TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2020 (5) TMI 403
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....The Ld. CIT (DR) had requested to condone the same as it has occurred due to technical reason and the delay was not deliberate or intentional hence, delay in filing of appeal may please be condoned. The learned counsel for the assessee did not oppose the small delay in filing of appeal. 4. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. It is settled law that the Court and Quasi- judicial bodies are empowered to condone the delay if the litigant satisfies the Court that there were sufficient reasons for the availing the remedy after the expiry of the limitation. Such a reasoning should be to the satisfaction of the Court. Considering the facts of present case and small delay of 1 day, We are of the view that there was no malafide intention for delay. The CIT (D.R.) for the revenue has been able to demonstrate sufficient reasons. Therefore, we fit to condone the delay in filing of appeal and allow the appeal to be proceeded with on merit. 5. The Grounds of appeal raised by the Revenue read as under: "[1] On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 12,89,25,938/- made on account ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ness and genuineness of transaction are not proved. Several features of accommodation entries provider detected from bank statement 4 Ashok Kumar Sarkar 1,27,326 The person has neither been found on enquiry nor produced by the assessee. Further, creditworthiness and genuineness of transaction also not proved. Several features of accommodation entries provider detected from bank statement 5 Binod Kumar Jain 1,08,521 The person has neither been found on enquiry nor produced by the assessee. Further, creditworthiness and genuineness of transaction also not proved. Several features of accommodation entries provider detected from bank statement 6 Chandan Sarawgi 1,32,922 -Do- 7 Deepmala 5,10,817 -do- 8 Gyan Enterprise 1,83,90,430 Proprietor concern of Gyanendra Kumar Singh, who has been neither produced and the assessee provided wrong name as Gyan Singh. Fund transfer out of overdraft. Person has tendency to return debt frequently and has substantial cash deposits. The assessee failed to produced cash book and failed to substantiate creditworthiness and genuineness 9 Irshad Khan 3,72,202 The person has neither been found on enquiry nor pro....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s of transactions are also not proved. Several features of Accommodation entry providers detected from the bank account statement. 21 Mohd Qasim 1,42,271 Identity proved. Creditworthiness not proved, nor is the genuineness of transaction. Several features of Accommodation entry providers detected from the bank account statement 22 Mona Sarkar 2,92,681 The person was not traceable on inquiry nor produced by the assessee. Further, creditworthiness & genuineness of transactions are also not proved. Several features of Accommodation entry providers detected from the bank account statement. 23 Mousami Sinha 4,06,128 The person was not traceable on inquiry nor produced by the assessee. Further, creditworthiness & genuineness of transactions are also not proved. Several features of Accommodation entry providers detected from the bank account statement. 24 Munna Kumar Singh HUF 1,71,232 The person was not traceable on inquiry nor produced by the assessee. It was rather found that there is an autorickshaw driver in the locality of Shri Jeevan Kumar Das. Further, creditworthiness & genuineness of transactions are also not proved. Several features of Accommodat....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ssbook and on the other she is showing income from business & profession. These contradictions have not been reconciled by the assessee. 31 R K Sinha HUF 1,44,889 The person was not traceable on inquiry nor produced by the assessee. It was rather found that there is an autorickshaw driver in the locality of Shri Jeevan Kumar Das. Further, creditworthiness & genuineness of transactions are also not proved. Several features of Accommodation entry providers detected from the bank account statement. 32 Rajkumari Sinha 1,67,939 The person was not traceable on inquiry nor produced by the assessee. It was rather found that there is an autorickshaw driver in the locality of Shri Jeevan Kumar Das. Further, creditworthiness & genuineness of transactions are also not proved. Several features of Accommodation entry providers detected from the bank account statement. 33 Rajesh Balmiki HUF 3,45,631 The person was not traceable on inquiry nor produced by the assessee. It was rather found that there is an autorickshaw driver in the locality of Shri Jeevan Kumar Das. Further, creditworthiness & genuineness of transactions are also not proved. Several features of Accommodatio....