9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (12) TMI 1197X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... re repaid in a month time, has not been disputed by the revenue. AO was made a case of capital building since loans were repaid within a month. Sufficient material placed on record by the assessee during the course of hearing before both the lower authorities and before us including the statement on oath taken by the Ld. AO and other documentary evidences referred hereinabove, are of the considered view that assessee had proved identity, genuineness and creditworthiness of all the cash creditors beyond doubt for which impugned addition u/s 68 - Appeal of the Revenue stands dismissed. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... not sufficient to provide the such huge sum and that is also without any collateral security, without interest and without any loan agreement. (ix) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) was justified in ignoring the proposition laid down by the Hon'ble High Court in the case of CIT vs. Precision Finance Ltd, 1994 208 ITR 465 Cai., that mere payment by account payee cheque is not sacrosanct nor can it make a non-genuine transaction genuine. (x) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) was justified in ignoring the decision laid down in case of CIT vs. United Commercial and Industrial Co. (Pvt.) Ltd (1991) 187 ITR 596 (Cal.) that the onus does not get discharged merely by filing confirmatory letters. " 3. Though the revenue has raised 10 grounds of appeal but the sole grievance is with regard to deletion of addition of ₹ 1,94,98,000/- which was made by the Ld. AO on account of unexplained cash credit u/s 68 of the Act. 4. Brief facts as culled out from the records are that the assessee is a Private Limited Company engaged in the business of Automobile Cars Dealer and Service Centre. Income of ₹ 3,42,620/- d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... urns of income, the source of cash deposit or loan given do not commensurate with the declared income. For example in the case of Gulab Sing there is cash deposit of ₹ 60,25,000/ whereas returned income is only ₹ 1,58,600/ and declared agricultural income is just ₹ 3,78,480/-. Hence' even agricultural income cannot justify such large cash deposits. It is noteworthy that there is immediate deposit of cash before giving loans to the assessee. There are no other transactions or deposits in the bank account barring for the transactions undertaken with respect to the loans given to the assessee in majority of above I cases. There is no justification for depositing such huge cash in bank account which was hitherto allegedly kept as cash as savings. There is no explanation or documentary evidence with regard to source of cash lying in hand which was deposited in the bank prior to giving loans to the assessee. It is also noteworthy that almost all loans and cash deposit have been made in the month of March 2014 (that too in last few days of the month of March) which cannot just be coincidence. It cannot be said that all lenders would keep their savings in cash and dep ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... also submitted that confirmation of account has been filed in all the cases. Loan has been taken through account payee cheque. Bank statement have been filed in all the cases except Ruby Jain. Statement on oath recorded by the Ld. AO in all the cases except Ragini, copy of income tax return filed for the loan creditors assessed to tax and land ownership documents and proof of agricultural income supplied by the cash creditors. Reliance was placed on plethora of judgments mentioned in the paper book filed on 03.12.2019. 10. We have heard rival contentions and perused the record placed before us. Though the revenue has raised grounds of appeal running from ground no.1 to 10 but the sole grievance relates to the addition u/s 68 of the Act at ₹ 1,94,98,000/- for unexplained cash creditors made by the Ld. AO but deleted by the ld. CIT(A). 