9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (2) TMI 986X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... according to the provisions of section 68, who is supporting its contentions only by producing certain internal documents and bank statements. While deciding this issue, we rely upon the judgment of Raja Kaimoor Breweries Private Limited [ 2024 (2) TMI 455 - ITAT RAIPUR] wherein the assessee was failed in producing necessary details before the Ld. AO, therefore, in absence of such details / evidence the addition made u/s 68 was sustained. Substance in the observations and findings of CIT(A) to be concurred with, specifically in a situation wherein the assessee company had squarely failed in discharging the onus cast upon it to provide essential information/ documents and evidence in the form of confirmation, ITR, bank statement financials of the creditor and to produce the creditor before the AO for witness if so required, which is the prime responsibility of the assessee to establish the identity and creditworthiness of the creditor, consequently, the genuineness of transaction. Accordingly, the order of CIT(A) is set aside, and the addition made by the Ld. AO u/s 68 is upheld. Decided against assessee. - SHRI RAVISH SOOD, JM SHRI ARUN KHODPIA, AM For the Asse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oncisely stated, the facts of the case are that the assessee is a private limited company engaged in the business of cement manufacturing. Accordingly, notice u/s 148 of the Act was issued to the assessee on 07.05.2018. The assessee filed return of income in response to the notice u/s 148 of the Act on 07.05.2018 declaring total loss at (Rs. 219,26,42,619/-). The case of the assessee was reopened on the basis of credible information that the assessee company had brought unaccounted money in the books via layering of funds from M/s. Jagdamba Traders and M/s. Surya International from Dhanalaxmi Bank. As per cash trail, there was cash deposit totalling to Rs.6.74 crores during the F.Y. 2010-11 in the Bank A/c. No. 2208000000019 of M/s. Surya International. Subsequently, an amount of Rs.3.47 crores is found transferred to the account of M/s. Dreamland Barter Private Ltd. having A/c No.3101115000028410 3101115000028413 from 22.6.2010 to 07.01.2011. Out of the above fund, an amount of Rs.1,63,57,908/- was transferred through RTGS into the bank account of M/s. Bhilai Jaypee Cement Ltd. maintained with Oriental Bank of Commerce. Similarly, there is cash deposit of Rs.6.35 crores during t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed the assessee has explained that it pertains to the supplies of Clinker to their customer M/s Vinayak Cement Udyog, Calcutta under a contract for sale of Clinker. The explanation of the assessee have been examined by the Ld. AO however, the assessee has not submitted any relevant document to substantiate its contentions, accordingly a summon u/s 131 of the Act has been issued on 13.12.2018 and statement of Shri Bijan Kumar Dey, employee of the assessee company were recorded wherein he accepted that the assessee has received Rs.2,16,33,868/- as advanced from M/s Vinayak Cement Udyog against sale of Clinker. In question no. 5 of the statements regarding the bank details of the party who deposited the impugned amount in the assessee s account, it was replied that at this stage he was unable to answer the question, further it is submitted that at present Vinayak Cement Udyog is not their regular customer, so he is unable to give the complete name and address details. Ld. AO also shown the cash trail of to the assessee and confronted. The Table showing cash trail is reproduce here under for the sake of completeness of facts: Bank Details of the assessee: Sr.N ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of multi layering, finally the amounts were brought to the bank accounts of the assessee which is the modus operandi of such companies/firms in execution of such bogus transactions. In the present case, the assessee was unable to substantiate by producing any cogent evidence w.r.t. the buyer M/s Vinayak Cement Udyog before the AO and the fact remain the same before the Ld. CIT(A) also. However, Ld. CIT(A) has summarily accepted the contentions assailed by the assessee on the basis of ledger account of M/s Vinayak Cement Udyog in the books of assessee, the inward transactions in the bank statement of assessee and sample purchase orders sales invoices, transport bilty etc. Ld. CIT DR further submitted that Ld. CIT(A) has observed that the onus of the assessee stands fully discharged with the remarks that identity of the creditor is established and actual receipt of money from such creditors is proved, whereas the assessee was unable to provide or furnish any information w.r.t. M/s Vinayak Cement Udyog, the impugned creditor before the revenue authorities and even before the tribunal under the present appeal. With such submissions, Ld. CIT DR requested to set aside the order of Ld. CI ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 020, order cit. 09.04.2010 of Delhi High Court - ITO vs Parmanand Gupta in ITA no. 82/RPR/2017 cit. 04.08.2022, para no. 21, page no. 38, last five lines. -Rahul cold Storage vs. ITO (2022) 66 CCH 355 (Raipur) -Anantpur Kalpana vs ITO (2022) 194 ITD 702 (Bang.) -DCIT vs M/S M.c. Hospital (2022) 197 ITD 706 (Chennai) 6. Statement recorded during assessment Statement of Shri Bijan Kumar Dey was recorded during assessment, at PN 138 to 142 of PB. All facts explained. 