2019 (2) TMI 799 - AT - Income Tax

Addition u/s 68 - unsecured loans received from seven parties - disallowance of interest on the aforesaid loan amount - Held that - All creditors were having sufficient bank balances in their bank accounts for giving credit to the assessee. Thus, there were no reasons for the AO to doubt the creditworthiness of the creditors except creditor mentioned at sl. No. 2. The AO has not made further investigation on the veracity of the documents submitted by the assessee. The issue is, therefore, squarely covered in favour of the assessee by order of the Tribunal in the case of M/s Topline Buildtech Pvt. Ltd. (2018 (4) TMI 793 - ITAT DELHI). AO has nowhere mentioned in the order, if assessee was asked to produce the creditors for examination on oath. No evidence has been brought on record, if the amount in question came from the coffer of the assessee. There is no dispute that AO accepted the identity of the creditors. These facts, therefore, show that assessee has been able to prove the creditworthiness and genuineness of the transaction in the cases of the creditors namely Smt. Shashi Lata Bhargav, Shri Prateek Ahluwalia, Shri Sarin Kumar, M/s T.S. Sethi & Sons, M/s C.S. Sethi & Sons and M/s G.S. Sethi & Sons. Thus, additions in their cases cannot be made in the hands of the assessee. The disallowance of interest is also deleted. In the case of Smt. Kamini Ahluwalia-(2), it is not in dispute that prior to giving loan to the assessee there were cash deposits of the equivalent amount of the credit in her bank account. There were insufficient bank balances in her account for giving loan to the assessee. In case of credit entry of ₹ 3 lakhs on 12.11.2010 cash was deposited for clearance of the cheque on 15.11.2010. These facts clearly support the findings of the authorities below that transaction of the assessee with Smt. Kamini Ahluwalia was not genuine. We confirm the addition of ₹ 9 lakhs on account of unexplained credit in case of Smt. Kamini Ahluwalia. The proportionate disallowance of interest in this case is also confirmed - Decided partly in favour of assessee.

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Addition of ?58,50,000/- under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act on account of unsecured loans.
2. Disallowance of interest of ?7,02,000/- on the aforesaid loan amount.

Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

1. Addition of ?58,50,000/- under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act:

The assessee company, engaged in manufacturing and sale of automobile bushes and washers, filed its return of income declaring ?82,92,990/-. During the assessment, the AO noted unsecured loans amounting to ?3,07,01,788/- and requested details, confirmations, transaction details, and sources of funds from the assessee. Notices under Section 133(6) were issued to the loan depositors. The AO observed discrepancies in the depositors' financials, such as higher deposit amounts compared to their income returns and low average bank balances with recent cash deposits before issuing cheques. Consequently, the AO added ?58,50,000/- as unexplained cash credits under Section 68, questioning the creditworthiness and genuineness of the transactions.

The assessee contested the addition before the CIT(A), providing confirmations, ITR acknowledgments, and bank statements for all creditors, asserting that the loans were genuine and routed through banking channels. The CIT(A) upheld the additions, noting low income declarations by creditors and unexplained sources of income in some cases. The creditors' non-appearance before the AO was also cited.

Upon appeal, the ITAT considered the submissions and evidence provided by the assessee, including confirmations and bank statements. The ITAT referenced various judicial precedents, emphasizing that the assessee is not required to prove the source of the source. The ITAT found that the assessee had sufficiently demonstrated the identity, creditworthiness, and genuineness of transactions for most creditors. Consequently, the ITAT deleted the addition for creditors Smt. Shashi Lata Bhargav, Shri Prateek Ahluwalia, Shri Sarin Kumar, M/s T.S. Sethi & Sons, M/s C.S. Sethi & Sons, and M/s G.S. Sethi & Sons, noting that the AO did not conduct further investigations or prove that the funds originated from the assessee.

However, the ITAT upheld the addition for Smt. Kamini Ahluwalia, citing cash deposits equivalent to the loan amount just before issuing cheques, indicating a lack of genuine transaction. The ITAT referenced similar judgments where such cash deposits before loan issuance were deemed non-genuine.

2. Disallowance of Interest of ?7,02,000/-:

The AO disallowed the interest paid on the unsecured loans, amounting to ?7,02,000/-, due to the unexplained nature of the loans. The CIT(A) confirmed this disallowance.

The ITAT, while addressing the main issue of unsecured loans, also considered the interest disallowance. Given the deletion of the addition for most creditors, the ITAT proportionately deleted the interest disallowance for those creditors. However, for Smt. Kamini Ahluwalia, where the addition was upheld, the ITAT confirmed the proportionate interest disallowance.

Conclusion:

The ITAT partly allowed the assessee's appeal, deleting additions and interest disallowance for most creditors, except for Smt. Kamini Ahluwalia, where both the addition and interest disallowance were confirmed. The judgment emphasized that the assessee need not prove the source of the source and that mere low income of creditors is insufficient to doubt the genuineness of transactions.