Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2024 (5) TMI

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ct, establishes the identity of the creditors and the Revenue accepts the genuineness of a part of the transaction, it is not justified to disbelieve remaining part of the transaction by mere attribution of suspicion. The burden having been discharged partly, the onus was on the Revenue to establish by some substantive evidences or series of circumstances, rather than bare suspicion on the basis of what is termed as 'happy coincidence of loan being followed by credit entries of similar amounts', more particularly, as observed earlier, at the cost of repetition, when part loan transaction from the same person is admitted to be genuine. Thus, in regard to the ground raised, the findings of the ld. CIT(A) cannot be sustained. Assessee .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Rs 1.45 crore from Sh. Shyam Sunder Bansal, Sh. Bhajan Singh Pratap Singh and Ms. Ankit Birla and most of them were claimed to be squared off. The AO required the assessee to furnish details of unsecured loans received during the year and file the supporting documentary evidences within the precincts of 68 of the Act. After examination of documents filed, the AO made an addition of Rs 1.45 crore of unsecured loans treating them as unexplained by invoking the provisions of Section 68 of the Income Tax Act. The AO also noted that there was a fall in GP rate and the claim of the assessee that the fall in GP rate was on account of market conditions was not substantiated by any comparable case in the market. The AO, accordingly, applied the GP r .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... se. I, accordingly, uphold the addition of the AO amounting to Rs 40,00,000/- on this ground. My observations with regard to section 68 as elucidated on pages 24, 25 and 26 of my appellate order also apply mutatis mutandis to this adjudication. Thus, a total addition of Rs 65,00,000/- ( Rs 25,00,000/- of Shyam sunder Bansal + Rs 40,00,000/- of Ankit Birla) is upheld. 2.2 In regard to the addition made on account of fall in gross profits, the ld. CIT(A) was satisfied and deleted the addition. 2.3. Accordingly, the assessee is in appeal raising following grounds ; 1. That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in sustaining the addition of Rs. 65,00,000/- (out of Rs. 1,45,00,000/-) m .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... me Tax Appeal no. 179 of 2008 dt. 17.11.2009 (Allahabad High Court). Mangilal Agarwal (Late) vs. ACIT 300 ITR 372 (Raj) CIT vs. Metachem Industries 245 ITR 160 (MP) 4.1 It was submitted that once assessee points out the depositor from whom he has received money and depositor earns the advancement of money the source of source cannot be explore for which reliance was placed on judgment: Tolaram Daga vs. Commissioner of Income Tax 59 ITR 632 (Assam) CIT vs. Shri Ram Narain Goel 224 ITR 180 (Pun. Har.) Nemi Chand Kothari vs. CIT another 264 ITR 254 (Gauhati) Rohini Builders vs. DCIT 76 TTJ 521 (Ahmd.) DCIT vs. Rohini Builders 256 ITR 360 (Gujarat) CIT vs. Rohini Builders 254 ITR 275 (Statute) CIT vs. Orissa Corporation Pvt. Ltd. 159 ITR 78 (SC .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... of Rs. 15 lakhs disbursed as loan on 01.05.2015 is preceded by a deposit of an identical amount on the same date. 6.3 A loan of Rs. 4 lakh credited on 30.04.2015 is preceded by credit of exactly same amount on same date. The assessee had submitted that these credits were sourced by loans from family members/HUF viz., Shri Nitish Sharda, HUF, Smt. Seema Sharda, Smt. Shashi Sharda, Shri Mahesh Sharda and Shri Kailash Narain Sharda. However, in the absence of confirmations to corroborate the same, the ld. CIT (A) has not considered them duly explained. 6.4 The Bench is of the considered view that when the assessee, for the purpose of section 68 of the Act, establishes the identity of the creditors and the Revenue accepts the genuineness of a .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates