TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (4) TMI 170
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f enhancement were never considered by an A.O. from the point of view of taxability. 4. That CIT(A) has grossly erred in law and on facts in making an enhancement and sustaining addition under section 68 of the Act. The CIT (A) has failed to appreciate that loan were taken in the earlier years. 5. That CIT(A) has grossly erred in law and on facts in not considering submissions of the appellant assessee and thus acted against the principals natural justice. 6. That the CIT(A) has erred in law in making an addition of Rs. 87,50,000/-. when the appellant has discharged its onus of proving identity and creditworthiness of unsecured creditor and genuineness of transaction before the assessing officer. 7. Without prejudice, the CIT(A) has grossly erred in law and on facts in passing direction U/s 150(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 when he himself made enhancement/confirmed addition made by an AO on all the transaction. 8. That CIT(A) has grossly erred in law and on facts In making enhancement/confirming an addition when he himself failed to conduct inquiry despite request by an appellant. 9. That the evidence filed and materials avail....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... received by the assessee during other Assessment Year and take necessary steps to bring the same for taxation. 5. Now, the assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal. 6. The assessee has raised multiple grounds however, the only effective ground in this appeal is against the proposed enhancement made by Ld.CIT(A) in respect of unsecured loan from M/s. Hirise Hospitality Pvt.Ltd. & M/s. Mithilanchal Investment & Finance Pvt.Ltd. and further sustaining the addition of Rs. 87,50,000/- made by the AO. 7. Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that Ld.CIT(A) exceeded his jurisdiction by making enhancement of income. He contended that the impugned order is ex facie, patently illegal and grossly unjust. He contended that the Ld.CIT(A) failed to appreciate the fact that loans were taken in earlier years. He submitted that Ld.CIT(A) infact under the garb of enhancement exceeded his jurisdiction which is not permissible under law. Ld.CIT(A), infact exercised revisionary jurisdiction which is not conferred upon him. He contended that during the appellate proceedings, it was categorically stated that the Assessing Officer had verified the issue of loan and more particularly, the asse....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....at the impugned order was passed without making any inquiry and verifying the material facts. 8. Per contra, Ld.CIT DR pointed out that the grievance of the assessee is baseless. He contended that Ld.CIT(A) has duly considered the contention of the assessee and gave direction to the AO to verify the genuineness of the loan and tax it in appropriate Assessment Year. Therefore, the assessee should not have any grievance. 9. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the material available on record and gone through the orders of the authorities below. We find that the Ld.CIT(A) in para 6.2 of the impugned order has noted the factum of addition made by AO and in paras 16.3 & 16.4 of the impugned order, he decided the issue of additions made by the AO by observing as under:- 16.3. "As mentioned in the assessment order before Assessing Officer, in respect of the above said three parties, even the addresses were not provided by the appellant. Before undersigned also, situation remained same. The basic question is as to whether appellant discharged its onus (cast upon it by the provisions of section 68 i.e. to prove identity and creditworthiness of the lender and genui....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t and Finance Pvt. Ltd.) was received on 30.06.2011, the AO is directed under section 150(1) to examine the case under section 147/148 for the relevant assessment years, independently and in case the conditions under relevant sections are found to be satisfied, the proceedings may be initiated not withstanding anything contained in section 149 subject to provisions of section 150(2). In case, the above stated amount (or part of it) is assessed & attains finality, in that assessment year, the addition to that extent may be deleted in this 11. On the above finding, We do not see any infirmity into the above finding of Ld.CIT(A) and the same is well-reasoned and no prejudice would cause to the assessee. The AO is directed to verify the transaction and consider in the appropriate Assessment Year. 19.6. The appellant is entitled to the reduction of Rs. 1.15 crore in AY 2017-18 in respect of forfeited amount (of M/s. Mithilanchal Investment and Finance Pvt.Ltd.), provided that the corresponding addition in AY 2012-13 is not disputed by the appellant and the appellant is able to show that it was actually added in Assessment Year 2017-18." 12. Hence, we do not see any reason to....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... loss account/ Income Tax Return of this company was ever filed before the AO. The appellant submitted a photocopy of letter dated 20.12.2016 addressed to the AO, in which it has been claimed that a) necessary evidence of dispute with this' party were being produced. b) a copy of balance sheet of this party as downloaded from MCA (Ministry of Company Affairs) was enclosed. c) a copy of bank statement evidencing receipt of the said payment was enclosed.(it seems that the letter was talking above the statement of the bank account of the appellant). However, during the present appellate proceedings, the appellant did not furnish any of the documents mentioned at a), b) or c), above. Of course, a photocopy of bank statement of the appellant has been submitted which evidence receipt of only Rs. 10 lakhs (it will be discussed below). iv) During the present appellate proceedings, the appellant produced the following: a) a simple (unauthenticated) photocopy of ledger account of this party (which does not have address of the party) in the books of the appellant which is purportedly confirmed by the director/authorised signatory of this party. This being a simple photoc....