9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (9) TMI 1195X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... showing a total loss of ₹44,67,381. The case was selected for scrutiny. During the scrutiny assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer noticed the assessee to have shown huge addition of liability of ₹49,75,921 under the head unsecured loans . The Assessing Officer asked the assessee to furnish the details and confirmation letters from the creditors to prove the genuineness of the liability. The Assessing Officer observed in his order that the assessee could not produce the confirmation letters and has failed to discharge the onus of proving the genuineness of the said liabilities to the extent of ₹48,36,421. He, therefore, treated this amount of ₹48,36,421 as bogus liability and added the same to the total incom ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f Suburban Industries Ltd. for the same assessment year 2006-07 was also covered under scrutiny assessment Under Section 143 (3) of the Income Tax Act. The fact of such transactions with the assessee with the above party have been duly examined where in certain transactions made were in the nature of loan. In terms of common directorship of Sri Prasant Satpathy it can be considered as a sister concern. In spite of production of copy of Account and confirmation from Suburban Industries, the net increase in liabilities was added as deemed income by treat it as bogus liability. In respect of loan transactions made by the assessee with International, Pratap Chandra and Sinclair Builders (p) Ltd during the year, though the loan were taken throug ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... income as bogus liability and added it as deemed income by applying the provisions of section 68 of Income Tax Act. The learned assessing officer should have issued summons as provided under Section 131 of Income Tax Act to the loan creditors or should have conducted further enquiry or investigation before coming to a conclusion that the net increase in addition to unsecured loans for ₹ 48,36,421 .00 during the year as deemed income U/s 68 of the Income Tax Act. The learned assessing officer has not properly examined the books of accounts and entries recorded there in and so as to know the identity of the party and genuineness of the transactions. It is not fair and proper on the part of the assessing officer to disbelieve the audite ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 08,000 towards interest on loan was credited to its account and a sum of ₹ 1,32,234 was debited to its account and thus arising a net credit balance of ₹ 39,75,766as at 31st March 2006. Even interest paid on such loan was allowed during the assessment. Thus the learned assessing officer has not applied his mind before treating it as bogus liability or deemed income. Further no other independent material or evidence has been collected before coming to such conclusion. Assessment has been completed without making any further enquiry or issuing of summons to creditors as provided U/s 131 of the Income Tax Act. Thus the order of assessment made by the learned assessing officer is made without judicial application of mind and merely ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
