9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (8) TMI 198X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d be sufficient for the assessee to discharge his initial burden. Then it would be for the AO to bring material if he wants to negate the same. - Decided in favour of assessee. - ITA.No.5899/Del./2019, ITA.No.4789/Del./2019 - - - Dated:- 7-8-2020 - Shri Bhavnesh Saini, Judicial Member And Shri O.P. Kant, Accountant Member For the Assessees : Shri Ved Jain, Advocate, Shri Ashish Goel, C.A. And Ms. Surbhi Goyal, C.A. For the Revenue : Shri R.K. Gupta, Sr. D.R ORDER PER BHAVNESH SAINI, J.M. Both the appeals by different Assessees are directed against the different Orders of the Ld. CIT(A)-34, New Delhi, Dated 15.05.2019 and 26.04.2019 for the A.Y. 2009-2010 respectively. 2. We have heard the Learned Representatives of both the parties through video conferencing and perused the material on record. Both the appeals are decided as under. ITA.No.5899/Del./2019 Shri Neetu Nayyar : 3. In this appeal the assessee challenged the reopening of the assessment under section 147 of the I.T. Act, 1961 and addition of ₹ 4 lakhs under section 68 of the I.T. Act, 1961. 4. The assessee filed return of income declaring income of ₹ 2,00,110/ on 31 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ntary evidence is produced on record to prove the entry in the Bank Account. It was submitted that the additional evidences may be considered. The Ld. CIT(A) called for the remand report from the A.O. who submitted that the documentary evidences submitted by assessee could not be verified. The Ld. CIT(A) considering these facts, confirmed the addition on merit. 5. We have heard the Learned Representative of both the parties. Learned Counsel for the Assessee submitted that in the case of wife of assessee Smt. Meena Nayyar, the identical issue came up for consideration before ITAT, SMC-1 Bench, Delhi in ITA.No.4788/Del./2019 for the A.Y. 2009-2010 on identical facts and the addition on merit have been deleted vide Order Dated 19.03.2020. Learned Counsel for the Assessee submitted that in the case of wife of assessee similar loan was given to M/s. R.G. Consultants Pvt. Ltd., through the loan taken from Shri Babu Jethani and his son Master Vinayak Nayyar. Similar documents were filed on record. Copy of the Order of the Tribunal is placed on record. He has, therefore, submitted that the issue is covered by the aforesaid Order of the Tribunal. 6. On the other hand, Ld. D.R. reli ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... credits from the related parties, which led the Ld. DCIT, Circle 15(1)) conclude the assessment, by making an addition of ₹ 22,70,000/-. On appeal, the Ld. CIT(A), deleted the additions in the hands of the M/s R.G. Consultants Private Limited. But, the CIT(A) directed the AO to verify the source of investment in the hands of the assessee. Subsequently, the AO, vide notice dated 01.06.2016 issued u/s 148 of the Act, reopened the case of the assessee. During the course of assessment proceedings, the assessee vide reply dated 30.11.2016 submitted that the assessee has given a loan of ₹ 7,50,000/- to M/s R.G. Consultants Pvt. Ltd. The assessee further submitted that out of ₹ 7,50,000/-, the loan of ₹ 4,00,000/- was obtained from his friend through account payee cheque and the balance loan of ₹ 3,50,000/- was obtained by transfer from assessee's son, Master Vinayak Nayyar's account. However, the AO disregarded the explanations submitted by the assessee and made an addition of ₹ 7,50,000/- in the hands of the assessee and alleged that the assessee has received this amount from M/s Federal Exchange and the amount received in the bank accoun ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ten submissions filed before the Ld. CIT(A); copy of remand report, copy of rejoinder filed before the CIT(A) and the copy of order of CIT(A) in the case of Shiv Kumar Nayyar dated 28.5.2019. After perusing the written submissions as well as the documentary evidences, I am of the view that it is not the case of the AO that the amount received by the assessee is in the nature of accommodation entry. In order to arrive at such a conclusion, the department has to be in possession of sufficient and adequate material. It is noted that assessee has received these amounts from his friend, Sh. Babu Jeethani. The assessee had also submitted the proof of identity of the lender as well as the copy of confirmations, which itself establish the existence of the lender and which has not been doubted by the AO as well as the Ld. CIT(A). Thus, the genuineness of the transactions gets established through the evidences submitted by the assessee. To support this view, I draw my support from the decision of the ITAT, Mumbai Bench in the case of ACIT vs. Calvin Properties, in ITA No. 6561, 6562 6564/Mum/2017 dated 3.4.2019 wherein it has been held as under:- 15. In this case, the creditwort ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Fair Finvest Ltd., reported in [2013] 357 ITR 146, vide order dated 22.11.2012, wherein it was held as under: 6. This Court has considered the submissions of the parties. In this case the discussion by the CIT(A) would reveal that the assessee has filed documents including certified copies issued by the Registrar of Companies in relation to the share application, affidavits of the Directors, Form 2 filed with the ROC by such applicants confirmations by the applicant for company's shares, certificates by auditors etc. Unfortunately, the assessing officer chose to base himself merely on the general inference to be drawn from the reading of the investigation report and the statement of Mr. Mahesh Garg. To elevate the inference which can be drawn on the basis of reading of such material into judicial conclusions would be improper, more so when the assessee produced material. The least that the assessing officer ought to have done was to enquire into the matter by, if necessary, invoking his powers under Section 131 summoning the share applicants or directors. No effort was made in that regard. In the absence ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ders of the authorities below and delete the addition of ₹ 4,00,000/-. In view of the above the issue as regards reopening of the assessment is left with academic discussion only and there is no need to decide the same. 8. In the result, appeal of Assessee allowed. ITA.No.4789/Del./2019 Smt. Honey Nayyar : 9. In this case assessee has challenged the reopening of the assessment under section 147 of the I.T. Act, 1961 and addition of ₹ 7,50,000/-. 10. In this case also similarly the assessment was reopened because assessee has given loan of ₹ 7,50,000/- to M/s. R.G. Consultants Pvt. Ltd., after taking loan from Shri Babu Jethani and his son Master Karthik Nayyar. The A.O. did not accept the contention of assessee and confirmed the addition. The Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of assessee. The issue is covered by the Order of the ITAT, SMC-1 Bench, Delhi in the case of Smt. Meena Nayyar (supra) and following the same we have also deleted the similar addition in the case of Shri Neetu Nayyar (surpra). Following the reasons for decision in the above case, we set aside the Orders of the authorities below and delete the entire addition. The issue of re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
