TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (9) TMI 1604
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....facts and, hence, whatever view is taken in A.Y. 2007-08 shall apply to A.Y. 2012-13 also. 3. The grounds taken by the Revenue for A.Y. 2007-08 read as under: "1. Whether on the facts and in circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld CIT(A) was right in deleting the addition made u/s 68 of the Act to the tune of Rs. 40,00,000/- on account of unexplained unsecured loan I taken from Javda India Impex Limited and Lexus Infotech Ltd. ?" "2. Whether on the facts and in circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld CIT(A) was right in deleting the disallowance of interest made u/s f 37 (I) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 of Rs. 45,134/- which is paid on the loan taken from the above two companies?" "3. Whether on the fa....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nvestigation), Mumbai, the Assessing Officer noted that the assessee was one of the beneficiaries of accommodation entries given by Shri Praveen Kumar Jain. A search and seizure action u/s. 132 of the I.T. Act had been conducted in the case of Shri Praveen Kumar Jain and from the statements of Shri Praveen Kumar Jain and his associates it was known that the assessee is one of the beneficiaries of the accommodation entries provided by them. On the basis of specific information that accommodation entries of ` 20 lacs each had been made to the assessee on account of loans advanced to it by M/s Javda India Impex Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as Javda) and M/s. Lexus Infotech Limited (hereinafter referred to as Lexus) on 15th Feb 2007 and 31st J....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f confirmation of these loans, copies of bank accounts from which loan had been advanced, the list of directors of the two companies and copies of the acknowledgment of return filed by these companies. The assessee also furnished copy of written submissions dated 15.03.2015 as well as affidavit of Shri Praveen Kumar Jain retracting his statement. The CIT(A) after going through the submissions deleted the addition made by the Assessing Officer. 6. We have heard the rival submissions along with the orders of the tax authorities below. We noted that during the impugned assessment year, the assessee had taken unsecured loans from the following two parties: Sr. No. Name of the Party and Address PAN Loan taken (Rs.) Rate of Inte....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... 7. The learned AR before us relied on the order of the CIT(A) and has also pointed out that the loan received by the assessee has been returned to the respective parties through cheques and in none of the case the respective party has deposited any cash. He relied on the following Tribunal decisions: • Arceli Realty Ltd vs. ITO [ITA No. 6492/Mum/2016 dated 21.04.2017(Mumbai)] • M/s Komal Agrotech Pvt. LTd. vs. ITO [ITA No.4 37/Hyd/2016 dated 25.11.2016 (Hyderabad)] • Sudhanshu Suresh Pandhare vs. ITO [ITA No. 5185/Mum/2012 dated 05.10.2016 (Mumbai)] • Dilsa Distributors Combines vs. ITO [ITA No.5849/Mum/2011 dated 06.09.2013(Mumbai)] • Aim Properties & Investments Pvt. Lt....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....all the evidences including the confirmation of the creditors. This is not a case where the creditors have not given confirmations rather they have duly confirmed to giving loan to the assessee, the loans were received and returned through banking channels. The assessee has also submitted copies of bank accounts. The lender has not deposited cash into bank account. The assessee has duly discharged the onus with regard to identity of the lender, credit worthiness of the party and all supporting evidences as required u/s. 68 of the I.T.Act. Therefore, in our opinion the decisions relied upon by the DR does not assist the Revenue to the facts of the present case. 11. We have also gone through the decisions relied upon by the learned AR. We ....