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... neither been found nor produced by the assessee on commission inquiry. First the assessee provided wrong name as Gyan Singh. However, inquiry revealed the correct name. It is seen from the bank account statement that even though the fund transfer is out of over draft, the person has a tendency of returning the debt by frequent and substantial cash deposits. Despite a specific request, the assessee failed to produce the cash book etc of the alleged lenders to substantiate the source of such cash deposits. Creditworthiness and genuineness not proved. 40 Subodh Kumar Sinha HUF 1,59,159 The person has neither been found on inquiry nor produced by the assessee. Further, creditworthiness & genuineness of transactions are also not proved. Several features of Accommodation entry providers detected from the bank account statement. 41 Subodh Kumar Sinha 2,91,806 The person has neither been found on inquiry nor produced by the assessee. Further, creditworthiness & genuineness of transactions are also not proved. Several features of Accommodation entry providers detected from the bank account statement. 42 Sumitra Devi 7,30,367 The person has neither been found on inqu....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ss of some of assertions made by Id AO and the AR; a joint examination of assessment records was done on 20.01.2016 along with Shri Vipul Chavda, IRS, the ACIT Circle 1 (1)( 2), the jurisdictional AO and the A~ and the same is noted in order sheet. The ACIT CIT Circle 1 (1) (2) was asked to furnish, attested copies of following documents for detailed examination and for record purposes, and the same have been furnished by the Officer. The order sheet notings dated 20.01.2016 of the Joint examination of records is reproduced below. "Date 20.01.2016 "Shri. Vipul Chavda ACIT Circle 1 (1)(2) attended with assessment records. Shri Mukesh Khaitan CA & AR also present. Assessment records jointly examined. It is found that the assessment records have (i) list of unsecured loan creditors along with confirmation, bank accounts copies, ITR copies. (ii) Address proof of new address of 8 persons mentioned in show cause notice (iii) In order sheet noting, AO had asked for details of unsecured loans on 08.01.2014. (iv) The commissions were issued to DCIT Circle 1, Ranchi and ACIT TDS Circle Ranchi on 17.02.2014 and 14. 03. 2014 respectively. The annexures to commission was the c....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the conclusion that Neither found or produced by the assessee' in case of 42 lenders. The conclusions of the ld AO are contradictory to enquiry reports (Exhibit No 1 and 2). It is 0150 seen from both the enquiry reports that the. lenders were not asked to be produced. Even in joint examination made of assessment records no such summons or letter was found. The show cause notice, (which in a way narrates all the enquiries done), also does not mention any such summons or request for production of the said lenders. (iv) The inquiry report forwarded by the DClT Circle 1, Ranchi mentions that Shri J K Dos was asked to produce copies of ITR, bank details and computation or income for the lost 3 assessment years and the said Shri. J K Dos appeared end produced the said documents in case of all lender except M/s Jyoti Vikas industries. The enquiry report encloses the said documents , but there is finding given from examination of these documents. v) The Id AO has not mentioned anywhere whether he has received the documents along with said enquiry report of DClT Circle -1. Ranchi. The records do not indicate whether the Id AO carried out any examination of these documents. No ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ssessment order. Only statement recorded is of Shri Jeevankumar Dos. However, this statement was not mentioned in the said show cause notice, nor a copy of statement is given to appellant during assessment stage. On perusal of the assessment records, it was not found in the documents received from Ranchi. The Id AO has also not mentioned / reproduced any portion of the said statement, in the assessment order. Hence, the above alleged statement of family members do no carry any evidentiary value . In any case, as the enquiry report states, Shri. Jeevankumar Das appeared before Officers at Ranchi and confirmed the said loans and produced the documents asked for. Even otherwise, nothing adverse can be drawn from the statement of family members as it is common for the head of the family to manage financial affairs and it is possible that all the family members may not be knowing about all the transactions. a. 8C. Significant finding of 2nd report. (i) The Id AO doubts the genuineness of confirmation of loan by one lender Shri. Ashim Ashraf, filed by the appellant. for the reason that he was working and staying in Saudi Arabia. The Id AO appears to state that confirmation could....