9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (6) TMI 1606 - AT - Income TaxUnexplained Cash Credit u/s. 68 - addition was made on account of failure of assessee in substantiating the creditworthiness in respect of the loans shown from M/s. Basant Marketing Pvt. Ltd. In the balance sheet - HELD THAT - We find that the identity, credit worthiness and genuineness of the BMPL is not in dispute. Sufficient evidence has been given in these cases to prove the identity, genuineness and creditworthiness of the M/s Basant Marketing Pvt.Ltd. The CIT(A) has specifically pointed out this fact that no evidence is on record to which identity, creditworthiness and genuineness of the claim of the loan can be doubted. Taking into account was all these facts and circumstances, we are of the view that CIT(A) has decided the matter of the controversy judiciously in correctly which is not liable to be interfere with at this appellate stage. Accordingly, these issues are decided in favour of the assessee against the revenue.
Issues:
1. Addition of Unexplained Cash Credit under section 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. Addition of undisclosed income based on information received from the Investigation Wing regarding transactions with M/s. Basant Marketing Pvt. Ltd. Issue No. 1: The Revenue challenged the deletion of an addition of Unexplained Cash Credit of ?58,20,000 made under section 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)]. The CIT(A) relied on the decision in the assessee's own case for AY 2008-09 and concluded that the assessing officer failed to prove any negation of identity, creditworthiness, or genuineness of the transactions with M/s. Basant Marketing Pvt. Ltd. The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, emphasizing that the identity, creditworthiness, and genuineness of M/s. Basant Marketing Pvt. Ltd. were not in dispute, and there was sufficient evidence to support these aspects. The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) had correctly decided the matter, and hence, ruled in favor of the assessee. Issue No. 2 & 3: Issues 2 and 3 were formal in nature and did not require further adjudication. Consequently, the appeal filed by the Revenue was dismissed. Issue No. 1 (ITA No. 6807/Mum/2018): In this case, the Revenue contested the addition of ?2,63,000 to the returned income under section 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, based on suspicions regarding transactions with M/s. Basant Marketing Pvt. Ltd. The CIT(A) deleted the addition, stating that the initial onus to establish identity, creditworthiness, and genuineness of the transactions was discharged by the appellant. The Tribunal noted that the facts of this case were similar to a previous case and upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, as the issue of identity and creditworthiness had already been decided in favor of the assessee in the previous case. The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal, finding the CIT(A)'s decision applicable to the present case. In conclusion, the Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decisions in both cases, ruling in favor of the assessee and dismissing the appeals filed by the Revenue.
|
