9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (5) TMI 753X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ers, whose names are given to the AO, then the Department is free to proceed to reopen their individual assessments in accordance with law. - Decided in favour of assessee. - I.T.A. No. 5918/Del/2017 - - - Dated:- 9-5-2018 - SHRI H. S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER For The Assessee : SH. ANKIT GUPTA, ADV. For The Revenue : MS. ASHIMA NEB, SR. DR. ORDER This appeal is filed by assessee against the Order dated 20.6.2017 passed by the Ld. CIT(A), Muzaffarnagar relating to Assessment Year 2013-14. 2. The grounds raised by the assessee in the appeal read as under:- 1. That assessment order passed u/s 143(3) by the Assessing officer is illegal, bad in law and without jurisdiction and the CIT(A) has also erred in upholdin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... its claim during the assessment proceedings. 8. The additions made and the observations made are unjust, unlawful and based on mere surmises and conjectures. The additions made cannot be justified by any material on record and also excessive. The CIT(A) erred in upholding the same. 9. The CIT(A) has failed to appreciate, the explanation given in the evidence produced, material placed that has been made available on record has not been properly considered and judicially interpreted and the same do not justify the additions / allowances made. 10. The interest under section 234B, 234D 244A has been wrongly and illegally charged as the appellant could not have foreseen the additions / disallowances made and could not have included th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mar Jain. During the year the assessee has taken unsecured loan of ₹ 5,00,000/- on 21.3.2013 from Sh. Mahendra Kumar Jain. On going through the bank statement, it was noted that Sh. Mahendra Kr. Jain has deposited cash of ₹ 3.75 lacs on 21.3.2013. Therefore, as per AO the A.R. was required to produce Sh. Ashish Jain L/H of Sh. Mahendra Kr. Jain and also to make available the details of availability of source of cash deposited of ₹ 3,75,000/- before giving loan to the assessee. However, no compliance has been made, as a result, the assessee has failed to prove the creditworthiness in respect of loan taken from Mahendra Kr. Jain to the extent of ₹ 3.75 lacs. The onus was on the assessee as required u/s. 68 of the Act t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... jurisdictional High Court of Allahabad in the case of Zafa Ahmad Co. Vs. CIT 263 CTR 612 (All.). He further stated that in this case there is no evidence with the authorities below directly or indirectly that assessee s unaccounted money to the extent of ₹ 3.75 lacs had been routed in the share capital and in the absence of such evidence, no addition could be sustained in the income of the assessee merely on suspicion. Since the identity of the shareholders and genuineness of transactions had been established by the assessee, thus utmost in case of doubt about the capacity, the addition could have been made in the hands of shareholder(s). To support his contention, he relied upon the decision of the Hon ble Supreme Court of India in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d the fact that the loan transactions were through banking channel, does not establish the genuineness of transactions. Loan entries are generally masked to pump in black money into banking channels and such practices continue to plague Indian economy. 8. I have heard the rival contentions and perused the materials available on record. I find that the AO has made addition of ₹ 3,75,000/- on account of unexplained loan u/s. 68 of the Act from Late from Late Sh. Mahendra Kumar Jain. During the year the assessee has taken unsecured loan of ₹ 5,00,000/- on 21.3.2013 from Sh. Mahendra Kumar Jain. However, as per AO the A.R. was required to produce Sh. Ashish Jain L/H of Sh. Mahendra Kr. Jain and also to make available the detai ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 3 CTR 612 (All.). I note that these documents were before the AO as well as Ld. CIT(A), but they have not appreciated it properly. However, on going through the aforesaid documentary evidences, it is observed that there is no evidence with the authorities below directly or indirectly that assessee s unaccounted money to the extent of ₹ 3.75 lacs had been routed in the share capital and in the absence of such evidence, no addition could be sustained in the income of the assessee merely on suspicion and the identity of the shareholders and genuineness of transactions had been established by the assessee, thus utmost in case of doubt about the capacity, the addition could have been made in the hands of shareholder(s), as per principles l ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
