TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (2) TMI 643
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e assessee on service of notice of appeal has filed its Cross Objection (CO), which in turn the assessment order under section 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') dated 28.10.2016. The Revenue in its appeal has raised the following grounds of appeal:- "1. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A)is justified in deleting the interest paid on bogus unsecured loan borrowed by the assessee from bogus lenders without appreciating that the department has not accepted the Ld. CIT(A)'s decision in respect of deletion of quantum addition made on account of unsecured loan u/s 68 of the Act and the Revenue has preferred appeal before the Hon'ble Tribunal ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the same loss which was declared initially. The Assessing Officer after serving statutory notice proceeded for assessment. The assessing officer issued show cause notice as to why the interest paid on such unsecured loan which should not be disallowed. In reply, the assessee stated that the addition was made itself wrong so there should not be any disallowance of interest expenses paid to those parties as the assessee has substantiated to genuineness of its loan. The Assessing Officer after considering the reply of assessee made addition of interest of Rs. 23,29,482/- paid to on the alleged unexplained unsecured loan. 3. Aggrieved by the addition and re-opening the assessee filed appeal before Ld. CIT(A). Before Ld. CIT(A), the assessee....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....see was allowed by Ld. CIT(A) by holding that in quantum assessment, the Ld. CIT(A)-1, Surat in order No.CAS/1/121/2014-15 dated 28.06.2017 has already deleted the addition of unsecured loan Rs. 2.85 crores holding that assessee has been able to explain all three limbs of section 68 of the Act i.e. identity and creditworthiness of the lenders and genuineness of such transactions. Once the addition has been deleted, the question of disallowance of interest thereon does not arise. Aggrieved by the order of Ld. CIT(A), the Revenue has filed present appeal before the Tribunal. The assessee on service of notice of Revenue's appeal filed its C.O. challenging the validity of re-opening. 5. We have heard the submissions of Ld. Senior Departmenta....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Objection or that the assessment was re-opened on the basis of Audit Objection. The Revenue / Assessing Officer for the first time before the Tribunal has disclosed that there was any Audit Objection on the basis of which the re-opening the case of assessee was re-opened. Ld. AR of the assessee submits that re-opening is not valid on the basis of Audit Objection. The appeal of Revenue is not maintainable and is not liable to be admitted in view of latest CBDT's Circular No.17 of 2019 dated 08.08.2019 as the tax effect involved in the present appeal is below monetary limit of Rs. 50 lakh. 8. On merit, the Ld. AR of the assessee submits that the addition on account of unsecured loan was made in the original assessment passed u/s 143(3) of....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ddition on account of alleged interest payment paid of Rs. 23,29,482/- on unsecured loan. We further find that the addition of unsecured loan was made in the assessment order dated 31.03.2014 passed under section 143(3). It is admitted fact that addition on account of unsecured loan were deleted by Ld. CIT(A)-1 Surat in his order dated 28.04.2017. Against the order of Ld. CIT(A)-1, Surat dated 28.04.2017 the Revenue filed appeal before Tribunal, wherein the order of Ld. CIT(A)-1 Surat was upheld by Tribunal passed in ITA 118/Surat/2017 dated 20.09.2021. Considering the fact that once the addition of unsecured loan for which the disallowance of interest was made has been deleted, the order for disallowance of interest would not survive. Acco....