence produced by assessee, deletion of addition was held to be justified [ S. 133(6),153A ]