9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (3) TMI 75X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... deleted. - Decided in favour of assessee. - I.T.A. No. 1037/DEL/2016 - - - Dated:- 10-2-2017 - SHRI H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER For The Assessee : Sh. B.L. Gupta, Adv. Department : Sh . F.R. Meena, Sr. DR ORDER Assessee has filed this Appeal against the impugned Order dated 21.12.2015 passed by the Ld. CIT(A)-16, New Delhi relevant to assessment year 2011-12 on the following grounds:- 1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. C.I.T. (Appeal) was incorrect and unjustified in confirming the addition of ₹ 200000/- (Two Lac Only) made by the AO U/s 68 in the name of Mr. Sachin Aggarwal. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. C.I.T. (Appeal) wa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n identity, creditworthiness and genuineness of the transactions proved. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee filed its return of income on 23.9.2011 declaring an income of ₹ 2,28,090/-. The return was processed on 24.12.2011 at income of ₹ 2,28,090/-. The case was selected for scrutiny and accordingly, the notice u/s. 143(2) of the I.T. Act dated 27.9.2012 was issued and served upon the assessee. Another notice u/s. 143(2) of the I.T. Act dated 24.7.2013 and notice u/s. 142(1) of the I.T. Act, dated 13.11.2013 was issued and served upon the assessee and in response to notices, the A.R. of the assessee appeared from time to time and filed the details including the books of account, but the stock register was ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that the assessee has not satisfactorily explained the loans, therefore, hit by the provision of section 68 of the I.T. Act. 4. Aggrieved with the order of the Ld. CIT(A), Assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. 5. Ld. Counsel of the assessee has filed the Paper Book containing pages 1 to 99 attaching therewith the copy of computation of loan ledger of Sh. Sachin Aggarwal in the books of Shiv Kumar Aggarwal; confirmation by Sh. Sachin Aggarwal; copy of ITR, computation with B/s of Sh. Sachin Aggarwal; copy of Election Card and Bank statement of Sh. Sachin Aggarwal; copy of loan ledger of Smt. Lata Aggarwal in the books of Shiv Kumar Aggarwal; copy of ITR, computation with B/s of Smt. Lata Aggarwal and copy of Election Card, Ration ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Ration Card and Bank Statement of Smt. Lata Aggarwal. I note that the assessee has raised loan of ₹ 2 lacs from Sh. Sachin Aggarwal and ₹ 3 lacs from Smt. Lata Aggarwal and during the examination by the Ld. CIT(A) Sh. Sachin Aggarwal has admitted to have given a sum of ₹ 2 lacs to the assessee during the AY 2011-12. I further find that Sh. Sachin Aggarwal and Smt. Lata Aggarwal even though have declared the same in their balance sheet, books of accounts and they are assessed to tax, which itself proves the identity, creditworthiness and genuineness of the transactions and hence, the addition in dispute is not sustainable in the eyes of law, therefore, the same is deleted. My aforesaid view is fully supported with the follo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
