9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (8) TMI 1173X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... proceedings, and the amount sustained by the CIT(A) with the observation that the bank statements of the creditors other than sister concern was not submitted by the assessee company. We fail to understand that CIT(A) has sustained the addition with the observation that assessee has not submitted bank statement of the creditors other than sister concern while making the findings whereas that assessee has already submitted the confirmation and bank statements before the lower authorities, non submissions of the bank statements of other creditors has no role to play to adjudicate the issue in hand i.e. relating to unsecured loan, from sister concern when the assessee has submitted all the relevant data of this transaction before Lower Authorities, therefore, we are inclined to allow the grounds raised by the assessee. With regard to ground No.4, assessee has not pressed the same, therefore, the same is dismissed. Unexplained cash deposits in bank account - assessee has failed to prove the source of these cash deposits, therefore, the same are disallowed - HELD THAT:- As we observed that the assessee has submitted cash book in the Paper Book wherein assessee has received share applica ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and the observations made and conclusions drawn are based on incomplete appreciation of facts on records and the submissions of the appellant have not been considered in right perspective thereof. 4. That the authorities below have erred in law as well as on the facts of the case by making and confirming the addition of Rs. 5,97,833/- u/s 43B of the Act, allegedly for want of payment proof, ignoring the facts on record that none of the said sums was part of trading receipts or was claimed as expenditure in the profit loss account. 5. That the Id. CIT(A) has erred in law as well as on the facts of the case by upholding the action of the id. A.O. for making addition of Rs. 8,00,000/- u/s 68 of the Act allegedly holding the amount of cash deposits in bank account as unexplained cash credit and the submissions of the appellant have not been considered in the right perspective thereof. 6. That the authorities below have erred in law by treating the bank account of the appellant as its books of account for making section 68 addition of Rs. 8,00,000/- as above, ignoring the various judicial pronouncements on the issue. 7. That the authorities below have erred in law by making and confirmi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 7. Considered the rival submissions and material placed on record, we observed that the Assessing Officer has disallowed 20% of the expenses claimed by the assessee due to the fact that assessee has not filed any supporting documents. On careful consideration of the information submitted before us, we observed that assessee has claimed expenditure of employee benefit expenses, other expenses and fianc costs in its profit and loss account, however, while filing return of income assessee has not claimed any expenditure nor shown to have carry forward the loss, therefore, the assessee has not claimed any expenditure during the year hence, making adhoc disallowance is not proper. Accordingly, ground No.2 raised by the assessee is allowed. 8. With regard to ground No.3, during assessment proceeding, the assessee was asked to furnish copy of confirmation of the persons from whom assessee has received unsecured loans along with their ITRs. The assessee failed to submit any details, accordingly, AO issued show cause noticed u/s 144 of the Act. In response, the AR of the assessee submitted that assessee has received Rs. 7,72,890/- from Goodwin Public School and Rs. 4,89,49,059/- from Godwin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ly through banking channel and there was no cash transactions in the said account and therefore the complete information with reference to the said loan was available on record. Non submission of details of debtors by the sister concern in its assessment proceedings cannot lead to disbelieve the receipt of loan from sister concern by the appellant. The details of loans advances of Rs. 39,47,17,475.84 as appearing in sister concern's balance sheet and copy of balance sheet of the said concern are placed at page nos.28 to 54 in the paper book for your kind reference. From the details so placed on record, it is apparent that M/s Godwin Construction Pvt. Ltd. had a debit balance of Rs. 4,88,49,059/- in the name of the appellant. On the totality of facts, where the A.O. has neither doubted the identity nor the creditworthiness of the lender, the addition u/s 68 of the loan from him is totally unlawful illegal and therefore the same kindly be deleted. For the remaining loans of Rs. 1,00,000/- from six (6) person as above, the appellant had filed confirmations and return filing proofs of all the lenders showing their respective PAN and therefore the addition of the loan with requiring ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... present issue and he submitted that the same Assessing Officer has completed the assessment in the case of Godwin Construction Pvt. Ltd. He brought to our notice first appellate order and ITAT orders in the case of Godwin Construction Pvt. Ltd., to demonstrate that there was no discussion on this point, therefore, he submitted that the addition made u/s 68 is not proper and deserves to be deleted. 13. On the other hand, the Ld. AR relied on the orders of the lower authorities. 14. Considered the rival submissions and material placed on record, we observed that assessee has received unsecured loan from its sister concern Godwin Construction Pvt. Ltd. Based on the facts on record, the assessee has demonstrated that the assessee has received above said unsecured loan from its sister concern Godwin Construction Pvt. Ltd. and merely because the assessee has not submitted relevant information during assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer proceeded to make the disallowance. Even in the remand proceedings, and the amount sustained by the Ld. CIT(A) with the observation that the bank statements of the creditors other than Godwin Construction Pvt. Ltd. was not submitted by the assess ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ndersigned has carefully gone through the assessment order, written submission as well as verbal arguments of the Id. A.R. of the appellant. It is settled preposition of law that, the onus is on the appellant company to prove the sources of each cash deposit in its bank accounts with cogent evidences: which has not been done by the appellant company in the present facts of the case. No comments has been made by the AO in remand reports cannot with any stretch of imagination justify the cash deposits in the Bank by the appellant company. Further, contention of the Id. A.R. of the appellant that, bank books are not books of accounts, cannot be accepted, as it is against settled preposition of law. Therefore, considering the non-discharge of initial onus of substantiating the cash deposits with cogent evidence, undersigned finds it difficult to interfere with the addition made by AO and the same is hereby confirmed and ground of appeal is dismissed. 17. At the time of hearing, the Ld. AR brought to our notice page 138 of the PB are the cash book maintained by the assessee for the year under consideration and he brought to our notice page 155 to submit that assessee had made a cash dep ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
