9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (2) TMI 71X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... record. 3. Briefly the facts of the case are that the return of income was filed by the assessee on 26.03.2011 declaring a total income of Rs. 2,75,250/-, which was processed under section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. A search and seizure action under section 132 of the Income-Tax Act, 1961 was carried-out in the case of Shri Mukesh Gupta Group 21.05.2009. This case was centralized with this Circle of the A.O. by CIT-IV, New Delhi. As the assessee failed to comply with the statutory notices, an ex-parte assessment order was passed under section 144 of the Income-Tax Act, 1961, on the basis of material available on record and the A.O. made the following additions (1) Unexplained Share Application Money - Rs. 9,50,000/- (2) Unexplain ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rav Bhasin Rs. 10,00,000/- 5. Star Technosoft Pvt. Ltd., Rs. 10,00,000/- Rs. 40,00,000/- Total Rs. 1,59,50,000/- 3.4. The assessee vide letter Dated 01.03.2018 submitted confirmation of abovementioned persons except of Star Technosoft Pvt. Ltd. The assessee vide letter Dated 21.05.2018 further submitted ITRs of the abovementioned persons except of Star Technosoft Pvt. Ltd. The assessee also submitted bank statements of the above creditors except Star Technosoft Pvt. Ltd. and also submitted audit report of Kshitiz Infratech Pvt. Ltd., for A.Y. 2009-2010. The A.O. from the above documents observed that (1) income declared in the ITRs of all the six parties was very low as compared to the corresponding transactions (2) in t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in response to the summons under section 131 of the I.T. Act, therefore, same were also treated as unexplained unsecured loans and addition of Rs. 1.50 crores was made. 3.5. The assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) and also raised additional ground of appeal that assessment completed is time barred and that additions on merit are wholly unjustified. The Ld. CIT(A), however, decided both the issues against the assessee. The Ld. CIT(A) also observed that since there was non-compliance to the summons issued by the A.O, therefore, onus upon assessee to prove genuine credits have not been discharged. The Ld. CIT(A), accordingly, dismissed the appeal of the assessee. 4. The Learned Counsel for the Assessee as regards the unexplained s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ransactions. He has also referred to Order of Ld. CIT(A)-23, Dated 06.07.2020 for A.Y. 2010-2011 in which the same CIT(A) did not consider non-compliance of summons as sufficient to make addition under section 68 of the Income Tax Act in the case of same assessee. Learned Counsel for the Assessee relied upon the following decisions: 1. CIT-IV vs., Dwarkadhish Investment (P.) Ltd., [2011] 330 ITR 298 (Del.). 2. Mod Creations (P.) Ltd., vs., ITO [2013] 354 ITR 282 (Del.) 3. CIT vs., Varinder Rawlley [2014] 366 ITR 232 (P & H) 4. Pr. CIT vs., Himachal Fibers Ltd., [2018] 98 taxmann.com 173 (SC). 5. On the other hand, the Ld. D.R. relied upon the Orders of the authorities below and submitted that assessee did not follow the Order o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hey have sufficient bank balance to give loan to the assessee. These creditors have also confirmed giving loan to the assessee. In the case of Star Technosoft Pvt. Ltd., assessee has filed letter before A.O. Dated 21.05.2018 [PB-124] in which assessee has explained that the assessee is making efforts to get the bank statements and in case of urgency the same may be summoned from the concerned Bank of the creditors. The assessee also requested that this creditor may be summoned under section 131 of the Income Tax Act. However, the A.O. did not make any effort to summon this creditor for producing the bank statement and no effort is also made to call for the information from the concerned Bank of the creditor, despite the request made by the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ance sheet found that amount of Rs. 50 lakh have been shown as advance against the property, but, it is a fact that this creditor has given an amount of Rs. 50 lakhs to the assessee, therefore, no further adverse inference could be taken against the assessee. The authorities below have also rejected the explanation of assessee because the creditors did not appear in response to the summons issued by the A.O. Dated 17.05.2018 for the date fix for 24.05.2018. It may be noted that the A.O. issued summons under section 131 of the Income-Tax Act, 1961 to enforce the attendance of the creditors at the fag end of the assessment. The first date was fixed for 24.05.2018 only and assessment have been framed on 31.05.2018. Thus, the Learned Counsel fo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
