9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (12) TMI 508X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ork order issued by the Government, copies of immovable property ownership certificates etc. along with audited financial statements, turnover certificates and affidavits affirming the loan transactions, all of which clearly aided the assessee in discharging his initial burden of proof that the persons from whom the amounts were received had advanced these amounts as loans to the assessee and they were persons who had the requisite means to advance the said amounts. The fact that these transactions had taken place through banking channels was also found by the Tribunal to be significant in assessing the genuineness of the transactions. We see no reason, as we have no material before us, to disbelieve the findings of the Tribunal on this count. Tribunal had sustained certain additions to the taxable income of the assessee by rejecting the argument of the assessee that such additions were made without there being any material that was obtained by the Revenue consequent to the search u/s 132 and therefore could not be made at all in proceedings pursuant to a notice u/s 153A - Tribunal had rejected his contention by placing reliance on the decision of this Court in E.N. Gopakumar [ 201 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , pursuant to which, a notice was issued to the assessee under Section 153A of the I.T. Act on 03.08.2018. The respondent/assessee, is a partner to the extent of 39% in one of the partnership concerns namely, M/s.Money Muttam Finance, and has a limited shareholding of approximately 11% and 15% respectively in M/s.Mooneymuttathu Nidhi Limited and M/s.Allebasi Builders and Developers (P) Limited. His wife and children are proprietors and partners respectively in other business concerns that come under the umbrella of M/s.Sreevalsam group. The respondent/assessee and his family members, as well as all the entities of the group, are separately assessed to income tax and it is not disputed that the respondent/assessee does not hold any position in the management and control of the majority of the firms/corporate entities of M/s.Sreevalsam group. 3. On receipt of the notice under Section 153A of the I.T. Act, the respondent/assessee filed a return of income on 01.12.2018 declaring an income of Rs.6.17 lakhs. Notices under Section 143(2) and Section 142(1) were issued on various occasions to the assessee requiring it to file requisite documents including cash flow statements and statement ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the Act, thereby the genuineness of the transactions as per the mandate of the provisions of section 68 of the Act including the first proviso provided thereunder remaining undischarged ? 2. Whether the Appellate Tribunal is justified in holding that cash deposited in bank account of the assessee, to the extent of cash deposits in the Nagaland based accounts of family members, others, stood explained ignoring the fact that lower authorities had rejected the cash flow statement on ground of lack of evidence and further no evidence was furnished for claim of contract work/consultancy income ? 3. Whether Appellate Tribunal is justified in interfering with order of CIT (A) and in deleting the various additions sustained by the CIT (A) and are not the findings of fact by the Tribunal perverse, uncalled for and unjustified ? 6. We have heard Smt.Susie B. Varghese, the learned Standing Counsel for the Income Tax Department and Sri.R.V.Easwar, the learned senior counsel duly assisted by Sri.Sidharth A. Menon, Smt.Sandra Mariya and Smt.Ananya Rath, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent/assessee. 7. The main thrust of the argument of the learned Standing Counsel for t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to Rs.131.26 Crores the assessee group made IDS, 2016 disclosure for Rs.21.13 Crores which include assessee's disclosure of Rs.6.81 Crores and other family members' disclosure of Rs.14.31 Crores. The requisite forms, declarations including Form 3 has been placed in the paper-book which would dispel the concern raised by Ld. CIT(A) in the impugned order. The other family members made payment of Rs.4.58 Crores for subsequent transfers which have no connection with the present assessee. The unsecured loans received from these parties aggregated to Rs.88.41 Crores out of which loans of Rs.11.72 Crores has been received by the assessee (Rs.3.22 Crores from Shri G.K. Rengma and Rs.8.49 Crores from M/s Excellence Associates). The remaining amount of Rs.17.11 Crores was proposed to be disclosed by the assessee group before Hon'ble lTSC. The assessee proposed settlement for Rs.5.45 Crores on this count. Considering these figures, the additions to the extent of Rs.5,44,90,000/- stand confirmed since the assessee has himself computed this disclosure before us to make up for remaining undisclosed consultancy / liaisoning income. This leave assessee's onus to prove the ingredien ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... low had also rejected the explanation given by the assessee that the amounts received by him were by way of loan from persons in Nagaland. Based on its earlier finding that the Revenue had not established that the bank accounts held by the other family members and group concerns actually belong to the assessee himself, the cash deposits in the said accounts were directed to be excluded from the additions made to the taxable income of the assessee. As regards the amount of Rs.6.26 crores that remained as a cash deposit in the assessee's own bank account, the Tribunal found that an amount of Rs.26.48 lakhs was already dealt with in the assessment for the assessment year 2018-19 that was subsequently set aside, and hence, could not be taken into account. In respect of the balance amount of Rs.599.56 lakhs, the Appellate Tribunal went through the cash flow statement for the assessment years 2012-13 to 2017-18 worked out by the assessee, and finding it to be satisfactory and after reducing therefrom amounts relatable to the assessment year 2018-19, the Appellate Tribunal sustained the additions on this count to Rs.5,35,15,000/-. The separate additions made towards the purchase of im ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y burden cast on an assessee confronted with a notice that sought an explanation for cash credits in his accounts, was only to establish to the satisfaction of the Assessing Officer the proof of identity of the creditors, the capacity of creditors to advance money and the genuineness of the transaction. He places reliance on the decision in Kale Khan Mohammad Hanif v. Commissioner of Income Tax - [(1963) 50 ITR 1 (SC)] to contend that once an assessee has submitted the documents relating to identity, genuineness of the transaction and creditworthiness, then it is for the Assessing Officer to conduct a further enquiry and call for more details before invoking Section 68 of the I.T. Act. It is his submission that it is only if the assessee is not able to provide a satisfactory explanation of the nature and source of the receipt that the Revenue can treat the receipt as income in accordance with Section 68 of the I.T. Act. As rightly pointed out by the learned counsel, we find that the Appellate Tribunal considered the aforesaid aspects and specifically found that with regard to the said amounts of Rs.3.22 crores and Rs.8.49 crores, the assessee had placed on record copies of the PAN ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
