TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (9) TMI 1214
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....011. 2. Initially, the assessee has raised multiple Grounds of appeal in memo of appeal, but subsequently, it has filed revised Grounds of appeal, which read as under:- " 1. The learned CIT(A) failed to appreciate that increase in sundry creditors of Rs. 55,71,480/- being expenditure INCURRED in earlier years by tenants namely Mr. Suresh Chandra Taparia and Smt. Srikanta Devi Taparia on behalf of Assessee Company without appreciating that Assessee had discharged its onus u/s 68 and hence addition of Rs. 55,71,480/- u/s.68 may be deleted. 2. The Appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter or delete any or all the above grounds of appeal." 3. Apart therefrom, assessee has also filed an Additional Ground of appeal, whic....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... in the sundry creditors of Rs. 55,71,480/- was held to be an unexplained credit under section 68 of the Act. When such assessment was carried in appeal before CIT(A), the assessee submitted that the increased balance of sundry creditors represented amount due to two of its tenants, namely, Shri. Suresh Chandra Taparia and Smt. Srikanta Devi Taparia to whom assessee had given its flat at Benhor apartments, Mumbai on rent. The aforesaid increase reflected amount credited to Shri Suresh Chandra Taparia - Rs. 33,11,052/- and Smt. Srikanta Devi Taparia - Rs. 32,23,184/- for the expenses incurred by them on the civil renovation work of the flat rented out. Before CIT(A), assessee filed details like confirmations, Board resolutions, balance sheet....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sued by the Assessing Officer under section 133(6) of the Act the two creditors appeared and confirmed the transactions. The CIT(A) has duly noted the submissions put forth by the assessee but he has ultimately observed that the impugned credit entries in the books of account could not be satisfactorily explained and hence, upheld the addition made under section 68 of the Act. As per the CIT(A), the copies of bank account of the creditors was not available which could prove the capacity of the two creditors. Against such a decision of the CIT(A), assessee is in further appeal before the Tribunal. 5. Before us, the Ld. Representative for the assessee vehemently pointed out that the details submitted by the assessee clearly established the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....a xv. Copy of I.T. Acknowledgement of Smt. Srikanta Devei Taparia for the A.Y 1999-2000. xvi. Copy of Balance Sheet of Smt.Srikanta Devi Taparaia as on 31/3/1999. 6. On the other hand, the Ld. Departmental Representative pointed out that in the present case, the CIT(A) has clearly established that the clinching evidence in the shape of the bank accounts of the creditors through which the expenses have been incurred; and, the relevant bills of the repair expenses etc. were not produced and, therefore, the impugned credits could not be considered as explained within the meaning of section 68 of the Act. 7. We have carefully considered the rival submissions. In the present case, the controversy revolves ar....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....paying rents, but later on accepted the aforesaid claims in terms of its Board of Directors resolution dated 18/02/2000. The assessee had explained before the lower authorities that in pursuance to such resolution, it capitalized the aforesaid amount incurred by the aforesaid two creditors by debiting it to the 'building account' and crediting the same to the accounts of the two creditors, Shri. Suresh Chandra Taparia and Smt. Srikanta Devi Taparia. In support, assessee furnished a copy of the communication of the two creditors, copies of which have been placed in the Paper Book at pages 41 - 42 and 55-56. In terms of such communication, the two creditors have explained to the Assessing Officer the details of expenditure incurred on civil r....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... him was wrong or otherwise not credible. The explanations furnished by the assessee, as also by the two creditors have been merely disbelieved and it is not a case where any of the evidence has been found to be false or untrue. Factually speaking, in the present case, the assessee company has completely discharged the initial burden cast on it to explain the nature and source of the credits. The arrangement between assessee and its tenants by way of the tenancy agreement, copy of which has been placed in the Paper Book pages 75 to 79 was also before the Assessing Officer. The onus that is cast under section 68 of the Act is not static, inasmuch as it shifts to the Revenue depending on the material and evidence led by the assessee at a give....