9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (12) TMI 1384X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (3) TMI 291 - ITAT MUMBAI] It was observed that in the case of repayment of loan earlier given by the assessee, there is no requirement on the part of the assessee to prove the source of funds of the borrower making repayment towards its existing obligation. Similar view has been expressed in Veedhata Tower P. Ltd. SBD Estate [ 2018 (4) TMI 1004 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT] Thus on this score itself on standalone basis, the addition made is unsustainable in law. We further advert to the other line of plea such as placing reliance on statement of searched person without providing cross-examination as well as the seized documents involving the assessee. The assessee on its part has duly attended before the AO in pursuance of notice issued u/s 131 of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... andatory procedure laid down in the Act has not been followed. c) The information has been collected behind the back of the assessee and the assessee was never confronted with the same nor an opportunity provided for cross-examination of Jain brothers, directors of Shalini Holdings Ltd. alleged intermediary, copies of the orders of Jain Brothers and the relevant seized material relied upon has not been provided to the assessee. 2. The learned assessing officer has erred on facts and in law in making an addition of Rs. 1,00,00,000/- u/s. 68 on account of unexplained cash credit, treating as an accommodation entry. It is not a case of cash credit. Receiving your own money advanced earlier is not a cash credit. The Ld. AO made no independent e ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assessment under section 143(3) r.w.s 147 r.w.s. 263 of the Act dated 06.12.2017. The AO made addition of INR 1,00,00,000/- towards unexplained cash credit received from M/s. Shalini Holdings Ltd. and also added INR 1,80,000/- towards unexplained interest expenditure under section 69C of the Act. 5. Aggrieved the assessee preferred appeal before the Ld.CIT(A) who in turn denied any relief. 6. Further aggrieved, the assessee preferred appeal before the Tribunal. 7. When the matter was called for hearing, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee challenged the additions made on merits as well as alleged multiple legal infirmities in the action of the Revenue. 8. On merits, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee pointed out that the assessee initially advan ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... BD Estates P. Ltd. ITA no.1356 of 2015 (Bom-HC); and [c] ITO vs Vijay Dewellers Pvt. Ltd. ITA No.141/Mum/2018 dated 30.01.2019. 8.3. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee next pointed out that the assessment in the case of M/s. Shalini Holdings Ltd. for Assessment Year 2009-10 in question has been framed under section 153C/153A of the Act vide order dated 28.03.2013. No adverse finding had been recorded by the AO on the activities of M/s. Shalini Holdings Ltd. in the assessment order. 8.4. Thus, the additions have been made, firstly, on the basis of wholly incorrect understanding of fact whereby loan and receipt by way of repayment has been wrongly equated; secondly, adverse material was never confronted; thirdly, cross examination was not provi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... any application of mind and multiple other infirmities while recording the reasons under section 148(2) of the Act. We shall deal with the contentions raised on behalf of the assessee in the subsequent paragraphs as and when it is considered expedient. 10. The Ld. Sr. DR for the Revenue on the other hand, relied upon the reassessment order passed in pursuant of revisional directions and first appellate order thereon. 11. We have carefully considered the rival submissions. The assessee has broadly assailed the assessment order and the first appellate order on three grounds:-(i) The additions on merits towards unexplained cash credits and unexplained expenditure thereon is unfounded on facts and law; (ii) The reassessment order passed under ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the case of repayment of loan earlier given by the assessee, there is no requirement on the part of the assessee to prove the source of funds of the borrower making repayment towards its existing obligation. Similar view has been expressed in Pr.CIT vs Veedhata Tower P. Ltd. SBD Estate (supra). Thus on this score itself on standalone basis, the addition made is unsustainable in law. We further advert to the other line of plea such as placing reliance on statement of searched person without providing cross-examination as well as the seized documents involving the assessee. The assessee on its part has duly attended before the AO in pursuance of notice issued under section 131 of the Act and provided the requisite explanations. It is also no ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