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....mentioned in report and the concern has lent Rs. 73,00,000/-, which has been repaid by the appellant in the same year. The ACIT (TDS) has not given any adverse finding in respect of creditworthiness or genuineness of the loans. Even the Id AO has not given any adverse findings from examination of the financial statements. The Id AO has erred factually here in concluding that M/s Ganesh Enterprises belongs to Mr. Gyanendra Kumar Singh, whereas it is the proprietary concern of Shri. Kailashchandra Kejriwal as per ITR and Tax audit report. The Id AO is hence, not justified in saying assessee has provided wrong address. 9. Other conclusions of the ld AO 9.1 The ld AO said that bank accounts of following concerns have huge cash deposits, but, he has not specified the actual amounts. When perused by the undersigned the bank account statements, reveal the following cash deposits around the dates of advancing said loans. Sr.No. Name of the concern Date of loan and amount of loan Cash deposits within 15 days before the loan Cash Deposits within 15 days after the loan 1 M/s Ganesh Enterprises 16.12.2010 NIL NIL 2 M/s Gyan Enterprises 1,77,00,000 16.12.2010 ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 2 states that Mr. Mongol Kumar Singh was not traceable at the given address. Regarding Irshad Khan and Ishrat Jahan, the table says addressee was not found on given address ,however, in the last paragraph of report , it is mentioned Jeevan Kumar Das has told that both have shifted and has given the new address in Karbala Ranchi. No enquiry was mode on new address. Tile AR contends that in response to the show cause notice from Ld AO, the address proofs of all the above have been submitted before the AO. The AR also explained that in the time gap between advancing of loon to appellant- company and the date of enquiry, it is possible that a few might have changed their residences. The new residence addresses and address proofs have been provided to the Id AO and he has not made enquiries to refute the same. During joint examination of records, it is found that address proofs are available on record. It is also seen that, in all the above cases, the copies of ITR and bank accounts have been filed by Shri. Jeevan Kumar Dos. It is also seen that 6 of the above 8 are also shareholders in the appellant - company. On careful consideration of above facts, and the copies of ITR and ba....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....lly showing nominal incomes. As is typical of entry provider entities, these persons have neither a healthy balance sheet nor a potent enough Capital account which can vouch for the claimed investment in the shares of the appellant - company. The Ld AO follows it up with a table in next para where, he gives income of all lenders for the relevant assessment years. From this he draws conclusion that except one or two stand alone instances the lenders are not creditworthy in the true sense. 10.2.2 The Id AO in paragraph in 9.6 writes that the assessee has not filed balance sheet and capital accounts of individual lenders. At the same time, he has commented in para 9.1 that' the lenders have neither a healthy balance sheet nor a potent enough Capital account. Interestingly, the Id AO in paragraph 3 of his show cause notice dated 24. 03. 2014 has stated that ' it is however, noted from primary examination of the balance sheets and other details of the respective parties filed by the assessee - company during assessment. it appears that most of the concerns did not possess creditworthiness to advance any such quantum of monies to' the assessee". Thus, there is a contradict....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r creditor to the lenders. It is a leading share booking firm with online share broking portal allover India. Millions of people purchase and sell shares through it. iii) the Id AO himself states that lenders are all known to each other by connection to either Shri Jeevan Kumar Dos or Shri Sandeep Kejriwal who are admitted associates. Further, as stated in para 13.9 of the assessment order 30 lenders are also share-holders in the appellant - company, This shows that the said lenders take common investment decisions. On perusal of above narrated facts by Id AO, only inference that can be safely drawn is that, the above 40 lenders, have indulged in trading in shares and securities through one Sharebroking firm and that they have taken common decision to sell some of their shores and to lend the same to appellant. Given the, fact that all of them ore either shore- holders in appellant - company or family members or Group concerns. This decision does not strike as abnormal or glaring enough to draw any conclusion. Hence, the conclusion drawn by the AO is not justifiable. 