9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (5) TMI 1443X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y arrived at the conclusion. The questions, answered negatively and in favour of the assessee. - HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHWANT VARMA HON BLE MR. JUSTICE PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV For the Appellant Through: Mr. Abhishek Maratha and Mr. Parth Semwal, Ms. Nupur Sharma, Mr. Manav, Mr. Gaurav, Ms. Divya, Mr. Bhanukaran, Advs. For the Respondent Through: Mr. Satyen Sethi, Mr. Artatrana Panda, Advs. JUDGMENT PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV, J. 1. The present appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [ Act ], impugns the order dated 13.04.2018 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal [ ITAT ], whereby, appeal of the respondent-assessee being ITA No. 6507/Del/2017 was allowed for the Assessment Year [ AY ] 2013-14. 2. The respondent-assessee is a company engaged in the business of civil construction as contractor and real estate developer. The respondent-assessee filed its Income Tax Return [ ITR ] on 30.09.2013, declaring a loss of Rs. 5,30,72,598/- and paid taxes on book profits under Section 115JB of the Act and the same was processed under the provision of Section 143 (1) of the Act. Thereafter, the case of the respondent-assessee was selected for scrutiny assessment and a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ate that the respondent-assessee had failed to discharge the onus to prove the genuineness of the amount of Rs. 18,00,000/- on account of the sundry creditor, TCPL. 8. Secondly, the Revenue has also assailed the findings of the ITAT on the ground that the ITAT has ignored the fact that the unsecured loan amount of Rs. 5 crores on account of MTL and MOL has not been explained by the respondent-assessee and is therefore, liable to be taxed under Section 68 of the Act. 9. It is, therefore, the case of the Revenue that the order of the ITAT suffers from perversity and thus, liable to be quashed. 10. Learned counsel for the respondent-assessee, on the other hand, vehemently opposed the arguments and he submitted that since the sundry credit to the tune of Rs. 15,00,000/- was accepted to be genuine, it cannot be said that the remaining part of the transaction of Rs. 18,00,000/- is not genuine. 11. He also submitted that since the doubt with respect to the genuineness of the unsecured loan of Rs. 5 crore is on account of receipt of funds by MTL from Divine Infracon Pvt. Ltd., therefore, in the absence of any material, it cannot be said that the respondent-assessee introduced its own unacc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at during assessment year under appeal there were many transactions conducted between assessee-company and M/s. Transearch Consultations Pvt. Ltd. This party/creditor has transferred Rs. 33 lakhs on different dates in the account of the assessee-company through banking channel and similarly there are 04 debit entries of Rs. 15 lakhs and the amount of Rs. 18 lakhs was credit closing balance at the end of the year. On 31st March, 2014, the same amount was written off in the books of account and has been offered for taxation. These facts would support the explanation of assessee-company that amount in question was received through banking channel and there are various entries between the parties and only addition was made of the closing balance without disturbing the other entries in the account of the creditor. Addition of closing balance was, therefore, not justified on facts of case. Otherwise, the A.O. should have made full addition against the assessee-company of Rs. 33 lakhs. The book results of the assessee-company have not been disturbed by the A.O. The decision in the case of CIT vs. Ritu Anurag Aggarwal (supra) would support the case of the assessee-company. The assessee-com ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as not filed. These facts and material on record clearly prove that identity of both the creditors are not in dispute because both the creditors are assessed to tax and have filed confirmation directly to the A.O. in response to notice issued under section 133 (6) of the I.T. Act and also confirmed transaction with the assessee-company in the statement recorded under section 131 of the I.T. Act. The parties have been filed confirmed copies of their ledger account, bank statements, ITR and audited balance sheet in which the giving of loan to the assessee-company has been mentioned. All the transactions are routed through banking channel. Copies of the ledger account, income tax return, balance sheet and bank statement are filed on record. In the bank statements of the creditors, no cash was found deposited before giving loans to the assessee-company. If in the case of M/s. Maple Technologies Ltd., there were transactions conducted of Rs.10 crore would support the explanation of assessee-company that such creditor was having capacity to give loan of Rs.3.70 crores to the assessee-company. The assessee-company paid interest on these loans to the creditor, on which, TDS have been deduc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
