9911796707
|
Home
Issues involved:
Appeal against deletion of addition u/s 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on account of unexplained credit. Issue 1: Addition of Rs. 1,35,00,000/- u/s 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 - The Assessing Officer added Rs. 1,35,00,000/- as unexplained credit from Kuber Group entities during re-assessment proceedings. - Assessee failed to provide confirmations/agreements, leading to the addition. - Ld CIT(A) confirmed the addition, but Tribunal set aside the case for further examination. - Legal objections raised against burden of proof on assessee. - Factual submissions included identification of parties and reliance on case laws. - Ld CIT(A) upheld the legality of reopening but favored the assessee on the addition. - Explanation-3 of section 147 allowed Assessing Officer to inquire into genuineness of loans. - Assessing Officer failed to prove income escape before shifting burden to assessee. - Evidences submitted by assessee proved identity and creditworthiness of lenders. - Assessing Officer's conclusion of non-genuineness deemed illogical. - Addition of Rs. 1.35 crore u/s 68 deleted by Ld CIT(A). Issue 2: Appeal before the Tribunal - Department appealed against Ld CIT(A)'s decision. - Arguments presented by both parties regarding the burden of proof. - Citing judgments emphasizing assessee's limited burden under section 68. - Assessee provided details but could not furnish confirmations. - Assessing Officer made additions without adverse findings other than lack of confirmations. - Tribunal dismissed the appeal, finding Assessing Officer's additions unjustified and against the facts of the case. In conclusion, the Tribunal upheld the decision of Ld CIT(A) to delete the addition of Rs. 1.35 crore u/s 68, emphasizing the importance of establishing a nexus between the creditor's deposits and the assessee's income from undisclosed sources. The burden of proof was deemed fulfilled by the assessee through submitted evidence, leading to the dismissal of the revenue's appeal.
|
