IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI 
 . 
  10.12.2010 
.
 Present:        Ms. Sonia Mathur, Advocate for the appellant/Revenue. 
.
.
 + ITA 1989/2010 and CM APPL. 22179/2010 
.
 The Assessing Officer made an addition of ` 15,55,400/- to the income of 
 the respondent assessee herein under section 68 of the Income-Tax Act. It was on 
 account of the share application money received by the assessee from various 
 parties and as per the Assessing Officer, the respondent assessee was not able 
 to give requisite proof of identification of those parties and/or their capacity 
 to invest.  Out of the aforesaid amount, a sum of ` 2 lacs was invested as share 
 application money by one M/s Victoria Advertising Pvt. Ltd.  Other amount of Rs. 
 13.55 lacs were from various other parties.  The assessee preferred  an appeal 
 their against before the CIT (A).  The CIT (A) sustained the additions of Rs. 2 
 lacs which represented  the share application money allegedly received from M/s 
 Victoria Advertising Pvt. Ltd.  on the ground that the assessee was not able to 
 satisfactory explain that source.  However, in so far as other additions are 
 concerned, the CIT(A) deleted those additions after satisfying itself that 
 requisite documents establishing  their identity and also  receipt of  payment 
 from those parties  were produced by the assessee.  The ITAT has sustained the 
 aforesaid order of the CIT (A). 
 We find from the order of the CIT (A) that the  share application money 
 received from each and every party has been discussed in detail and on that 
 basis, it is held that the money was actually received from those parties.  The 
 documents which are scanned through and examined by the CIT (A) in this behalf 
 are the requisite details of share application, dates of receipts of those 
 applications, mode of payments and even the confirmation from the share 
 applicants.  Their bank statements for the relevant period  alongwith details of 
 the share application money received, indicating the name, addresses, cheque 
 numbers, drawee bank particulars and the amount of share application money 
 received from respective applicants were  filed by the assessee which were 
 examined by the CIT (A) in detail and also by the ITAT. 
 The findings of fact recorded by these two authorities, therefore, are 
 without any blemish.  These authorities have rightly deleted the addition.  The 
 case is now squarely covered by a judgment of Supreme Court in the case of 
 Lovely Export, 216, CTR 115. 
.
.
 Thus we are of the opinion that no question of law arises.  This appeal 
 is accordingly dismissed. 
.
 A.K. SIKRI, J. 
.
 INDERMEET KAUR, J. 
 DECEMBER 10, 2010 
 skb 
.
 33#