2014 (8) TMI 65 - AT - Income Tax

Unexplained loan u/s 68 Interest paid on loan Held that - CIT(A) has considered the remand report of the AO - the explanation given by the assessee along with confirmed copy of accounts and respective bank statement is prima-facie in order the parties are assessed to tax - on the basis of the findings, he has come to the conclusion that under these facts, no addition can be made u/s 68 or 69 of the Act - regarding the advance given to M/s Yog International Pvt. Ltd. and M/s Oil Emporium (Proprietorship concern), it is noted by the CIT (A) that the advances were given by the assessee in his individual capacity whereas the borrowed funds were utilized in his proprietorship concern - there is no nexus between the borrowed funds and the advances given thus, the order of the CIT(A) is upheld Decided against Revenue. Unexplained jewellery found Held that - The addition have been deleted by CIT(A) on the basis of receipt of jewellery as per WILL of late Mama of the assessee Shri Shyam Lal Garg - the notarized copy of Will and a few marriage photographs have also been filed and placed on record - The second addition was deleted by CIT(A) on the basis that the addition is made in the hands of the assessee on protective basis and the same was added on substantive basis in the hands of the wife of the assessee Smt. Sneh Lata Gupta - the Will of Mama of the assessee Shri Shyam Lal Garg was produced before the AO - the Will was rejected by the AO on suspicion alone without giving any concrete reason - Decided against Revenue. Unexplained agricultural income Bonafide of agricultural operations not proved Held that - The assessee has submitted six yearly Khatauni regarding land holding of the assessee, it is noted by CIT (A) that the assessee owns land of about 4.89 hectare - the assessee owns a tractor which is exclusively used for the purpose of carrying on agricultural activities - the agricultural income has also been accepted by the Department from year to year order of the CIT(A) is upheld Decided against Revenue.

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Deletion of addition on account of unexplained loan under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act.
2. Deletion of addition on account of interest paid on unexplained loan.
3. Deletion of addition on account of unexplained jewellery found.
4. Deletion of addition relating to unexplained agricultural income.

Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

1. Deletion of Addition on Account of Unexplained Loan under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act:
The Revenue's appeal contested the deletion of additions made by the Assessing Officer (AO) under Section 68 for various loans received by the assessee from different persons. The AO had made these additions on the basis that the assessee could not satisfy the requirements under Section 68 regarding the identity, genuineness, and creditworthiness of the loan creditors. The CIT(A) deleted these additions, noting that the assessee had provided confirmatory letters and bank statements, and the AO had verified these documents during the remand proceedings. The CIT(A) concluded that the explanations and documents furnished by the assessee were prima facie in order, and the said parties were assessed to tax. The tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, finding no reason to interfere with the order as the Revenue could not controvert the findings of the CIT(A).

2. Deletion of Addition on Account of Interest Paid on Unexplained Loan:
The AO had disallowed the consequential interest payments on the unexplained loans. The CIT(A), having accepted the loans as explained, directed the AO to delete the addition of Rs. 1,09,352/- related to the interest paid on these loans. The tribunal upheld this decision, noting that there was no nexus between the borrowed funds and the advances given, as the borrowed funds were utilized in the assessee's proprietorship concern, while the advances were given in his individual capacity.

3. Deletion of Addition on Account of Unexplained Jewellery Found:
The AO had made an addition of Rs. 19,06,192/- and Rs. 5,38,031/- for unexplained jewellery found during the search. The CIT(A) deleted these additions, accepting the assessee's explanation that the jewellery was received through a Will from his late Mama Shri Shyam Lal Garg. The CIT(A) noted that the notarized copy of the Will and marriage photographs were filed and not controverted by the AO in the remand report. The tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, finding that the AO's rejection of the Will was based on suspicion without concrete reasons, and the documents provided by the assessee were sufficient to explain the jewellery.

4. Deletion of Addition Relating to Unexplained Agricultural Income:
The AO had made an addition of Rs. 1,54,383/- for unexplained agricultural income, questioning the bonafide of the agricultural operations. The CIT(A) deleted this addition, noting that the assessee had provided six yearly "Khatauni" showing landholding of about 4.89 hectares and documents of crop production. The CIT(A) also noted that the agricultural income had been accepted by the Department in previous years. The tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, finding the evidence provided by the assessee sufficient to prove the agricultural income.

Conclusion:
The tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal, upholding the CIT(A)'s order in all contested issues. The tribunal found that the CIT(A) had correctly evaluated the evidence and explanations provided by the assessee and that the Revenue failed to provide substantial reasons to overturn the CIT(A)'s findings. The order was pronounced in the open court.