9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (4) TMI 1319X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t'). 2. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an individual, filed his return of income for A.Y.2018-19, declaring total income of Rs. 1,54,55,320/-. The case was selected for scrutiny under CASS. The assessee filed details as required vide notices u/s 142(1), from which it was gathered that the assessee had shown unsecured loan to the tune of Rs. 1,01,22,406/- as on 31.03.2018 and out of which Rs. 33,32,906/- was received during the year under consideration, against which no interest had been shown to have been paid by the assessee. The assessee was asked to produce the documentary evidence to prove the identity, creditworthiness and genuineness of the loan transactions, consequent to which, the said amount remained unexplained ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Act was passed on 23.04.2021. Against which, the assessee preferred an appeal before the CIT(A) and submitted that the assessee's field of working is erroneously stated as real estate, whereas, the assessee is in the business of rural water scheme, which lacks the jurisdiction for scrutiny. The Ld.CIT(A) observed that the assessee has totally misplaced the facts that the case was selected for limited scrutiny and accordingly relied on CBDT's Instruction No.225/169/2019/ITA-II dated 05.09.2019 which relates to manual selection of returns for complete scrutiny, wherein scope of examination /enquiry is described in para 2(ii) in limited scrutiny cases only and whereas, the assessee's case is selected for complete scrutiny and does not have a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e assessee under the provisions of section 68 of the Act. 11. Aggrieved by the order of the AO, the assessee preferred an appeal before the CIT(A) and the Ld.CIT(A) observed that the onus lies with the assessee to prove identity, creditworthiness and genuineness of all the unsecured loans to the satisfaction of the AO. Relying on various judgements of Hon'ble Supreme Court and other High Courts, the Ld.CIT(A) held that mere furnishing of a copy of aadhar card, PAN card, bank statements, etc. do not suffice all the three components of cash credits. In the instant case, it is an undisputed fact that the assessee is getting huge unsecured loan without any collateral security and that too without any interest and failed to show the purpose of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... wer authorities and allow the ground of appeal. 13. On the other hand, the Ld.DR submitted that Ld.CIT(A) considered all the aspects and passed orders, therefore, the Ld.CIT(A) rightly confirmed the orders passed by the AO. Hence, orders of the lower authorities to be confirmed. 14. We have heard both the parties and perused the material placed on record. Admittedly, the assessee has filed PAN, Aadhar numbers and bank details of the creditors except two creditors i.e. Sri A.Nageswar Rao for an amount of Rs. 2,00,000/- and Sri Bommala Srinivasa Rao for an amount of Rs. 2,00,000/-. Therefore, all the transactions are explained except the above said two transactions for an amount of Rs. 4,00,000/-. But the Ld.CIT(A) as well as the AO simply ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
