9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (4) TMI 265X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... venue against the order dated 20.06.2017 passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (for short the CIT (A)-37, Mumbai, for the assessment year 2008-09, whereby the Ld. CIT (A) has allowed the appeal filed by the assessee against the assessment order passed u/s 143 (3) r.w.s. 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short the Act ). 2. The revenue has challenged the impugned order passed by the Ld. CIT (A) on the following effective grounds: 1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) has erred in deleting the addition of ₹ 5,00,00,000/- on account of unsecured loans without appreciating that the assessee could not prove the creditworthiness of the lenders as well as non-production of the lenders before the Assessing Officer. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned Commissioner of Income tax (Appeals) has erred in not considering that the addition was made on the basis of information received from the DGIT (Inv.), with regard to bogus loan taken by the assessee from Shri Pravin Kumar Jain Group. 3. At the outset, the Ld. counsel for the assess ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Jain and associate concern i.e. Ansh Merchandise Pvt. Ltd. (New Planet Trading Co. Pvt. Ltd.), Caspar Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. (Ostwal Trading Pvt. Ltd.), Mohit International (Proprietor M/s Nilesh F Parmar) and Natasha Enterprises (Proprietor Rose Sudhir Padbidri). In the first appeal, the Ld. CIT (A) deleted the addition by following the decision of the coordinate Bench in the assessee s own case for the AY 2007-08 and other cases. The operative part of the order passed by the Ld. CIT (A) reads as under:- 5.15 The case of the appellant is covered by the decision of ITAT, Bench, Mumbai in the case of Satish N. Doshi HUF Vs. ITO, Ward 21 (2) (4), Mumbai in ITA No. 2329/Mum/2009 and the decision of ITAT, E Bench, Mumbai in the case of Shaf Broadcast Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT Cir-9(3), Mumbai in ITA No. 1819/Mum/2012. Both the cases relates to re-opening of assessment on the basis of statements of Mr. Mukesh Choksi and Mr. I.C. Choksi and associated brokerage companies. The Hon ble ITAT on the analysis of the findings made in the assessment orders has reached to the conclusion that the re-opening itself is bad in law and quashed the orders accordingly. The ratio of these judgments is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the nature and source of such credits or the explanation by the assessee in the opinion of the AO is not satisfactory. 2. The opinion of the AO for not accepting the explanation offered by the assessee as not satisfactory is required to be formed objectively with reference to the material on record. 3.Courts are of the firm view that the evidence produced by the assessee cannot be brushed aside in a casual manner. 4. The onus of proof is not static. The initial burden lies on the assessee to establish the identity and the credit worthiness of the creditor as well as the genuineness of transaction. 5. The identity of creditors can be established by either furnishing their PANs or assessment orders. The genuineness of the transaction can be proved if it was shown that the money was received by A/c payee cheque. Creditworthiness of the lender can be established by attending circumstances. 5.18 During the assessment proceedings, the appellant has submitted Loan Confirmations, Copy of Acknowledgement and Copies of the Bank Statements of Ansh Merchandise P. Ltd., Casper Enterprises P. Ltd., Mohit International and Matasha Enterprises. If the above referred pr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... shed copies of bank statements, income tax returns of the lenders, copy of acknowledgments of income tax returns, copy of ledger accounts of the creditors, loan confirmation along with bank statements reflecting the receipts and payment of loans from the said parties. However, the AO relying on the statement of Sh. Pravin Kumar Jain and Bhanwarlal Jain concluded that the companies have provided accommodation entries to the assessee, therefore, the assessee has failed to prove the nature of source of the transaction. 7. Before the Tribunal, the Ld. DR submitted that the transaction between the assessee and the company operated by Sh. Pravin Kumar Jain Group and Bhanwarlal Jain Group are all paper transaction, therefore, the claim of the assessee are not genuine. The coordinate Bench after hearing both the sides upheld the findings of the Ld. CIT (A) holding as under:- 6. We have heard the rival submissions, perused the orders of the authorities below. Assessing Officer made addition by placing reliance merely on the statements of Shri Praveen Kumar Jain Group and Shri Bhanwarlal Jain Group which were recorded u/s 132 (4) of the Act. No independent enquiry was carried out by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
