TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (2) TMI 266
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... wake of evidences produced and submitted by the appellant. 3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case as well as in law the Ld. Commissioner _of Income Tax (Appeals) grossly erred in confirming the action of Ld. Assessing Officer that the assessment order passed without any adequate opportunity of being heard. 4. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case as well as in law the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) grossly .erred in confirming the addition made by Ld. Assessing Officer of 4,68,43,464/- in respect of charging' commission providing accommodation of entry 2,60,24,14646 @. 1.8% without consider the facts evidence submission made by appellant incorrect prospective disallow against the principle of natural justice." 3. The assessee company is a non-banking finance company. From the analysis of the balance sheet, AO observed that assessee has advanced an amount of Rs.2,08,81,97,859/-. The assessee submitted list of 78 parties of Rs.279,10,01,130/- under the head 'unsecured loans and advances' and capital advances of Rs.13,57,50,000/- to 4 parties. Thus, the total amount of loans and advances comes to Rs.2,92,67,51,130/-. The AO....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ct, 1961 in one of the companies alleged to be operated by Jain Brothers. Relevant finding w.r.t to commission income earned @ 0.5% on Page 32 (Para 3.4) of the Paper book. Assessment Order passed in the case of M/s Solomon Holdings Pvt. Ltd. (Starts at Page 38 of the Paper book.) Sl No.5 Refers to the assessment order dated 2912.2018 passed u/s 147 r.w.s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 in one of the companies alleged to be operated by Jain Brothers. Relevant finding w.r.t to commission income earned @ 0.5% on Page 55 (Para 14.1) of the Paper book. Order dated 23.01.2019 passed by the Hon'ble ITAT, Delhi in the case of Adonis Financial Services Pvt. Ltd. ITA 6507/DEL/2015 Sl.No.2 This order has been passed by the Hon'ble Tribunal disposing of 86 appeals by the assessee wherein @ Page 8 of the paper book refers to the name of M/s Bhawani Portfolio Pvt. Ltd. (ITA No. 6350 & 6351 of 2016) against which department has filed an appeal before the Hon'ble Delhi High Court. Relevant finding by the ITAT, Delhi. [@ Page 10 (Para 5] [@ Page 11 (Para 6-8] [@ Page 14 (Para 14- 17] of the paper book Order passed by the Hon'ble Delhi High in ITA No.158/2020 ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... of their trustworthiness, fix a liability upon a person. Keeping in view the above principles, even if we proceed on the assumption that the entries made in MR 71/91 are correct and the entries in the other books and loose sheets which we have already found to be not admissible in evidence under Section 34) are admissible under Section 9 of the Act to support an inference about the formers' correctness still those entries would not be sufficient to charge Shri Advani and Shri Shukla with the accusations levelled against them for there is not an iota of independent evidence in support thereof. In that view of the matter we need not discuss, deleve into or decide upon the contention raised by Mr. Altaf Ahmed in this regard. Suffice it to say that the statements of the witnesses, who have admitted receipts of the payments as shown against them in MR 71/91, can at best be proof of reliability of the entries so far they are concerned and not others. In other words, the statements of the above witnesses cannot be independent evidence under Section 10(34) as against the above two respondents. So far as Shri Advani is concerned Section 34 would not come in aid of the prosecution for a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ion entry transactions since the Assessee had failed to produce any satisfactory reply and confirmations for the said transactions. 4. He states that the Assessment Orders were upheld by the CIT(A) holding that the respondent-Assessee had failed to discharge his onus to establish the nature and source of each credit entry appearing in the bank accounts and therefore for want of necessary details and supporting evidence, the Assessing Officer was justified in treating all the credit entries appearing in the bank accounts as income for the purpose of estimating commission income at the rate of 2.25%. 5. He states that the ITAT vide the impugned orders dated 23rd January 2019 partially allowed the respondent-Assessee's appeals and set-aside the assessment orders and CIT(A) orders on the basis that in such illegal activities, no precedence of rate could be applied and further held that there cannot be any profit element in intergroup transactions. 6. He emphasises that the ITAT had overlooked the fact that the respondent-Assessee had admitted to providing accommodation entries. He adds that the error in the impugned order is that ITAT had failed to recogn....