9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (6) TMI 1606X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... these facts and circumstances, we are of the view that CIT(A) has decided the matter of the controversy judiciously in correctly which is not liable to be interfere with at this appellate stage. Accordingly, these issues are decided in favour of the assessee against the revenue. - ITA No.7460/Mum/2016, ITA No. 6807/Mum/2018 - - - Dated:- 26-6-2019 - Shri M. Balaganesh, Accountant Member And Shri Amarjit Singh, Judicial Member For the Revenue : Shri B. Yadagiri For the Assessee : Shri Vinod Kumar Bindal ORDER Per Amarjit Singh, Judicial Member The above mentioned appeals have been filed by the Revenue against the different order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-8, Mumbai [hereinafter referred ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... provided the accommodation entries. Notice u/s 147 148 of the Income tax Act, 1961 was issued and served upon the assessee and the reasons for reopening is hereby reproduced as under:- intimation has been received from Dy Commissioner of Income Tax (Central)-XXVIII, Kolkatta as per letter No. DCIT/CC-XXVIII/Kol/BMPL/2012-13/535 dtd 12.02.2013 stating therein that the ADIT (Investigation), Unit-VII (1) (2), Mumbai, vide his letter No. ADIT (Inv) / U-VII(1)/A.Dalmia/2011-12 dated 28.12.2011, had informed that consequent to the searches by CBI at the residence and office premises of M S Bali and Dalmiya s, and the prima facie substantial material found by CBI, indicating 20 dummy companies of Mr. Arun Dalmiya engaged in money launder ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o believe that income chargeable to tax to the extent of ₹ 11485500/- has escaped assessment within the meaning of provision of sec. 147 of Income Tax Act, 1961 and hence, I propose to re-open the assessment for AY 2009-10 by issuing notice u/s. 148 of the Income Tax act, 1961. Issue notice u/s. 148 of the Income Tax act, 1961 to the assessee. 3. Thereafter an opportunity of being heard was given to the assessee, the assessee failed to explain the unsecured loan to the tune of ₹ 58,20,000/- which was added to the income of the assessee. The total income of the assessee was assessed in sum of ₹ 60, 64,740/-. Feeling aggrieved, the assessee filed appeal before the CIT(A) to deleted the said additions. Therefore, the reven ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... brought anything on record to negate identity, creditworthiness or genuineness of transactions with BMPL but has instead made the addition on certain conjectures and surmises. Therefore, an addition of ₹ 41,00,000/- is deleted. This ground of appeal is allowed. 5.2.2 The facts and circumstances in the instant assessment year are identical except for the amount. Therefore, following my decision for A.Y. 2008-09, addition of ₹ 58,20,000/- u/s. 68 is deleted. This ground of appeal is allowed. 4. On appraisal of the above mentioned finding, we noticed that the CIT(A) has deleted the additions on the basis of the decision in the assesee s own case for AY 2008-09. The identity, creditworthiness and genuineness of the transacti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e case and in law, the Ld. C1T(A) was right in holding that the AO has erred in making addition of ₹ 2,63,000/- to the returned income in terms of section 68 of the Act not being satisfied with the genuineness of credit? 2. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) was right in deleting the addition of Rsr2,63,000/- holding that the appellant had discharged initial onus to establish identity, creditworthiness and genuineness of the transactions and since the AO had not faulted the confirmations filed before him, the entire addition was merely based on suspicion regarding BMPL which does not stand? 3. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. C1T(A) wa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
