9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (9) TMI 31X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... access to the part of the information specifically available with the lenders, AO has not issued any summon u/s. 131 of the Act to the two lenders to carry out further verification and to find out legitimacy in the claim of the assessee. We have also considered the decision in the case of Smt. Prabhavati S. Shah [ 1998 (2) TMI 107 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT] referred by the ld. counsel for need of admitting additional evidence in the larger interest of justice - we consider that it is essential to restore this case to the file of AO for deciding the issue in appeal on merit after examination, verification of the additional evidences which could not be obtained during the course of assessment proceedings because of non-cooperation from the lend ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d to beneficiaries M/s. Poineer Mercantile Ltd. and Lakshya Securities Credit holding Ltd. and they have failed to make compliance with the notices issued by the Assessing Officer. Therefore, the Assessing Officer has issued show cause notice to the assessee to show cause as to why aggregate loan of ₹ 1,13,90,000/- taken from both the parties should not be treated as unexplained cash credit u/s. 68 of the act. In response, the assessee explained that he has submitted all the details/documents in his submission dated 12th July, 2016, 8th August, 2016 and 7th December, 2016. The assessee has further submitted that part of the detail mentioned in the notice at para no. 2 pertaining to the detail of M/s. Poineer Mercantile Ltd. and Lakshy ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the two lenders was not available with the assessee because of confidential nature, therefore, the same could not be furnished before the Assessing Officer because of paucity of time at the assessment level. Because of the own efforts of the assessee, the same was filed before the ld. CIT(A) after collecting the information from the website of the Ministry of Corporate Affairs. However, the ld. CIT(A) has not accepted these details for deciding the case of the assessee on merit. The assessee has also pleaded that inadvertently the assessee could not make an application under rule 46A I.T. Rule 1962 for admission of additional evidences before the ld. CIT(A). He has submitted that ld. CIT(A) has failed to appreciate that the aforesaid unavo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lance sheet as well as profit and loss account. The assessee has explained that he was prevented by the aforesaid cause from producing the details before the Assessing Officer during the assessment. In spite of the undisputed fact that the assessee has categorically brought to the notice of the Assessing Officer that he was not having access to the part of the information specifically available with the lenders, the Assessing Officer has not issued any summon u/s. 131 of the Act to the two lenders to carry out further verification and to find out legitimacy in the claim of the assessee. We have also considered the decision of Hon ble Bombay High Court in the case of Smt. Prabhavati S. Shah Vs. CIT 231 ITR 1 (Bom) referred by the ld. counsel ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
