TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2021 (7) TMI 1021
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... is engaged in trading of animal husbandry, producing livestock, meat, hide and skin. For the assessment year 2014- 15, it has filed its return of income on 29.11.2014 declaring income of Rs. 14,53,310/-. During the assessment proceedings, ld. Assessing Officer noticed from the balance sheet that the assessee company tad taken unsecured loans from its directors to the tune of Rs. 7,06,82,500/-. When called upon, the assessee explained that all the directors are directors in group companies, namely, M/s. Modern Overseas Pvt. Ltd. (assessee), M/s. Modsal Frozen Foods Pvt. Ltd. and M/s. Modern Enterprises, all of them having an inter-banking account with these three concerns. From time to time, they were depositing and withdrawing the amounts ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....at though the assessee filed the material like confirmations in respect of source of deposits by the Directors, bank statements, statements of the Directors with the assessee M/s. Modsal Frozen Foods Pvt. Ltd. and M/s. Modern Enterprises, the fact remains that such directors who advanced the loan, were not at all men of means for advancing such huge amounts of loan to the assessee and therefore, material is sufficient to show that unaccounted money of the assessee routed back in the form of unsecured loans. On this premise, ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal. 5. Assessee is, therefore, before us in this appeal, submitting that all the three persons who advanced the amounts to the assessee are directors of the assessee, they have been the tax ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... tainted money is involved in this flow of funds, it cannot be said that section 68 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ("the Act") is attracted. 6. Learned DR vehemently places reliance on the orders of the authorities below and submitted that there is no reason for the assessee to route the amounts through Modsal Frozen Foods Pvt. Ltd., Abdul Wahid and Mohd. Sayed to deposit the very same amount with the assessee. Similar suspicious circumstances are surrounding the transactions in respect of Mohd. Naeem. In so far as Mohd. Saleem is concerned, there are cash deposits prior to issuance of cheques to the assessee. He, therefore, submitted that these suspicious circumstances have to be considered in the light of the decisions of the Apex Court in ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nd 2014-15 also. The facts are demonstrated by ledger account at page No. 46 and 47 of the paper book. In discharge of this obligation towards M/s. Modsal Frozen Foods Pvt. Ltd., assessee paid a sum of Rs. 2,42,40,000/- which M/s. Modsal Frozen Foods Pvt. Ltd. in turn paid to Abdul Wahid. Abdul Wahid gave such amount in loan to Mohd. Sayed who in turn deposited a sum of Rs. 2,65,00,750/- with the assessee. All the relevant record is available with the Assessing Officer. No adverse remark was passed as to the assessee owing sums to M/s. Modsal Frozen Foods Pvt. Ltd., in discharge of which amount was paid to M/s. Modsal Frozen Foods Pvt. Ltd. Subsequently, such an amount is found to be deposited with the assessee through Mohd. Sayed. It makes....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... all the money that is circulated inter se the group concerns is that accounted money well reflected in the books and no any funds other than the withdrawals from the group concerns is found to have been deposited by Mohd. Naeem. In these circumstances, it is difficult to say that the money accounted in the books of these concerns and circulated from one concern to other is unaccounted money or tainted one. 11. Lastly, coming to Mohd. Saleem, there is no dispute that for the assessment year 2013-14, he declared an income of Rs. 9,09,008/- and for the current assessment year, it was Rs. 9,83,643/-. This declared sum is much more than the deposit of Rs. 5.55 lacs and even according to the Assessing Officer, there were deposits in cash only t....