9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (10) TMI 422X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hence, the creditworthiness also has been proved. The appellant provided a copy of audited balance sheet and profit and loss account for the year under consideration in respect of depositors to the Assessing Officer and after verification, the Assessing Officer has the only objection that the company was not having fresh funds in its books of accounts and negligible operational income was derived. CIT(Appeals) has rightly opined that since the depositor company had duly recorded the deposits/loans given to the appellant in its books of accounts out of its own funds or borrowed funds, no addition in the hands of the appellant is permissible so far as the transactions are recorded in the books of depositor company No reason for us to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ess of a party? (C) Whether the Appellate Tribunal has erred in law and on facts in deleting the addition by ignoring that the lenders had filed Return of Income declaring very meagre taxable/operational income which casts aspersions on the capacity of such lenders to advance such huge amounts to the assessee? 2. The brief facts leading to the present appeal are as follows: - 2.1. The Assessing Officer had made an addition of ₹ 4,03,34,000/- under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act ) in respect of six parties. The Revenue is aggrieved by the decision of the Appellate Tribunal only in respect of unsecured loans received from Shaan Leisure Limited, GSM Infra Projects Limited and Mani ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... anking channels and, in support, copy of the bank statement was provided by the assessee; (iii) in the event of any doubts with regard to the cash deposits in the banks of the depositors, the action can be taken against them, but, no adverse view could be taken at the ends of the assessee. It held that once the assessee discharges the primary onus cast upon it by submitting the copy of supporting documents in form of confirmation, copy of bank statement and return of income, the onus would shift upon the Assessing Officer to make further inquiries through issuing summons and notices under Section 133(6). 2.5. When challenged before the Appellate Tribunal, it concurred with the view of the CIT (Appeals). The same has been challenged ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... it G. Shah ₹ 5,75,000/-, (2) Sejal Shah ₹ 67,30,000/-, (3) Shaan Leisure Ltd. - ₹ 1,07,05,000/-, (4) GSM Infra Projects Ltd. - ₹ 92,60,000/-, (5) Yuva Sports Academy Pvt. Ltd. - ₹ 5,00,000/-, and (6) Manibhadra Tradelink Pvt. Ltd. - ₹ 1,25,64,000/-. The Assessing Officer directed to submit the identity of the creditors, their creditworthiness and genuineness of the transactions and since when he disbelieved the creditworthiness of the creditors, he made the additions. 4.1. The CIT(Appeals), as could be noticed, threadbare examined the entire material in case of each of these persons and entities and eventually held that the identity of the depositors had been prove ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing summons and notices under Section 133(6) to the depositors for further verification, which in the instant case, has not been done and for which the appellant could not be held responsible. In case of every person and entity, it has gone into these details and accordingly allowed the appeal of the appellant. 4.4. The ITAT on detailed representation of this, concluded thus: - 11. A perusal of the finding of the ld. CIT(A) extracted (supra) it would reveal that the ld. CIT(A) has examined each transaction in detail in the light of conditions enumerated in section 68. For example, in the case of Shri Mit Gopalbhai is concerned a sum of ₹ 5,75,000/- was taken by the assessee as unsecured loan during this year. The ld. CIT(A) as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... with absence of any incriminating evidence in the subsequent assessment orders of the creditors, we are of the view that no interference is called for in the finding of the ld. CIT(A). This ground of Revenue is dismissed. 5. We could notice the concurrent findings of both the authorities on facts which deserve no interference from this Court. The ITAT as a final fact finding body, in absence of any material under Section 133(6) with the AO, has chosen to uphold the version of CIT(Appeals) which also elaborately treated the material evidence and concluded with sound reasoning. We do not see any reason for us to interfere as addition contemplation was under Section 68 of the IT Act which provides that any sum found credited in the books ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
