9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (12) TMI 985X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... re and source of such sum so credited which has been found to be satisfactory the addition under Section 68 is maintainble. Thus, the provision of 68 does not speak about mere belief of the Revenue in regard to the proof of the genuineness of the transaction as well as identity and creditworthiness of the creditors but must have a clear finding on this aspect. Main ingredients of the provision of Section 68 has not been satisfied and taking into consideration this particular aspect of the matter we find that the Ld. AO rightly added the impugned amount in the hands of the assessee - Decided in favour of Revenue. - I.T.A. No. 2127/Ahd/2016 - - - Dated:- 30-11-2021 - Shri Waseem Ahmed, Accountant Member And Ms. Madhumita Roy, Judicial Member For the Revenue : Shri Mohd. Usman, CIT DR For the Assessee : Shri M. K. Patel, Advocate ORDER PER Ms. MADHUMITA ROY - JM: The instant appeal filed by the Revenue is directed against the order dated 13.06.2016 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-9, Ahmedabad arising out of the order dated 27.03.2015 passed by the DCIT, Circle 3(1)(1), Ahmedabad under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (here ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... .06.2012. So far as the creditworthiness of the above two persons are concerned it was submitted by the assessee that Mr. Jimmy Patel Group is in real estate business and the said family has one suitable plot of land near Makarba. Twin negotiations with M/s Patel family were going to construct on their land a proposed Showroom, office and workshop for the assessee as per the designed to be approved by BMW and secondly the said Patel family were potential joint venture partner in BMW business. The said family had, therefore, brought Share Application Money for proposed joint venture. However, since certain legal queries in regard to the clear title of the property cropped up the same was not found acceptable to the BMW Group and the negotiations between the parties failed. 7. The assessee provided the details of the name, address and PAN of both the family members having Share Application. It was also submitted by the assessee before the Ld. AO that since the negotiations for potential joint venture partnership and showroom etc. premises have been closed long back, the assessee does not get requisite co-operation from the said Patel Group and the ITR, relevant bank statement for ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e contentions of the assessee are found not tenable for the following reasons: i) The basic requirement to discharge the onus of explaining the cash credit is to establish the identity and creditworthiness of the creditors and genuineness of the transactions. ii) The onus to explain any cash credit in the books of accounts rests on the assessee. The onus can be discharged only if the identity and creditworthiness of the creditors as well as the genuineness of the transactions are established. ii) To establish the identity of the applicants for the shares of the company the assessee failed to furnish copy of return of income of the for the AY 2012-13. Assessee miserably failed to provide any documentary evidences which establish the identities of the creditors. iii) To establish the creditworthiness, the assessee failed to produce copies of Balance Sheet and Profit and loss accounts of the creditors for the AY 2012-13 (FY 2011-12). The argument of the assessee that it is not getting co-operation from the Patel Group is baseless and merely an afterthought. To justify the creditworthiness, the assessee vide submission dated 24.02.2015 furnished Certificate of Valua ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Patel, the assessee claims that the advance has been adjusted against the sale of BMW cars to him. However, on perusal of the ledger account of Shri Jimmy Patel in the books of the assessee it is noticed that the sum of ₹ 68,61,507/- has come from the following parties: 1. Janki Jaushil Patel ₹ 34,48,970/- 2. Hirenbhai Dilipbhai Trivedi ₹ 14,12,537/- 3. Zarak Yunus Sheikh ₹ 20,00,000 /- Total ₹ 68,61,507/- However, the assessee failed to explain that on what account these parties have given Hawala to Shri Jimmy Patel. The assessee also failed to produce the copies of bills for sale of BMW cars against which said advance has been claimed as adjusted. From the above discussion, it is established that the argument of the assessee is not satisfactory as the transactions of receiving share application and afterward adjusting in the so called sale is nothing but a colorful device to hide capital ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
