TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (2) TMI 118
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ment Year 2012-13. 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: 1. The Ld.CIT(Appeals) has erred in not considering the documents and evidences submitted during the course of appeal proceedings with respect to Unsecured Loans available during the year under consideration. 2. The Ld.CIT(A), (Appeals) erred in law and in facts in upholding the addition of Rs.15,00,00/- u/s.68 of the Act without considering the facts of the case and the documents/details submitted by the appellant. 3. At the outset we note that there is a delay in filing the appeal by the assessee for 3 days only. Considering the length of delay, the Ld.DR did not raise any objection if the delay is condoned. Accordingly, we condone the d....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... AO held that the assessee failed to discharge the onus specified u/s 68 of the Act and treated the amount of loan of Rs.15,00,000/- as unexplained cash credit u/s 68 of the Act. 6. Aggrieved assessee preferred an appeal before the learned CIT-A. 7. The assessee before the Ld.CIT(A), submitted that the loans have been accepted by him through banking channel. To prove the genuineness of loan, the confirmation containing the name, address, bank account and cheques nos. were filed along with the copy of return of income and bank statement. 8. The assessee is not under the obligation to justify the source of source in the hands of the loans parties. Had there been any doubt about the genuineness of the loan, the AO was entitled to issu....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....vidence. The practice of conversion of unaccounted money needs to be curbed. The addition made is confirmed. 9. Being aggrieved by the order of the learned CIT-A, the assessee is in appeal before us. 10. The Ld.AR before us filed a paper book running from pages 1 to 22 and contended that all the details of the loan parties such as confirmation, Income tax return, bank statement were furnished in respect of loan taken by him.The Ld.AR to the effect has drawn our attention on pages 1 to 22 of the paper book where the necessary details were placed on record. 11. The Ld.AR further contended that the AO has not carried out any verification from the loan parties despite having the complete details of such parties. Therefore, the principl....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....her the principles laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Pr. CIT v. NRA Iron & Steel (P.) Ltd. [2019] 103 taxmann.com 48/262 Taxman 74/412 ITR 161 are applicable to the present facts of the case. In that case, the assessee-company received share capital and premium of Rs. 17.60 crores in all from nineteen parties (six from Mumbai, eleven from Kolkata and two from Guwahati). The shares had a face value of Rs. 10 and were subscribed by the investor-companies at a premium of Rs. 190 per share. The AO made the addition of Rs. 17.60 crores after carrying out various inquiries as under- (i) To verify the veracity of the transactions, the notices were served on three investor-companies namely Clifton Securities Pvt. Lt....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....es - Ispat Sheet Ltd. and Novelty Traders Ltd., were found non-existent at the given address. d. None of the investor-companies appeared before the A.O. 12.1 Based on the above it was held the by the Hon'ble Apex Court, that the Assessee-Company failed to discharge the onus required under section 68 of the Act. Therefore, the Assessing Officer was justified in adding back the amounts to the Assessee's income. However in the case on hand, we find that the assessee has discharged its onus cast upon it under the provisions of section 68 of the Act which has been elaborated in the preceding paragraphs. 12.2 In our humble understanding, we also note that the decision in the case of NRA Iron & Steel (P.) Ltd. (s....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... somewhere in the preceding paragraph. Therefore in our humble understanding the principles laid down by the Hon'ble Apex court in the case of NRA Iron & steels (P.) Ltd. (supra) are not applicable to the facts of the case. 12.4 It is also pertinent to note that various Hon'ble court after considering the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of NRA Iron & Steel (P.) Ltd. (supra) has deleted the addition made by the AO under the provisions of section 68 of the Act. In this connection we draw support and guidance form the judgment of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in case of Pr. CIT v. Ami Industries (India) (P.) Ltd. [2020] 116 taxmann.com 34/271 Taxman 424 ITR 219 where it was held as under: "21. From t....