10.3 Genuineness As already discussed, the lenders are either shore -holders of appellant - company or t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....dentical for these loons too. Some type of documents were produced before the Id AO as well as the officer at Ranchi, doing inquiry. Since, there is no distinguishing feature, pointed out by the Id AO, explanation and documents furnished in these cases carry the same degree of credibility as in the case of other lenders. It is also not the case of tile Id AO that these loans were not added, because lenders are family members / group concerns of the appellant, because loans from other family members and Group concerns (given in table below) have been added u/s 68 of the Act, b I the Id AO. When the same documents have been accepted by the Id AO, as proof enough for few of the loans, then rejection of said documents for others ,is not explained at all, in the assessment order. This inconsistency to views taken by the Ld. A.O. List of Relatives of Kejriwal Group whose loans has been added Name Pan Addition Amount Sumitra Devi, AGQPD0632B 730367 Kejriwal Dyg. & Prg Mills.Pvt. Ltd. AACCT1359G 16,80,000 Kejriwal Integrated Textile Park. Pvt Ltd. AADCK3490J 4,89,89,817 Sandeep Kejriwal, ADHPK3865H 168809 Vinod Devi Kejriwal,, ADBPK0510F 386811 Vish....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ch fact from the Assessing Officer of the lenders of the assessee, the Assessing Officer decides to examine the lenders and asks the assessee to further prove the genuineness and creditworthiness of the transaction, the Assessing Officer does not follow the principle laid down under section 68. [Para 16] " 12.3 The facts of the appellant 's case are squarely covered by the decisions above, Since the said decisions are of the Hon'ble Supreme Court and Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat, they are binding. Respectfully following the above binding decisions, I hereby delete the addition of Rs. 12,89,25,938/- made u/s 68 of the Act in respect of 'unexplained cash credits'. 10. Thus, as per above findings of the Ld. CIT (A), the CIT (A) has examined the each lender and given his finding in the chart as Annexure -A attached with appellate order. The CIT (A) was of the view that once the assessee has established that he has taken money by way of account payee cheques from the lenders who are all income tax assessees whose PAN have been disclosed, the initial burden under section 68 was discharged. The CIT (A) further observed that the assessee had also produced confirmation letters....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....made under section 68 of the Act by the AO. 12. Au contraire, the learned counsel for the assessee referred para No. 8.2 (vii) at Page No. 10 of assessment order and submitted that the AO has observed that the ACIT-TDS, Ranchi has categorically mentioned as finding of fact that all of the alleged lenders are family members or associates of either Shri N K Kejriwal or Shri Jeevan Kumar Das, who are the promotors of the assessee company. In para 8.2 (vi) the AO has stated that these two person have clearly stated before the AO that persons are genuine and can provide document in this regard. The learned counsel for the assessee further referred Page No. 22 at para No.11.1 of assessment order and submitted that the assessee company has duly provided copy of bank statement of each person, which has been prepared and discussed by the AO in table drawn as para No.11.1 of assessment order. The learned Counsel took us through this table and referred item no. 37 in the case of Ruhi Enterprise and submitted that loan of Rs. 73,00,000 has been taken from CCA bank account. Similarly, loan of Rs. 2,70,00,000 in the case of M/s. Shivam Enterprise (item No.38), and loan of Rs. 75,00,000 from M/s....