Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the addition made under section 68 on account of the loan of Rs. 55 lakhs from the lender could be sustained when the assessee produced the loan agreement, bank records, confirmation, audited financial statements, and material showing source of funds.
Analysis: The assessee established the lender's identity, creditworthiness, and the genuineness of the transaction through documentary evidence, including RBI registration, audited accounts, bank statements, and repayment schedule. The loan was disbursed by account payee cheque against property security, and the material showed that the lender had funds traceable to its own banking transactions. The adverse inference was based substantially on an alleged statement of an erstwhile director, but no copy was supplied to the assessee and no cross-examination was afforded. In such circumstances, the burden that initially lay on the assessee stood discharged, and the evidentiary burden shifted to the Revenue, which was not met.
Conclusion: The addition under section 68 was not sustainable and was deleted; the issue was decided in favour of the assessee.
Ratio Decidendi: Once an assessee proves the identity of the creditor, the creditor's creditworthiness, and the genuineness of the loan transaction through reliable material, an addition under section 68 cannot be sustained merely on suspicion or on an untested third-party statement.