TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (2) TMI 1998
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... credit. 3. Facts in brief are that the assessee filed return of income at Rs. 20,25,260/- on 30.9.2012, which was processed u/s. 143(1) of the Act. Thereafter, the case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny under CASS and statutory notices were duly served upon the assessee. The Assessing Officer, during the course of assessment proceedings, observed from the perusal of the balance sheet as on 31.3.2012 that the assessee has taken loans from three parties namely Casper International- Rs. 25 lakhs, Naleshja Business Pvt. Ltd. - Rs. 20 lakhs and Atharv Business Pvt. Ltd.- Rs. 25 lakhs. In the meantime, the Assessing Officer received information from DIT(Inv)-(1), Mumbai following a search at Pravin Kumar Jain and Associate entities on 1....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the accommodation entries coupled with the fact that there was no actual business activity in any of the concerns. The statement recorded on oath u/s 131 or 132(4) has evidentiary value and can be safely used as evidence. In view of above, it is held that the appellant has failed to prove identity, creditworthiness and genuineness of loans from the three lenders and the addition made by the AO is hereby sustained. The ground is rejected. 5. Learned AR vehemently submitted that the order of learned CIT(A) upholding the order of the Assessing Officer is contrary to the law as order of the Assessing Officer was confirmed despite the fact that the assessee has filed all necessary evidence before the AO in the assessment procedings. Learned AR....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....otally failed to conduct any meaningful and objective investigation and merely relied on the statement of Shri Praveen Kumar Jain that they were engaged in the business of providing hawala entries though nowhere assessee's name was ever taken by the said person. Similarly, learned CIT(A) has affirmed the order of Assessing Officer by simply relied on the statement recorded in the course of search u/s. 132(4) of the Act and further harping on the fact that summons issued u/s. 131 were not complied with. Learned AR also referred to the decision of the Coordinate Bench in the case of ACIT Vs. Shreedham Builders (ITA No. 5589/Mum/2017 for A.Y. 2012-13), wherein all these three entities have lent money and the Coordinate Bench has taken the view....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hreedham Builders (supra), under similar facts the Coordinate Bench has accepted loans given by these three parties, which were also common in the case of the assessee as stated in para 2.15 of the said order, which is as under:- 2.15. Now, in the light of the foregoing discussion, we shall examine the facts of the present appeal. Admittedly, the assessee alleged to have obtained accommodation entries in the form of unsecured loans from entities controlled by Shri Pravin Kumar Jain. During the course of survey, statement of Shri Ajay Maheshwari, one of the partners was recorded on 17/10/2014, on oath under section 131 of the Act. The details of unsecured loans taken during the Financial Year 2011-12 are summarized hereunder:- Sl. No. N....