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nd recorded a finding in his order sheet dated 20.01.2016 and found that the assessment record were having list of unsecured loan creditors along with confirmation , bank account and ITR`s copies address proof of new creditors of 8 persons and the commission issued by the AO to DCIT Circle-1 Ranchi and ACIT-TDS, Circle, Ranchi. Further, the ACIT was requested to furnish attested copies of various document as mentioned in the order sheet and mentioned in appellate order. However, the ld. CIT (A) observed in para No. 7.2 of his order that the AO has not made any entry for receipts of details of lenders nor has signed any office copy of letter of the appellant. However, from the above it is clear that the Ld.AO had all details of the lenders. Moreover, the Ld.AO in the assessment order refers to bank account, annual income and balance sheet of the lenders. In view of this, the appellant has filed the basic details. The learned counsel referred the Annexure-A of the appellate order of CIT (A) and submitted that the ld. CIT (A) has verified the factual details and confirmation bank account etc. income-tax returns, of each lenders and has given his findings and considering the enquiry re....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f the AO. It was further observed that the assessee had filed all address of the creditors but due to time gap, it is possible that at the time of enquiry they will have shifted to new address. However, copies of income-tax returns and copy of new address was filed before CIT (A) in respect of 8 person who were not found at the stated address as per enquiry reports. The learned counsel for the assessee referred para No. 10 of appellate order wherein the CIT (A) has examined and discussed the issue of identity, creditworthiness and analysis of bank account and genuineness of transaction. It was submitted that that as per para No. 11 of order of CIT (A). The AO has not made addition in respect of person mentioned in table at para No. 11.1 in respect of Serial No.45, 46, 47,49,50,51 and 52 without any discussion in the assessment order. There is no discussion about these loans as to why these were treated as explained, whereas fact and circumstances of other creditors are also same. 14. The learned counsel vehemently supported the findings of Ld. CIT (A) and placed reliance in the case of CIT v. Ranchhod Jivabhai Nakhava [2012] 21 taxmann.com 159 (Gujarat)/[2012] 81 CCH 193 Guj-HC of....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....assessee has relied in the case of CIT v. Ayachi Chandrasekhar Narsangji [2014] 42 taxmann.com 251 (Gujarat) wherein it was held that where Department had accepted repayment of loan in subsequent year, no addition was to be made in current year on account of cash credit. 18. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the relevant material on record. The perusal of chart as given in assessment order shows that the AO observed that identity was established in most of cases, but he was of the opinion that creditworthiness and genuineness of transaction is not established. Therefore, the AO has made impugned additions. However, during the course of appellate proceedings, the ld. CIT (A) has conducted joint examination of assessment record with the AO and with the Ld. AR of the assessee with reference to and enquiry reports obtained from DCIT Circle -1, Ranchi and ACIT (TDS)-Ranchi. The outcome of joint examination with the ACIT Circle 1(1) (2) Surat has been duly discussed by the Ld. CIT (A) in para No. 7 to 10 of his appellate order. These findings as given by the Ld. CIT (A) are duly reproduced in para No. 9 above in this order. We find that the AO has observed that the ACIT-TD....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the given address were not found. We observe that Ld. CIT (A) noted that there is no discussion in the assessment order as to how the AO arrived at the conclusion that 42 lenders were neither found or produced by the assessee. Therefore, the conclusion of the AO are contradictory to enquiry reports. It is also seen from the enquiry reports that lenders were not asked to be produced. Even joint examination of assessment record, does not shows that such summons or letters were found to have been issued. The enquiry report forwarded by the DCIT Circle-1, Ranchi mentions that Shri J. K. Das was asked to produce copies of ITR, bank details and computation of income for last 3 assessment years and said Shri J.K. Das appeared and produced the said documents in the case of all lenders except M/s. Jyoti Vikas Industries. The enquiry reports encloses with the said documents, but there is no finding given from the examination of said documents. We find that that CIT (A) has observed that the enquiry report of ACIT (TDS) Ranchi revealed that M/s. Gyan Enterprise was having turnover of Rs. 3.27 crores and who have lent a sum of Rs. 1.77 crores. This loan was repaid by the assessee company duri....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nquiry report is silent about this person. Copies of ITR, computation and copy of bank accounts given before the inquiry officer, at Ranchi. 