11. We observe that are the following disputed cash creditors are in challenge before us. Table 1 S. No. Name Amount 1 Hitesh Ghargav 2,00,000 2 Pankaj Nigoskar 320000 3 Nikhil Maheshwari 2250000 4 Laxminarayan Ramsingh 150000 Total 29,20,000 Table 2 S. No. Name Amount 1 Anusuiya Patel 700000 2 Benira ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ari Singh (₹ 7,00,000/-) (a) He is having 10.48 Bighas of agricultural land. Market (Guideline) value of said property is 26 lacs as on today.. (b) Loan taken through account payee cheque and repaid through account payee cheque (c) Affidavit filed (d) Statement on oath taken by the AO in which he confirmed the transaction (v) Laxmi Gulab Patel (₹ 6,50,000/-) (a) She is having 6.476 Bighas of agricultural land. Market (Guideline) value of said property is 1.10 crores as on today. (b) Loan taken through account payee cheque and repaid through account payee cheque (c) Affidavit filed (d) Statement on oath taken by the AO in which she confirmed the transaction (vi) Mahendra Patel (₹ 10,00,000/-) (a) He is having 17.6 Bighas of agricultural land. Market (Guideline) value of said property is 3.06 crores. (b) Loan taken through account payee cheque and repaid through account payee cheque (c) Affidavit filed (d) Statement on oath taken by the AO in which he confirmed the transaction (e) He is an Income Tax assessee. Copy of computation alongwith acknowledgement filed. (f) Holding 51% shares (vii) Rachita Patel (₹ 6,00,000/-) (a) S ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Statement on oath taken by the AO in which he confirmed the transaction (d) Salaried employee getting salary of ₹ 1.93lacs. (xiv) Ruby Jain (₹ 1,00,000/-) (a) Loan taken through account payee cheque and repaid through account payee cheque (b) Statement on oath taken by the AO in which she confirmed the transaction (c) Salaried employee getting salary of ₹ 2,00,000/- (xv) Y.D. Trading (Yashwant Dhanore) (₹ 5,00,000/-) (a) Loan taken through account payee cheque and repaid through account payee cheque (b) Affidavit filed (c) Statement on oath taken by the AO in which he confirmed the transaction (d) Director in Ocean Infrasolution getting salary of ₹ 2,00,000/- P.A. (e) Also supplies building material. (xvi) Ragini (₹ 5,00,000/-) (a) Loan taken through account payee cheque and repaid through account payee cheque (xvii) Pankaj Lata Gupta (₹ 20,00,000/-) (a) Loan taken through account payee cheque and repaid through account payee cheque (b) Statement on oath taken by the AO in which he confirmed the transaction (c) She is an Income Tax assessee. Copy of computation alongwith acknowledgement filed. (d) Getting ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rtment. The loan parties furnished the Joan confirmation, copy of bank account and proof of filing of the return. The appellant furnished the following documents in support of his claim 1. Loan confirmations. 2. Copy of ITR, wherever return has been filed 3. Proof of source of income. 4. Bank statement. 5. The AO has recorded the statement of the loan parties and they had confirmed the transactions. 6. Affidavits. By filing the above documents the appellant is able to establish the i. Identity of the creditors - most of the creditors are income tax payers and filed the loan confirmations. ii. Genuineness of the transaction - the appellant has taken the loan through banking channel. The appellant is in the receipt of loan by cheque. iii. Creditworthiness of the creditors - The persons not only given the loan to the appellant but to other parties also and confirmed the same. 4.1.2 From the above it is clear that the appellant ha satisfied all the three conditions required for genuineness of the transaction. It is also to be mentioned that most of the credit parties are assessed to tax. The same view has been upheld by Honble ITA T in the following cases:- i. U ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eed against the cash creditors if they were not satisfied with statement on oath given by the cash creditors. It is clear that the assessee has proved all the ingredients of section 68 of the Act in order to clear the burden of proof. The onus thus shifted on the Revenue to rebut which remained unfulfilled. The persons advanced the loan are man of means and nearly 70% of loan creditors are assessed to tax and the remaining are agriculturists having sufficient agricultural land to earn agricultural income. The affidavit has been filed by all the cash creditors and this fact cannot be disputed. It is also brought to a notice that the alleged loans accepted through account payee cheque were repaid in a month time, has not been disputed by the revenue. The Ld. AO was made a case of capital building since loans were repaid within a month. 17. We, therefore, in the given facts and circumstances of the case and detailed finding of fact by the Ld. CIT(A), sufficient material placed on record by the assessee during the course of hearing before both the lower authorities and before us including the statement on oath taken by the Ld. AO and other documentary evidences referred hereinabove, a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
