2019 (1) TMI 196 - AT - Income Tax

Appeal partially allowed, deletion of Rs. 76,00,000, upheld Rs. 14,85,000 undisclosed interest

Kachrulal Nathamal Mutha Versus Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central, Aurangabad

Kachrulal Nathamal Mutha Versus Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central, Aurangabad - TMI Issues Involved:1. Addition of Rs. 76,00,000 based on cheques found during survey.2. Estimation of Rs. 14,85,000 as alleged undisclosed interest on capital employed in the business.Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:1. Addition of Rs. 76,00,000 Based on Cheques Found During Survey:The assessee contested the addition of Rs. 76,00,000 made by the Assessing Officer (AO) based on cheques found during a survey under Section 133A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The AO concluded that the assessee was involved in unauthorized money lending, leading to the addition as undisclosed income. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) upheld this addition.The assessee argued that the modus operandi of their business involved advancing money on the basis of Hundis/Promissory Notes and taking cheques as security. The cheques found did not have corresponding Hundis or Promissory Notes, which are essential for a loan transaction. The assessee provided affidavits from the parties whose cheques were found, confirming that no loans were taken. These affidavits were corroborated by statements recorded under Section 131 of the ITA, 1961. The Tribunal noted that the Department disbelieved these statements and affidavits without concrete evidence.The Tribunal also considered a similar case where the penalty under Sections 271D and 271E was deleted as there was no evidence of loan transactions. It was observed that the cheques lacked dates and the name of the assessee, further weakening the Revenue’s case. The Tribunal concluded that there was no material evidence to support the addition of Rs. 76,00,000 and allowed the appeal on this ground.2. Estimation of Rs. 14,85,000 as Alleged Undisclosed Interest:The assessee also challenged the estimation of Rs. 14,85,000 as alleged undisclosed interest on capital employed. However, no substantial arguments were presented to counter the findings of the authorities below. Consequently, the Tribunal upheld the estimation and dismissed the appeal on this ground.Conclusion:The Tribunal allowed the appeal partly, deleting the addition of Rs. 76,00,000 due to lack of evidence supporting the alleged loan transactions, while upholding the estimation of Rs. 14,85,000 as undisclosed interest. The order was pronounced on October 8, 2018.