9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (3) TMI 98X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred in short as "I.T. Act") by the Assessing Officer (hereinafter referred in short as "AO"). 2. Brief facts are that in the course of assessment proceedings u/s 153A r.w.s. 143(3) of the Act the assessee was required to furnish complete details of unsecured loans along with confirmed copies of account and to prove the creditworthiness, identity and genuineness of the lenders. Assessee filed reply along with confirmations and other details called for by the AO. On examining the details, evidences furnished by Assessee the AO was of the view that loan of Rs. 80 lakhs taken from one Shri Sachin Dutta no complete documentary evidences were furnished to establish the identity, creditworthiness and genuineness of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... T(A) called for a remand report for the comments of the AO. In the remand report the AO submitted that assessee has been given sufficient opportunity to file the evidences and since the assessee has failed to file the evidences the same cannot be admitted. On merits of the addition the AO submitted that though several opportunities were given the assessee could not produce the creditor and, therefore, identity of the creditor is not proved. The AO also stated that the creditor filed return for AY 2013-14 declaring income of Rs. 12,70,656/- and whereas the loan advanced to the assessee was Rs. 80 lakhs and, therefore, the lender is not creditworthy to give such a huge loan to the assessee. 5. The Ld.CIT(A) admitting the additional evidences ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y the assessee and, therefore, the addition u/s 68 of the Act is not warranted. 7. The Ld. DR supported the orders of the authorities below. 8. Heard rival submissions, perused the evidences produced before us. On hearing the Ld. DR and perusing the evidences produced before us, we find that there is substantial merit in the submissions of the Ld. Counsel for the assessee. Assessee has produced the following document before the AO/CIT(Appeals) : - * Copy of Computation for Assessment Years 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 and copy of ITR for Assessment Years 2011-12, 2012- 13 and 2013-14. * Copy of Bank account statement of Mr. Sachin Dutta. * Copy of audited financial statement as on 31.03.2013 and 31.03.2012 of Shri Balaji Hitech Constru ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... refore, the assessee has proved the source of source also in this case although not required to prove in law. Thus, we hold that the assessee has proved the identity, genuineness and creditworthiness of the creditor and therefore, the AO is erred in treating the loan of Rs. 80 lakhs received by the assessee as unexplained cash credit u/s 68 of the Act. Thus, reversing the findings of the Ld.CIT(A), we direct the AO to delete the addition made u/s 68 of the Act. 10. The assessee also raised one more ground in sustaining the addition of Rs. 85,304/- made u/s 2(22)(e) of the Act. The AO while completing the assessment, it is noticed from the balance sheet that the assessee has received loan of Rs. 8,75,000/- from M/s KAJ Infrastructure Pvt. L ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
