TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
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>Unsecured loans from shell companies treated under s.68 and s.69C deleted as repayments were proven</h1> Calcutta HC dismissed the department's appeal and upheld the ITAT and CIT(A) findings that unsecured loans from shell companies, earlier treated as ... Addition u/s 68 - unsecured loan from shell companies treated as unexplained cash credit - addition made u/s 69C on account of interest expenses on such unsecured loan - ITAT confirmed CIT(A)'s order of deleting additions - HELD THAT:- Department was unsuccessful in their challenge before theTribunal wherein they questioned the correctness of the order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) – 27, Kolkata [CIT(A)] as allowed the appeal filed by the assessee and set aside the addition made by the AO by invoking power under Section 68 of the Act. As could be seen from the order passed by the learned Tribunal, the Tribunal has examined the factual details after noting the factual findings recorded by the [CIT(A)], more importantly, the learned Tribunal found that all the loans stood repaid, which has also been factually ascertained by the [CIT(A)] and re-affirmed by the Tribunal. No substantial questions of law arises. 'The application for condonation of delay being GA/1/2024 stands allowed.' Appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against the Tribunal's order in ITA No. 908/Kol/2023 (AY 2015-16) challenging deletion of additions under Section 68 (on account of 'unsecured loan from shell companies' treated as 'unexplained cash credit' of Rs. 3,00,00,000/-) and under Section 69C (interest expense thereon). Revenue framed two substantial questions of law regarding the Tribunal's upholding of the Commissioner (Appeals) order. The Tribunal and CIT(A) conducted fact-based inquiries, noting that 'all the loans stood repaid,' a factual conclusion reaffirmed by the Tribunal after quoting and independently examining the CIT(A)'s elaborate findings. Given those factual determinations, the Court held that 'no questions of law, much less substantial questions of law arises for consideration in this appeal.' Appeal dismissed; stay application GA/2/2024 dismissed.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
