TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (3) TMI 610
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....assed by Assessing Officer/ Income tax Officer ward-1(2)(2), Surat under section 143(3) of Income Tax Act, 1961 ( 'the Act') on 22.12.2017. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:- "1.The ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in law and on facts in confirming the action of the ld. A.O of making addition to the tune of Rs.35,00,000/- on the ground of alleged unexplained cash credit u/s 68 of the Act. 2. The ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in law and on facts in confirming the actin of the ld. A.O of disallowing interest expenses of Rs.2,78,500/- paid on unsecured loans. 3. The Appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter, modify, substitute, delete, change or vary all....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed loan of Rs.5.00 lakhs squared up during the year from Chunilal Jivanram. The Assessing Officer made addition of Rs.35 lakhs as well as interest of Rs. 2,35,500/- paid by assessee to all four parties. The Assessing Officer taxed such addition under section115BBE. 4. Aggrieved by the addition in the assessment order, the assessee filed appeal before Ld. CIT(A). The case of assessee migrated to NFAC/Ld. CIT(A). Before NFAC/Ld. CIT(A) the assessee filed detailed written submission. The submissions of the assessee is recorded in para-4 of the NFAC/Ld. CIT(A). The assessee submitted that Assessing Officer made addition of unsecured loan of Rs.35.00 lakhs and disallowed interest paid of Rs.2,78,500/-. The assessee submitted that it explained....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nd their bank pass-book. The Assessing Officer has not made any efforts to obtain necessary details from lenders by issuing summons under section 131 or notice under section 133(6) of the Act. The assessee appeared before Assessing Officer on 22.12.2017 with return of income of lenders, computation of their income, financial statement and copy of their pass book, which was received with the help of business associates of assessee, however, the Assessing Officer refused to receive such submission, though assessment order was served upon assessee on 26.12.2017. The assessee further stated that Assessing Officer while making the addition, did not considered the confirmation filed by lenders with other documentary evidence and no investigation ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d genuineness of transaction is proved. The assessee could not prove the unsecured loan in its books of account satisfactory and upheld the addition. The NFAC/ Ld. CIT(A) also upheld the addition of interest expenses as well as taxing the additions under section 68 under section 115BBE. Further aggrieved assessee has filed present appeal before the Tribunal. 6. We have heard the submission of Ld. Authorized Representative (Ld.AR) for the assessee and Ld. Senior Departmental Representative (Ld. Sr-DR) for the Revenue and have gone through the orders of the lower authorities carefully. The Ld.AR for the assessee submits that during the assessment, the assessee furnished the complete details of the loan transaction consisting of contra conf....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 39 TAXMAN 547 -GUJ, • Lanchand P Dhariwal vs ITO ITA No 2623/Ahd/2016 dated 11,02.2022 7. On the other hand, Ld. Sr-DR for the Revenue supported the order of lower authorities. The Ld. Sr-DR submits that assessee submitted the copy of bank account was not furnished by assessee despite repeated direction of Assessing Officer. 8. We have considered the rival submissions of both the parties and have gone through the orders of lower authorities carefully. We also deliberated various case law relied by Ld. AR for the assessee. We find that the assessing officer made addition of Rs. 35.00 lakhs by taking view that the assessee failed to provide the complete details of the lenders to prove the identity, creditworthy and genuine....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....evidences filed by the assessee. We find that in absence of any comment of the evidences furnished by the assessee in discharging its primary onus, assessing officer was not justified in making such additions. 10. We find that Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of CIT vs. Orissa Corporation (P.) Ltd. (supra) and Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of M/s Pankaj Enka Pvt limited (Tax Appeal No.967 of 2015), and CIT vs. Ranchhod V. Nakhava (supra) held that if the transaction is through regular banking channels and the assessee has filed confirmation along with PAN of the creditors, the assessee has discharged its onus. 11. Further, in case of CIT Vs Ranchod Jivabhai Nakhava (2012) 21 taxmann.com 159 (Gujarat), the Hon'ble....