9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (6) TMI 725X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ER: These appeals of the assessee are directed against the orders of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-5, Chennai dated 29.07.2016 and pertains to the assessment years 2011-12 2012- 13. 2. Shri T. Banusekar, the Ld. representative for the assessee submitted that there was a credit of ₹ 25 lakhs and ₹ 45 lakhs for the assessment year 2011-12 and 2012-13 respectively from M/s. Manish Traders and interest of ₹ 1,95,765/- for the assessment year 2011-12 as claimed by the assessee. The assessee explained before the AO that a sum of ₹ 25 lakhs was received as trade advance through cheque. The assessee subsequently refunded the trade advance. In the books of account, it was shown as loan received from M/s. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e of M/s. Manish Traders. Therefore addition was rightly confirmed by the CIT(Appeals). 4. We have considered the rival submissions on either side and perused the material available on record. The Assessing Officer made addition of ₹ 26,95,765/- U/s.68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short the Act ). The AO found that the transactions are sham. The fact remains that there was bank transactions between the assessee and M/s. Manish Traders. The assessee claims that what was received by the assessee is a trade advance and not a loan. Therefore it cannot be treated as income of the assessee. The assessee also claims that the trade advance of ₹ 25 lakhs was returned to M/s. Manish Traders. The assessee has also raised a ground wi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d the amount with interest in the next Financial Year. The assessee also submitted photocopy of the PAN card, Form No.15G and TNVAT registration certificate from M/s. Manish Traders to the AO. 4.3 Perusal of the IOB a/c, Sowcarpet Branch standing in the personal name of the assessee reveals that the following amounts were repaid to M/s. Manish Traders. 03.04.2010 ₹ 2,50,025/- 09.04.2010 Rs.14,00,050/- 06.10.2010 Rs.11,08,480/- Total Rs.27,58,555/- It is also seen that M/s. Manish Traders issued a purchase order to the assessee in which he asked ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... halakshmi Trading Company. It was also informed to the AO that the money was returned to M/s. Manish Traders in the subsequent year with interest. The AO was also provided with the PAN, TNVAT, Form 15G, etc. Perusal of IOB a/c of the assessee also reveals that the sums were repaid back to M/s. Manish Traders. In view of the above decision, I am of the considered view that the AO did not prove that the sum of ₹ 26 lakhs was assessee's own money and there is no concern in the name of M/s. Mahalakshmi Trading Company. It was also not proved that the cheques deposited in Axis Bank a/c are not that of M/s. Mahalakshmi Trading Co. and M/s. Jain Granites. The repayment were also not disproved by the AO. The AO is therefore directed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
