Documentary evidence and remand verification can defeat additions for unsecured loans and consultancy fees when the assessee's claim is substantiated.

Documentary verification and departmental remand support can discharge the assessee's burden for unsecured loans under section 68, so the addition could not be sustained once loan confirmations were found prima facie in order. Likewise, consultancy fees supported by confirmation, income-tax returns, financial statements, and tax deduction at source under section 194J were accepted on factual verification because the recipient's identity and the nature of the expenditure were established. The ITAT Mumbai accordingly treated both additions as unsustainable on the evidence and held that the revenue had not rebutted the material or displaced the appellate findings.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the deletion of addition made on account of unsecured loans and interest was sustainable when the assessee had produced additional evidence and the remand report supported the loan confirmations. (ii) Whether the deletion of addition made on account of consultancy fees was sustainable on the basis of the documentary evidence and tax deduction at source.

Issue (i): Whether the deletion of addition made on account of unsecured loans and interest was sustainable when the assessee had produced additional evidence and the remand report supported the loan confirmations.

Analysis: The assessee produced additional evidence before the first appellate authority, which was admitted and sent for verification. The Assessing Officer examined the material in remand and observed that the loan confirmations were prima facie in order. On that basis, the appellate authority deleted the addition. The record showed that the assessee had discharged the onus required under section 68 by producing supporting evidence and by establishing the loan transactions through verification.

Conclusion: The deletion of the addition on account of unsecured loans and interest was upheld in favour of the assessee.

Issue (ii): Whether the deletion of addition made on account of consultancy fees was sustainable on the basis of the documentary evidence and tax deduction at source.

Analysis: The consultancy payment was supported by confirmation, income-tax returns, financial statements, and deduction of tax at source under section 194J. The appellate authority accepted the documentary evidence and found that the identity of the recipient and the nature of the expenditure were established. The addition was therefore deleted on factual verification of the claim.

Conclusion: The deletion of the addition on account of consultancy fees was upheld in favour of the assessee.

Final Conclusion: The revenue failed to dislodge the factual findings recorded on both additions, and the appellate relief granted below remained undisturbed.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the assessee substantiates a loan or expenditure claim with documentary evidence and the departmental verification does not rebut the material, an addition cannot be sustained merely on suspicion.

---