2011 (3) TMI 951 - HC - Income Tax

Addition - Income escaping assessment - The Tribunal on the basis of material on record came to the conclusion that the amount of Rs. 1.50, 000/- which was received by the assessee from Naresh Kaoor had been repaid to him within a period of 15 days and the said transaction was a bona fide transaction and the provisions of Section 68 were not attracted - Decided in the favour of the assessee

Summary

Issues:
Appeal under Section 260A of the Income-Tax Act, 1961 regarding deletion of addition made under Section 68 on account of unexplained cash credit.

Detailed Analysis:

1. Background and Facts:
The appeal was filed by the Revenue against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal relating to the assessment year 1992-93. The assessee introduced secret funds of Rs. 1,50,000 through a third party, Naresh Kapoor, who deposited the money in an account and later provided a bank draft to the assessee. The assessing officer made an addition of Rs. 1,50,000 under Section 68 of the Act.

2. Appeal Process:
The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) dismissed the assessee's appeal, but the Tribunal later allowed it, deleting the addition. The Revenue challenged this decision, arguing that the amount received was a genuine transaction.

3. Arguments and Counterarguments:
The Revenue contended that the Tribunal erred in reversing the CIT(A)'s findings regarding the genuineness of the transaction. The assessee cited similar cases where the Tribunal had ruled in favor of the assessee, highlighting the tax effect and circulars issued by the Board.

4. Tribunal's Findings:
The Tribunal noted that the amount was received through a bank draft and repaid within 15 days, considering it a bona fide transaction. It referenced previous cases with similar circumstances where the Tribunal ruled in favor of the assessee, emphasizing the impossibility of producing Naresh Kapoor before the assessing officer.

5. Decision and Conclusion:
The Court upheld the Tribunal's decision, ruling in favor of the assessee and dismissing the appeal. The Court also left open the question of maintainability of the appeal under Section 268-A of the Act due to the decision being based on merits.

In conclusion, the High Court upheld the Tribunal's decision to delete the addition made under Section 68, considering the transaction genuine based on the repayment within a short period and precedents in similar cases.