9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (11) TMI 12X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ddition - On this ground, the orders of the lower authorities are reversed and grounds no.1(a) and 2 and 3 of the appeal are allowed. Addition u/s 68 - We find that assessee has submitted the confirmation, the copy of the return of income as well as the bank account wherever ₹ 8,80,000/- are received. Such bank account is the joint account of Mr. Rohit Sawhney with his wife. The learned lower authorities therefore made an addition to that extent. We find that source of the funds are clearly established by the assessee in that bank account. Assessee has clearly shown that in that bank account was received out of maturity policy of Insurance and ₹ 6 lacs is maturity of IDBI bank fixed deposits - according to us, assessee has clearly established the identity, creditworthiness and genuineness of the transaction of the lender - Assessee has paid an interest to Mr. Rohit Sawhney, which was also allowed by the AO as deduction. Accordingly, the addition u/s 68 deserves to be deleted and hence, reversing the orders of the lower authorities, same is deleted. Cash credit addition from Moiz Hasan Ali Tapia - Assessee has submitted the confirmation and bank statement durin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... No. 1853/MUM/2022 - - - Dated:- 28-10-2022 - SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI , AM AND SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY , JM Assessee by : Shri. R N Vasani, B T Thakkar , V H Sahani , ARs Revenue by : Shri. Nishant Somaiya , DR ORDER PER PRASHANT MAHARISHI , AM : 01. This appeal is filed by Assessee/ Appellant against Appellate Order passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre [the learned CIT (A)] for A.Y. 2013-14 dated 28th June, 2022, raising following grounds of appeal:- (1) The Learned Comm of Income tax (Appeals), committed a gross error of law and facts in confirming the following addition while passing the appellate order. a. Disallowances out of alleged bogus purchases Rs. 6,54,842/-. b. Disallowance of Unsecured Loan u/s. 68 Rs. 14,80,000/. c. Ad-hoc disallowance out of expenses Rs. 50,000/-. (2) He failed to appreciate the facts that no bogus purchases as alleged by him are made by the appellant firm. He made an addition on assumption and presumption without giving an opportunity of being heard. (3) He failed to appreciate the facts that these suppliers were neither identified as hawalasuppliers by sales tax authorities nor any speci ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ils. Not satisfied with that, the learned Assessing Officer issued show cause notice for making addition under Section 68 of the Act. As the assessee failed to produce the details with respect to the creditworthiness of the above parties,ld. AO accepted ₹6 lacs out of ₹14,80,000/- as explained in case of Mr. Rohit Sawhney and made an addition of ₹8,80,000/- as the cheques were issued by him to assessee from bank account of wife of Mr. Rohit Sawhney and ₹ 6 lacs of Moiz Hasan Ali Tapia was added for the reason that assessee did not produce copy of the ROI of lender. 05. It was also found that assessee has given interest free loan and advances of ₹79,64,570/- to two different parties. The assessee could not show the business exigency and therefore, the learned Assessing Officer disallowed interest at the rate of 12% per annum amounting to ₹9,55,748/- under Section 36(1)(iii) of the Act. 06. Assessee has debited various expenditure in the profit and loss account amounting to ₹6,92,596/-, such as telephone, motor car and miscellaneous expenditure. As the assessee failed to produce relevant bills and large part of such expenses as well as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... purchases from These parties have been accepted as genuine. In view of this, we do not find any reason to uphold the addition of ₹6,54,842/-. On this ground, the orders of the lower authorities are reversed and grounds no.1(a) and 2 and 3 of the appeal are allowed. 011. Coming to the addition of ₹8,80,000/- under Section 68 of the Act in case of Mr. Rohit Sawhney and ₹ 6 lacs in case of Moiz Hasan Ali Tapia. The learned Assessing Officer has accepted out of the loan taken of ₹ 14,80,000/- from Mr. Rohit Sawhney a sum of ₹6 lacs as properly explained but confirmed the addition of ₹8,80,000/- for the reason that same was accepted from his wife. We find that sum of ₹ 14,80,000/- from Mr. Rohit Sawhney was received from two different bank accounts. These are accounts with Bank of Baroda and IDBI Bank. IDBI bank is the joint account of Mr. Rohit Sawhney with his wife. For sum of ₹6 lacs, there is no dispute however, with respect to ₹8,80,000/-, the learned Assessing Officer confirmed the addition stating that the bank statements submitted by the assessee is wife of the assessee. We find that assessee has submitted the confirmation ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