2 Akshay Singh Rs. 1,51,475 (Loan- 1,38,000 + Interest- 13,475) The person has neither been found on inquiry nor produced by the assessee. Further, creditworthiness & genuineness of transactions are also not proved. Several features of Accommodation entry providers detected from the bank account statement. Inquiry report is silent about this person. Copies of ITR, computation and copy of bank accounts given before the inquiry officer, at Ranchi. 3 Asim Ashraf Rs. 1,87,141 (Loan- 1,71,000 + Interest- 16,141) Employed in Saudi Arabia but still assessee claims to have obtained his confirmation, which cannot be accepted. Assessee never intimated the department regarding such employment in Saudi Arabia. Further, creditworthiness & genuineness of transactions are not proved. Several features of Accommodation entry providers detected from the bank account statement. Inquiry report is silent about this person. Copies of ITR, computation and copy of bank accounts given before the inquiry officer, at Ranchi. 4 Ashok Sarkar Rs. 1....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ch cash deposits. Creditworthiness and genuineness not proved. All these concerns are the Proprietorship concern of Shri Gyananedra Kumar Singh and not Gyan Singh as mentioned in the letter. The office address of the Concerns is Neelkunj Sukhdev nagar, Ratu Road, Ranchi and the residential address of the prop is near Akhi memorial School, Sukhdev Nagar Ranchi. The PAN of Gyandra Kumar is AGJPS4948L. 9 Irshad Khan Rs. 3,72,202 (Loan- 3,39,000 + Interest- 33,202) The person has neither been found on inquiry nor produced by the assessee. Further, creditworthiness & genuineness of transactions are also not proved. Several features of Accommodation entry providers detected from the bank account statement. Gyan Enterprise 3,72,86,490 Ruhi Industries 2,88,55,785/- 10 Ishrat Jahan Rs. 4,00,199 (Loan -3,64 ,500 + Interest- 35,699) The person has neither been found on inquiry nor produced by the assessee. Further, creditworthiness & genuineness of transactions are also not proved. Several features of Accommodation entry providers detected from the bank account statement. At the first instance the lender was not found at the given address. However, fresh address of the l....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... of Shri Jeevan Kumar Das. However, bank accounts statement reflects the same typical characteristics as of entry providing entities. Genuineness of transactions also not proved. He is son of Jeevan Kr Das. ITR copy and bank accounts copy produced. 17 Mangal Singh HUF Rs. 3,60,673 (Loan- 3,28,500 + Interest- 32,173) The person has neither been found on inquiry nor produced by the assessee. Further, creditworthiness & genuineness of transactions are also not proved. Several features of Accommodation entry providers detected from the bank account statement. He is assistant of Jeevan Kr Das ITR copy bank account produced. 18 Mangal Singh Rs. 3,23,892 (Loan- 2,95,000 + Interest- 28,892) The person has neither been found on inquiry nor produced by the assessee. Further, creditworthiness & genuineness of transactions are also not proved. Several features of Accommodation entry providers detected from the bank account statement. He is the same person with the name Mangal Kr Singh (HUF) ITR copy and bank accounts copy produced. 19 Manju Devi Rs. 2,19,706 (Loan- 2,00,000 + Interest- 19,706) Wife of Shri Jeevan Kumar Das. However, bank accounts statement reflect....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... of transactions are also not proved. Several features of Accommodation entry providers detected from the bank account statement. The Karta does not live at the given address. But, ITR copy, and copy of bank account produced by J Das before the DCIT Circle-1, Ranchi. 25 Munna Singh Rs. 2,29,407 (Loan- 2,09,000 + Interest- 20,407) The person was not traceable on inquiry nor produced by the assessee. It was rather found that there is an autorickshaw driver in the locality of Shri Jeevan Kumar Das. Further, creditworthiness & genuineness of transactions are also not proved. Several features of Accommodation entry providers detected from the bank account statement. Same as above. 26 Nitya Nand Singh HUF Rs. 2,70,042 (Loan- 1,95,000 + Interest- 75,042) The person was not traceable on inquiry nor produced by the assessee. It was rather found that there is an autorickshaw driver in the locality of Shri Jeevan Kumar Das. Further, creditworthiness & genuineness of transactions are also not proved. Several features of Accommodation entry providers detected from the bank account statement. Inquiry report is silent about this person. Copies of ITR, computation and copy of....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ent about this person. Copies of ITR, computation and copy of bank accounts given before the inquiry officer, at Ranchi. 