TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (1) TMI 408
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....A No. 3930/Del/2016 [Assessment Year: 2012-13] 1. "That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and facts of the case in giving relief to the assessee. 2. That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 3,03,90,000/- u/s. 68 of the Income Tax Act, though the assessee has failed to prove identity and creditworthiness of the alleged lenders, as well as genuineness of the transaction. 3. That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in giving relief to the appellant by ignoring various facts as enumerated in the assessment order, as well as judicial pronouncements on the issue, including the decision of jurisdiction High Court. 4. The appellant craves leave for reserving the right to amend, modify, add or forego an....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the assessee. 5. Aggrieved against this, the Revenue has filed the present appeal. 6. Ld. Departmental Representative vehemently argued that the Ld. CIT(A) was not justified in deleting the additions. The Ld. SR. DR submitted that the Assessing Officer was justified in making the addition because the assessee could not prove the genuineness of transaction. He strongly relied upon the assessment order he submitted that an interim report dated 26/3/2015 was obtained from DDIT (Inv.) Unit-41(1) Kolkata in respect of M/s. D.M. Trading Pvt. Ltd. and M/s. Rosemary Commercial Pvt. Ltd. He submitted that in view of the report of the Investigation Wing, the Assessing Officer was justified to make addition in respect of these parties. 7. Pe....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the concerned party vide reply dated 13/6/2014. He submitted that the transactions was genuine, the assessee company had recorded the amount received as unsecured loan and also paid interests there on, the interest was also paid in the next years. In-fact, factum of payment of interest was also confirmed by the lenders companies. Therefore, the assessee discharged his initial burden. The A.O. failed to bring any adverse material, he submitted that the appeal of the Revenue may be dismissed. 8. In rejoinder, Ld. DR submitted that the merely providing the documents could not relieve, the assessee from its liability to prove the genuineness of the transaction. He submitted that in the facts and circumstances of the case, the action A.O. may....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 10. The aforesaid finding on fact is not rebutted by the Revenue by placing any contrary material on record. We, therefore, do not see any reason to interfere in the finding of the Ld. CIT(A). As the A.O. has not brought any adverse material and coupled with the fact, there is no whisper of discussion regarding this transaction in the assessment order. Therefore, in our considered view, the Ld. CIT(A) has rightly deleted this addition. 11. In respect of the other transaction, it is stated by the Ld. CIT(A) that the assessee has submitted all documents, all the notices issued u/s. 133(6) of the Act were duly served and replied were also filed. Further, it is stated that the correct address of M/s. Rose Mary Commercial Pvt. Ltd. was suppl....