9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (4) TMI 1961X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... am Singh further confirmed the loan transactions with the assessee. So far as the question that the CIT(A) raised that why a person would take loan on interest to pay it further interest free to the assessee, is concerned, we are of the view, that the aforesaid fact is not sufficient to hold that it was the own money of the assessee which was routed through Shri Sham Singh. Had it been so, in those circumstances, Shri Sham Singh would not have required to pay the interest to Shri Sunil Kumar HUF . Whether Shri Sham Singh had paid interest on the loan amount to Shri Sunil Kumar Goel HUF or not, in our view, is not relevant and cannot form the basis to hold that it was the own money of the assessee routed though Shri Sham Singh. So ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e assessee u/s 68 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act '). 2. The Assessing officer during the assessment proceedings, noted that the assessee during the year had received a loan of ₹ 4 lacs from one Shri Sham Singh. On being asked to explain the genuineness of the transact ions and creditworthiness of the creditor, the assessee stated that Shri Sham Singh had advanced the loan from his bank account. That he had applied to the bank for supply of copy of the bank statement. However, since the bank authorities did not supply the copy of the bank statement, the Assessing officer completed the assessment making the addition of ₹ 4 lacs into the income of the assessee treating the same as unexplained income of th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t from the circumstances it appeared that assessee had routed its own unaccounted money through different accounts which ultimately had been shown as a loan from Shri Sham Singh. He, therefore, held that the assessee had failed to establish creditworthiness of Shri Sham Singh. He, accordingly confirmed the order of the Assessing officer making the impugned addition of ₹ 4 lacs. 4. Being aggrieved by the above order of the CIT(A), the assessee came in appeal before the Tribunal. 5. We have heard the rival content ions and have also gone through the record. A perusal of the order of the CIT(A) reveals that the assessee had duly furnished not only the bank statement of Shri Sham Singh, creditor but also the bank statement of Sunil ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ne of Shri Sham Singh about any subsequent transaction as it was only Shri Sham Singh who could have explained the source of the returned money to Shri Sunil Kumar Goel HUF. The said transaction however, is not related to the appellant and thus he is not supposed to answer that quest ion. The assessee in this case has not only duly proved the transact ion but has also proved the source of the aforesaid loan amount in the hands of the creditor. We therefore, do not find any justification on the part of the lower authorities in making the impugned addition, the same is ordered to be deleted. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is, hereby, allowed. Order pronounced in the Open Court on 16.04.2019. - - TaxTMI - TMITax - Inco ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
