9911796707
|
Home
Issues involved:
The appeal against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal for the Assessment Year 2006-07, regarding the justification of additions made under Section 68 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. Issue I: The ITAT's justification in disregarding the assessee's failure to prove creditworthiness, identity, and genuineness of transactions as required u/s 68 of the Act. The Assessing Officer added amounts under Section 68 of the Act to the assessee's income, contending that the burden of proof was not met. However, the first Appellate Authority overturned this decision, which was upheld by the Tribunal citing the precedent of CIT Vs. M/s. Lovely Exports Pvt. Ltd. (216-CTR-195). Issue II: The ITAT's justification in ignoring the specific facts of the case and relying on the judgment of Lovely Exports, despite evidence of a common introducer and questionable investments by petty businessmen. The Tribunal's decision to confirm the CIT (A)'s order deleting the addition of Rs. 40 lakh u/s 68 was based on the Lovely Exports case, which the appellant argued was distinguishable due to the failure to produce creditors/share-applicants for verification. Issue III: The ITAT's justification in confirming the deletion of the addition u/s 68 despite the assessee's failure to produce creditors/share-applicants for verification. Despite a notice issued u/s 142(1) for verification, the assessee failed to produce the necessary parties, leading to questions about identity and creditworthiness. The ITAT upheld the deletion, which the appellant argued was unjustified. Issue IV: The ITAT's justification in confirming the order of CIT (A) despite the distinguishable facts from the Lovely Exports case. The ITAT upheld the CIT (A)'s decision, ignoring the distinction between the present case and Lovely Exports due to the failure to verify the identity of creditors/share-applicants. Issue V: The ITAT's justification in confirming the deletion of the addition u/s 68 despite the failure to prove the identity and creditworthiness of share applicants/creditors. The ITAT upheld the deletion of Rs. 40 lakh from the total share capital, ignoring the failure to prove identity and creditworthiness. The appellant cited the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court of Chhatisgarh in the case of Kushal Prasad Manhar Vs. CIT (2010) 236-CTR-192 as relevant. The Court dismissed the appeal summarily, citing the precedent set by the Apex Court and previous decisions that additions under Section 68 in such cases are not warranted, finding no substantial question of law involved in the appeal.
|
