2023 (1) TMI 887

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... RE.: REASSESSMENT: 2.1. The ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the action of the A.O whereby the A.O. had initiated reassessment proceedings and framed assessment of the appellant by invoking the provisions of Section 147 r.w.s 148 of the Act 2.2. While doing so, the ld. CIT (A) failed to appreciate that the case of the appellant did not fall within the parameters laid down by section 147 r.w.s. 148 of the Act, as the necessary condition for initiation as well as completion thereof were not fulfilled. 2.3. It is submitted that in the facts and the circumstances of the case, and in law, the reassessment framed is bad, illegal and void. 2.4. The appellant prays that the assessment so framed be held as bad and illegal and be quashed. 3. ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF UNSECURED LOANS: 3.1. The ld. CIT (A) erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 2,60,00,000/- made by the AO under section 68 of the Act whereby the A.O. had treated the unsecured loans received by the Appellant from following parties namely: Sr. No Name of the Loan Parties Amount Rs. 1 Atharv Business P. Ltd 65,00,000 2 Olive Overseas P Ltd 65,00,000 3 Viraj Mercantile P. Ltd 40,00,000 4 Caspe....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... of the Act. In compliance to the notice, the assessee has filed a letter dated 03.04.2018 to treat the return of income filed on 28.09.2012 as due compliance to notice u/s 148 of the Act. Further, the AO has issued notice u/s 143(2) and 142(1) of the Act along with the questionnaire and the reasons for reopening of assessment was provided to the asssessee and the assessee has filed objections and the same were disposed by separate letter dated 26.09.2018 by the A.O. In the asssesseement proceedings, the Ld. AR of the assessee appeared from time to time and submitted the various details/information and the case was discussed. 3. The A.O. has perused the financial statements and dealt on the transactions of unsecured loans obtained in the F.Y.2011-12 and found that the transactions are not genuine and dealt on the facts, statements, survey operations of Shree Praveen Kumar Jain & Group and has issued notice to the assessee to explain the sources and genuineness, creditworthiness and identity of the unsecured loan creditors. Whereas the assessee has furnished the submissions/details vide letter dated 22.10.2018 and was dealt at Para 6.16 of the order as under: 6. 16 The has in res....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... appeal, submissions of the assessee and findings of the A.O Whereas, the CIT(A) was not satisfied with the submissions and material information has upheld the validity of assessment and sustained the addition of unsecured loans and interest payments and dismissed the assesses appeal. Aggrieved by the CIT(A) order, the assessee has filed an appeal with the Hon'ble Tribunal. 6. At the time of hearing, the Ld.AR submitted that the CIT(A) has erred in confirming the addition of unsecured loans u/s 68 of the Act irrespective of the fact that the assessee has filed the details in respect of the loans and submitted the confirmation of the loan creditors along with other vital details. Further, the Ld. AR submitted that the assessee maintains the regular books of accounts and has furnished the confirmation of loans, bank statement of both the assessee and loan creditors, audited financial statements and retraction statement of Shri Praveen Kumar Jain to substantiate the genuineness, identity and creditworthiness of the loan creditors and the assessee has paid interest on loans and was confirmed by the parties. The Ld.AR supported the facts with the evidences in the paper book, submission....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....(1) 6. ITA No. 7079/Mum/2016 Asst CIT-19(1) vs. Shri Dilip Chimanlal Gandhi 7. ITA No. 7049 & 7050/Mum/2016, Jitendra M Kitawat vs. ITO 18(1)(5) 8. ITA No. 7047/Mum/2016 Jitendra M Kitawat (HUF) vs. ITO 18(1)(5) 9. ITA No.3017/Mum/2018 Smt. Ritu Kamal Singal vs ITO 24(3)(4) 10. ACIT Vs. M/s Shree Ganesh Developers ITA No. 1477/Mum/2017 11. ACIT Vs. Shri Ramesh Ramswarupdas Jindal I.T.A. No. 3091 to 3096/Mum/2017 12. ACIT VS. H. K. Pujara Builders I.T.A. No. 930/Mum/2017 13. ITO Vs. Smt. Sarita Devi Choudhary L.T.A.4771/MUM/2017 14. Indumati M Bansal Vs. ITO I.T.A. Nos. 3842/Mum/2017 15. ITO VS. M/s Shreedham Construction Pvt. Ltd. I.T.A. No. 3754 to 3756 & 2948/Mum/ 2017 16. ACIT VS. DNH Spinners Pvt. Ltd. I.T.A. No. 1225/Mum/2018 17. Shree Shankar Sarees Vs. ITO ITO ITA No. 2751/Mum/2019. 8. In the assessment proceedings, the assessee has cooperated in submitting the information, whereas the A.O has ignored the information, evidences and audited financial statements and unilaterally made addition u/sec68 of the Act only on the basis of statement provided by third party without any iota of evidences discrediting the evidence furnished by the as....