9911796707
|
Home
Issues Involved:
1. Deletion of addition u/s 68 for unexplained credits. 2. Deletion of disallowance of interest claimed on unsecured loans. 3. Addition on account of low household withdrawals. Summary: Issue 1: Deletion of Addition u/s 68 for Unexplained Credits The Revenue challenged the deletion of an addition of Rs. 14,75,000/- made by the Assessing Officer (AO) u/s 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, treating unsecured loans from four individuals as unexplained credits. The AO was not satisfied with the creditworthiness and genuineness of the creditors. The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) deleted the addition, noting that the creditors, who were income-tax payees, appeared before the AO, confirmed the loans, and provided requisite material. The Tribunal upheld the deletion, stating that the assessee had discharged the initial burden of proving the source and nature of the credits. The AO failed to provide evidence to falsify the confirmations and explanations. The Tribunal emphasized that the duty of the assessee is to explain the source of credits in its books, not the source of the creditors' funds, citing the case of Laul Transport Corporation. The Tribunal found no cogent material with the AO to treat the creditors as lacking creditworthiness and affirmed the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals). Issue 2: Deletion of Disallowance of Interest Claimed on Unsecured LoansThe Revenue also contested the deletion of disallowance of interest expenditure of Rs. 3,68,567/- claimed by the assessee on unsecured loans. The AO disallowed the interest on the grounds that the loans were treated as unexplained and the creditors were not produced for verification. The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) deleted the disallowance, noting that the loans were considered genuine in earlier years and the creditors were income-tax payees who showed interest income in their returns. The Tribunal upheld the deletion, stating that the loans were satisfactorily explained and the interest expenditure was genuine. The Tribunal found the action of the AO unjustified and affirmed the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals). Issue 3: Addition on Account of Low Household WithdrawalsThe assessee's Cross Objection related to an addition of Rs. 30,000/- sustained by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) on account of low household withdrawals. The AO estimated household expenses at Rs. 1 lac against the assessee's depiction of Rs. 42,000/-, resulting in an addition of Rs. 58,000/-. The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) estimated the expenses at Rs. 72,000/-, retaining an addition of Rs. 30,000/-. The Tribunal found no merit in the assessee's plea, as no cogent material was provided to show that the estimation was arbitrary or unreasonable, and dismissed the Cross Objection. Conclusion:The appeal of the Revenue and the Cross Objection of the assessee were both dismissed. Order Pronounced on 15.10.2010.
|
