TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (7) TMI 902
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....MR. JUSTICE BHARGAV D. KARIA MR MANISH BHATT. SR ADVOCATE WITH KARAN SANGHANI FOR M R BHATT & CO. (5953) FOR THE APPELLANT(S) NO. 1 ORDER PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N. V. ANJARIA Heard learned senior advocate Mr. Manish Bhatt with learned advocate Mr. Karan Sanghani for M.R. Bhatt & Co. for the appellant. 2. The revenue seeks to raise grievance about deletion on part of the Appell....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the two loan transactions of Rs.8,50,00,000/- and Rs.23,70,00,000/- received by respondent assessee from one M/s. J.A Infracon Private Limited and M/s. Satya Retail Private Limited were treated by assessing officer to be sham in the sense that the creditworthiness etc. of the giver of the loan were not established. Accordingly, the assessing officer made addition under Section 68 of the Act. 3.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....panies have submitted the requisite information." 3.3 The information supplied by assessee was duly noticed by appellate authority and facts in that regard were recorded also to arrive at a finding that the unsecured loans to the aforesaid parties have been paid by account payee cheques from the bank account of the assessee which was not in dispute, muchless in doubt. The accounts were finally ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....by it and the loan was repaid by the assessee in the subsequent year. It led to unacceptable conclusion that the impugned transaction was a business transaction between the assessee and the loan parties and that they could not be doubted for their genuineness. 3.5 While the revenue has tried to put up a case that the transactions were in the nature of accommodation entries, this case has only p....