7. Allegations of AO i) AO alleged that no documents submitted by assessee to substantiate sales made to Vinayak Cement Udyog. - Books produced. Ledger a/c of Vinayak Cement verified by AO. Bank statements showing receipt of RTGS directly from same party verified by AO. Sale bills, delivery challans transportation receipts verified by AO. Allegation of AO arbitrary. ii) AO alleged that address of Vinayak Cement not provided. - AO's observations incorrect. Complete address of Vinayak Cement mentioned in sale bills, at PN 130, 132, 134 of PB. iii) AO alleged that letter sent to M/s Surya International returned back. - AO did not est ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... te address of the party was available with the Ld. AO on the copies of sales bills submitted before him cannot be accepted as when specifically the complete address of the creditor was asked, it was answered that at present the address is not available but the same will be made available subsequently, however, nothing could be brought on record to substantiate that the address was provided to the Ld. AO or the AO was made acquainted that such address is available on the invoices and that address is still the correct and the creditor is existent. Regarding necessary enquiries, Ld. CIT(A) has observed that in case the assessing officer is dissatisfied about the source of cash deposits in the bank account of creditors the proper course would be to assess such credit in the hand of the creditors after making do enquiries from creditors, on this issue, we may herein observe that as per settled position of law, Ld. CIT(A) is vested with powers coterminous with that of the Ld. AO and accordingly, in the interest of substantial justice, Ld. CIT (A) is duty bound to exercise such powers in conducting necessary enquires that he thinks fit or direct the Assessing Officer to make further inqui ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tating the points for determination and then render a decision on each of the points which arise for consideration with reasons in support. Section 251(l)(a) and (b) of the Act provide that while disposing of appeal the CIT(A) would have the power to confirm, reduce, enhance or annul an assessment and/or penalty. Besides Explanation to sub-section (2) of Section 251 of the Act also makes it dear that while considering the appeal, the CTT(A) would be entitled to consider and decide any issue arising in the proceedings before him in appeal filed for its consideration, even if the issue is not raised by the appellant in its appeal before the CIT(A). Thus once an assessee files an appeal under Section 246A of the Act, it is not open to him as of right to withdraw or not press the appeal. In fact the CIT(A) is obliged to dispose of the appeal on merits. In fact with effect from 1st June, 2001 the power of the CIT(A) to set aside the order of the Assessing Officer and restore it to the Assessing Officer for passing a fresh order stands withdrawn. Therefore, it would be noticed that the powers of the CTT(A) is co-terminus with that of the Assessing Officer i.e. he can do al that Ass ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... verification but also not filed copy of his return of income, which would have evidenced creditworthiness to have made the aforesaid substantial investment of Rs.1.08 crore (approx.) with the assessee company. All that have been done by the assessee company is to place on record an affidavit of the aforementioned person wherein he had admitted of having made investment of Rs.1.08 crore towards share application money with the assessee company, Page 104 of APB. As nothing is discernible from the records, which would substantiate the creditworthiness of the aforementioned person who has stated to have made an investment of Rs.1.08 crore (approx.) with the assessee company, we find no infirmity in the view taken by the A.O who had rightly dubbed the same as unexplained cash credit u/s. 68 of the Act. 37. Based on our aforesaid observations, we concur with the view taken by the CIT(Appeals) who had rightly observed that the assessee company had failed to establish the genuineness of the assessee s claim of having received share application money from the aforementioned person by placing on record supporting documentary evidence, which would reveal his annual income and availab ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