31 R K Sinha HUF Rs. 1,44,889 (Loan- 1,32,000 + Interest- 12,889) The person was not traceable on inquiry nor produced by the assessee. It was rather found that there is an autorickshaw driver in the locality of Shri Jeevan Kumar Das. Further, creditworthiness & genuineness of transactions are also not proved. Several features of Accommodation entry providers detected from the bank account statement. Inquiry report is silent about this person. Copies of ITR, computation and copy of bank accounts given before the inquiry officer, at Ranchi. 32 Rajkumari Sinha Rs. 1,67,939 (Loan- 1,53,000 + Interest- 14,939) The person was not traceable on inquiry nor produced by the assessee. It was rather found that there is an autorickshaw driver in the locality of Shri Jeevan Kumar Das. Further, creditworthiness & genuineness of transactions are also not proved. Several features of Accommodation entry providers detected from the bank account statement. Inquiry report is silent about this person. Copies of ITR, computation and copy of bank accounts given befo....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ra Kumar Singh, who has neither been found nor produced by the assessee on commission inquiry. First the assessee provided wrong name as Gyan Singh. However, inquiry revealed the correct name. It is seen from the bank account statement that even though the fund transfer is out of over draft, the person has a tendency of returning the debt by frequent and substantial cash deposits. Despite a specific request, the assessee failed to produce the cash book etc of the alleged lenders to substantiate the source of such cash deposits. Creditworthiness and genuineness not proved. All these concerns are the Proprietorship concern of Shri Gyananedra Kumar Singh and not Gyan Singh as mentioned in the letter. The office address of the Concerns is Neelkunj Sukhdev nagar, Ratu Road, Ranchi and the residential address of the prop is near Akhi memorial School, Sukhdev Nagar Ranchi. The PAN of Gyandra Kumar is AGJPS4948L. The turnover of these concerns are as under: Gyan Enterprise: 3,72,86,490/- Ruhi Industries : 2,88,55,785/- 38 Shivam Enterprises Rs. 2,80,83,183 (Loan- 2,70,00,000 + Interest- 10,81,183) Identity not proved. No confirmations filed. Genuiness of the transaction not....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....000 + Interest- 65,367) The person has neither been found on inquiry nor produced by the assessee. Further, creditworthiness & genuineness of transactions are also not proved. Several features of Accommodation entry providers detected from the bank account statement. Inquiry report silent about his person. Copies of ITR, computation and copy of bank accounts given before the inquiry officer, at Ranchi. 20. In the light of above findings of ld CIT (A) , we are of the considered opinion the ld. CIT (A) has examined the each lender and arrived at finding that loan creditors are genuine hence, no addition could be made under section 68 of the Act. Therefore, we are in the agreement with the ld. CIT (A). We further notice that the AO observed para No. 13.9 in the assessment order, several alleged lenders are share applicant in earlier years. However, the learned counsel for the assessee submitted that the loan has been given from CCA account and from Kejriwal Dyeing and Printing Mills Pvt. Ltd. whose financial have been accepted by the same AO in the assessment order made under section 143 (3) of the Act of even date. Further Page No. 3 of appellate order mentioned that the claim ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....lenders. The learned counsel for the assessee further referred and relied in the case of DCIT v. Rohini Builders [2002] 256 ITR 360 (Guj.)/ [2003] 127 Taxman 523 (Guj) of Hon'ble Gujarat High Court which laid down that when the assessee has primarily discharged the initial onus laid on him in terms of section 68 by providing details to establish genuineness of transaction, identity and creditworthiness of depositors then the assessee is not expected to prove genuineness of cash deposited in bank account of those creditors because under the law the assessee can be asked to prove the source of credits in his books of accounts but not the source of source. 22. The learned counsel relied in the case of in the case of CIT v. Apex Therm Packaging (P.) Ltd. [2014] 42 taxmann.com 473 (Gujarat) wherein it was held that where name, address , PAN copy of IT Returns , balance sheet , Profit & Loss Account of all creditors / lenders as well as their confirmation has been furnished , Assessing Officer could not make addition on account of unsecured loan and interest thereon. 23. The learned counsel relied in the case of CIT v. Orissa Corporation (P) Ltd. [1986] 159 ITR 78 (SC)/ 25 Taxman 80(SC....