9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (11) TMI 748X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and Advances . We observe that unsecured loans from M/s. Surya Diam is on the same footing as loan from M/s. Rose Impex, the Tribunal has deleted the addition vide order dated 20/04/2018 (supra). The relevant extract of the finding of Tribunal has already been reproduced above. On account of parity of transactions, the finding given by the Co-ordinate bench would mutandis mutatis apply in the present set of transactions as well. The ground No.1 of appeal stands allowed and the findings of CIT(A) on this issue are set-aside. - ITA NO.1235/MUM/2017 - - - Dated:- 31-10-2019 - Shri Vikas Awasthy, Judicial Member And Shri Rajesh Kumar, Accountant Member For the Appellant : Shri Nitesh Gandhi For the Respondent : Shri S.K.Jain ORDER PER VIKAS AWASTHY, JM: This appeal by the assessee is directed against order of Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals)-41( in short the CIT(A)), Mumbai dated 20/12/2016 for the assessment year 2012-13. 2. The brief facts as emanating from records in this case are: The assessee filed his return of income for the impugn ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ubmitted that it is bad in law as the reasons recorded for reopening are borrowed and it is not based on the satisfaction of Assessing Officer . The ld. Authorized Representative for the assessee further pointed that similar reasons for reopening assessment were recorded in the assessment year 2010-11. The matter travelled upto the Tribunal in an appeal by the assessee in ITA No.1236/Mum/2017. The Tribunal vide order dated 20/04/2018, allowed the appeal of assessee on merits. Since, the reasons recorded for reopening assessment in assessment year 2012-13 are on similar lines, the addition is liable to be deleted in the light of Tribunal order in ITA No.1236/Mum/17 dated 20/04/2018(supra). 4.1 The ld. Authorized Representative of the assessee raised multiple contentions assailing the addition. He contended that the basis of entire addition is statement of Shri Bhanwarlal Jain recorded under section 132(4) and under section 131 of the Act after search and seizure action. The authorities below without appreciating the documentary evidences furnished by the assessee has made/confirmed the addition. The authorities below have failed to take note of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... made by representatives of rival sides and have perused the orders of authorities below. The assessee in Ground No.1 of the appeal has challenged addition of ₹ 64,00,000/- on account of alleged non-genuine unsecured loans from M/s. Navkar Diamond and M/s. Surya Diam. The addition in the hands of assessee has been made primarily on the basis of statement of Shri Bhanwarlal Jain recorded under section 132(4) 131 of the Act. 7. Reassessment proceedings for assessment year 2012-13, were initiated by the Assessing Officer on the ground that assessee has taken accommodation entries on account of unsecured loans from the following entities of Bhanwarlal Jain group: (i) M/s. Rose Impex - ₹ 25,00,000/- (ii) M/s.Navkar Diamond - ₹ 50,00,000/- (iii) M/s.Surya Diam - ₹ 14,00,000/- During reassessment proceedings the Assessing Officer found that unsecured loan of ₹ 25,00,000/- from Rose Impex were pertaining to assessment year 2010-11. Since the aforesaid amount was added in assessment year 2010-11, no addition was made in the assessment year under appeal. Thus, the addition was ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mpex. Perusal of the balance sheet would show that the loan of ₹ 25 lakhs given to the assessee is duly reflected in the balance sheet of the assessee. Further, it can be noticed that Rose Impex has taken loans from various persons, which formed source for giving loan to the assessee. Hence, it cannot be said the Rose Impex was not having funds for giving loan to the assessee, meaning thereby, creditworthiness of the creditor also stands proved. Hence, there is merit in the contention of the learned AR that the assessee has discharged primary onus placed upon it u/s. 68 of the Act. The Hon'ble Gujarat High Court has held in the case of Sachital Communications (2014) 227 Taxman 219, that if identity of creditor and capacity of the creditor is proved and the transactions have been carried out through banking channel, then no addition could be made on account of unsecured loan. Identical view was expressed by Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Patel Ramniklal Hirji (2004) 222 Taxamn 15. 8. We noticed that the Assessing Officer did not examine various documents furnished by the assessee and did not show that the said documents ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... m the lender, the same is at page-20 of the paper book. The assessee has also filed copy of audited accounts of the said firm at pages 22 to 26 of the paper book. The name of the assessee appears in the books of M/s. Surya Diam in Schedule-D of Balace Sheet as on 31/03/2012 under the head Loans and Advances . We observe that unsecured loans from M/s. Surya Diam is on the same footing as loan from M/s. Rose Impex, the Tribunal has deleted the addition vide order dated 20/04/2018 (supra). The relevant extract of the finding of Tribunal has already been reproduced above. On account of parity of transactions, the finding given by the Co-ordinate bench would mutandis mutatis apply in the present set of transactions as well. The ground No.1 of appeal stands allowed and the findings of CIT(A) on this issue are set-aside. 10. Since we have deleted the additions on merits, the issue raised in Ground no.2, challenging reopening of assessment has become academic. Therefore, the same is not taken up for adjudication. 11. The grounds of appeal No.3 to 5 are general in nature and, hence, requires no adjudication. 12. In the r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
