AI OCR 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (5) TMI 36
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ase as well as law on the subject, the ld. CIT(A) NFAC was not justified in dismissing the order without considering the facts of the case defying natural justice to the appellant. 2. On the facts and circumstances of the case as well as law on the subject, the ld. CIT(A) NFAC has erred in confirming the action of the ITO in reopening the assessment u/s 147 of the Act and issuing notice u/s 148 of the I.T. Act, 1961. 3. On the facts and circumstances of the case as well as law on the subject, the ld. CIT(A) NFAC has erred in upholding the addition of Rs. 9,50,000/- on account of unsecured loan taken treating such loan as unexplained income u/s 68 of the I.t. Act, 1961 without acknowledging the submission of the assessee. 4. On the fac....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....cording reasons that serving notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (In short, the Act) proceeded for assessment. 4. During the assessment, the Assessing Officer issued show cause notice and the assessee was asked to produce the Director of lender company who has given loan. The assessee was also asked to prove the identity, creditworthiness and genuineness of transaction by filing reply by 07/12/2018. The assessee filed reply dated 10/12/2018. The reply of assessee is scanned by the Assessing Officer on page No. 7 to 10 of the assessment order. In the reply, the assessee submitted that neither Anand Kumar Sharma is Director nor an authorised representative of the creditor and they may be allowed cross examination of such per....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ld. CIT(A). The assessee in sum and substance submitted that the transaction of loan is genuine and that they have discharged their primary onus. The assessee submitted that the loan taken by the assessee was paid in subsequent year and no adverse view was taken in assessment for subsequent year. The assessee also filed copy of his bank statement showing repayment. To support their submission, the assessee relied on the decision of Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in CIT Vs. Ayachi Chandrashekhar Narsangji 42 taxmann.com 251, ITO Vs Shyam Sunder Jajodia (2008) 26 SOT 541 (Delhi) and CIT Vs M.K. Brothers 30 Taxman 547 (Guj). On the addition of unexplained expenditure on account of commission, the assessee explained that there is no evid....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ss examination of the person who was allegedly searched by investigation team of department and the basis on which the case of assessee was reopened and ultimately addition was made. The assessee during the assessment, furnished complete details of lender including their name, PAN, account confirmation, contra confirmation and bank statement showing the loan received and loan paid. The assessee also furnished certificate issued by Ministry of Corporate Affairs wherein name of lender company was changed. The assessee also furnished the assessment order of lender company for A.Y. 2011-12 to 2018-19. The lender was having sufficient and surplus money for lending. The ld. AR of the assessee submits that unsecured loan was paid in A.Y. 2013-14 a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s. The ld. Sr. DR for the revenue submits that the Assessing Officer in the assessment order has brought sufficient evidence on record that the lender company was managed by Anand Kumar Sharma. The lender company was managed by Anand Kumar Sharma who himself admitted in the statement recorded by the Investigation Wing under Section 134 of the Act. The ld. Sr.DR submits that the transaction through banking channel is always not sacrosanct. The ld. Sr. DR prayed for upholding both the additions. 10. I have considered the submissions of both the parties and perused the material on record. I have also perused the orders of the lower authorities carefully. I find that during the assessment the assessee furnished the name, address and PAN of len....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....od Jhivabhai Nakhava (supra) also held that where lender of assessee are income tax assessee, whose PAN have been disclosed, the Assessing Officer cannot ask assessee to further prove genuineness of transaction without first verifying such fact from income tax return of lender. It is the duty of Assessing Officer to ascertain from Assessing Officer of those lender, whether in their respective return, they have shown existence of such amount of money and have further shown that amount of money had been lent to the assessee. I find that no such exercise was carried out by the Assessing Officer. Further, the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in case of CIT Vs Rohini Builders 256 ITR 360 (Guj) also held that when assessee proved identity by giv....