TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Firm's cash capital contributions from partners with proven identity and creditworthiness cannot be added under section 68</h1> <h3>Ahuja Automobiles Versus DCIT Circle 3 (1), Raipur</h3> Ahuja Automobiles Versus DCIT Circle 3 (1), Raipur - TMI Issues Involved:1. Addition of Rs. 25,50,000/- under Section 68 on account of unexplained cash credit.2. Addition of Rs. 1,48,290/- under Section 40(a)(ia) on account of non-deduction of TDS.3. Addition of Rs. 85,736 being 1/10th of conveyance expense and opening event expense.4. Charging special rate tax under Section 115BBE on the addition under Section 68.Summary:Issue 1: Addition of Rs. 25,50,000/- under Section 68 on account of unexplained cash creditDuring the assessment proceedings, the assessee was asked to explain the source of cash deposits made by the partners towards capital introduction. The Ld. AO noted that the assessee failed to furnish supporting documents like bank statements of the partners. The Ld. CIT(A) upheld the Ld. AO's decision due to the absence of submissions from the assessee. The assessee contended that all necessary documents were provided, including partners' capital accounts and income tax returns. The identity and creditworthiness of the partners were not doubted by the Ld. AO. The Tribunal observed that if the Ld. AO was not satisfied with the source of the amounts deposited by the partners, the addition should have been made in the hands of the partners, not the firm. The Tribunal relied on several judgments, including Kesharwani Sheetalaya vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, which supported the assessee's position. Consequently, the Tribunal decided in favor of the assessee on this ground.Issue 2: Addition of Rs. 1,48,290/- under Section 40(a)(ia) on account of non-deduction of TDSThe Ld. AR did not advance any arguments or furnish written submissions regarding this issue. Consequently, the Tribunal dismissed this ground as not pursued.Issue 3: Addition of Rs. 85,736 being 1/10th of conveyance expense and opening event expenseSimilar to Issue 2, the Ld. AR did not present any arguments or submissions on this issue. Therefore, the Tribunal dismissed this ground as not pursued.Issue 4: Charging special rate tax under Section 115BBE on the addition under Section 68This issue was consequential to the decision on Issue 1. Since the Tribunal decided in favor of the assessee on Issue 1, this ground was not dealt with separately.Conclusion:The appeal filed by the assessee was partly allowed, with the Tribunal deciding in favor of the assessee on the major ground of unexplained cash credit under Section 68. The other grounds were dismissed as not pursued. The order was pronounced in the open court on 22/02/2024.
TaxTMI 