9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (1) TMI 1342X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... with creditors were also provided to Assessing Officer. Assessing Officer instead of taking action, made addition for the reason that cash was deposited before the loan transactions. The deposit of cash proceeding transactions can give rise to doubt and be a starting point for investigation but cannot be the basis of conclusion disregarding other evidences. Nothing adverse has been brought on record by Assessing Officer with regard to evidence produced by assessee on this point. In any manner, since creditors were assessed to tax, confirmation were filed, TDS deducted on interest credit and loan were reflecting in their accounts, no addition could be made in the hands of assessee u/s. 68. Accordingly, CIT(A) justified in deleting addition ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... h was in conformity with the outstanding balances in the books. CIT(A) was justified in deleting addition - Decided in favour of assessee X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Shah, when the person is claimed to have given loan of ₹ 50,000/- only. Regarding addition on account of loan from Ronak Motor Re-powering ₹ 9,08,000/- was deleted in view of remand report. As regards C.B. Shah, Assessing Officer has accepted creditworthiness of creditor. Confirmations have been provided as also his income-tax acknowledgment. There is nothing adverse on record by Assessing Officer to suggest that transaction was not genuine. Therefore this addition of C.B. Shah was also deleted by CIT(A). As regards Hirenkumar S. Shah is concerned though confirmation has been given and PAN mentioned, the confirmation itself does not inspire confidence. PAN on confirmation is mentioned as applied, then one PAN has been written a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ) are also treated as unexplained cash credit U/s.68 of the IT Act and added to the total income of the assessee. Penalty proceedings u/s. 271(1)( c) of the IT Act is initiated for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income." 3.1 Matter was carried before the First Appellate Authority, wherein various contentions were raised on behalf of assessee and having considered the same and by calling remand report, CIT(A) has granted relief to the assessee. Same has been opposed on behalf of Revenue. On other hand, learned Authorized Representative supported the order of CIT(A). 3.2 After going through rival submissions and material on record, we find that CIT(A) in appeal observed that evidences have been provided to Assessing Officer during ass ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d. He therefore disallowed interest to the extent it could be related to the amounts outstanding in the names of these persons calculating interest to be disallowed @ 12%. 3.3.1 Matter was carried before the First Appellate Authority, wherein various contentions were raised on behalf of assessee and having called for remand report and considering the same CIT(A) observed that evidence shows that interest had been charged by assessee on advances given to M/s. Royal Agencies and fact that advances to other concerns were business advances, disallowance of interest was not warranted. Accordingly, same was rightly deleted. We uphold the same. 4. Next addition is with regards to addition of ₹ 3,43,634/- as unexplained income on the basis ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
