TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (8) TMI 288
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed to as 'the Act') relating to the Assessment Years (A.Ys) 2009-10 & 2010-11. Since common issue is involved in all the above appeals, the same are disposed of by this consolidated order. 2. The common issue involved in all these appeals are unsecured loans received from Smt. Hansaben M. Patel, Shri Kamal Gohil and Shri Mukesh Jayantilal Shah by the respective assessees and the additions made by the Assessing Officer made u/s. 68 which were repaid in the next financial year by the assessees, therefore the same were deleted by the Ld. CIT(A) which is tabulated as follows: Sr. No. ITA No./A.Y. Name of Assessee Amount Received From Repayment details 1 945/A/2018 A.Y. 2009-10 Asit Surendrbhai Shah Hansaben M. Patel Rs. 10,00,00,000/- Ledger a/c of Hansaben with confirmation in Paper Book @ Pages 22 & 23 Loan is fully repaid 2 1249/A/2018 A.Y. 2009-10 Asit Surendrabhai Shah (HUF) Hansaben M. Patel Rs. 5,00,00,000/- Ledger a/c of Hansaben with confirmation in Paper Book @ Pages 118 & 119 Loan is fully repaid 3 IT(SS)A No. 54/A/2021 A.Y. 2010-11 Asit Surendrabhai Shah S Mangaldas is proprietary concern of assessee Hansaben M. Pa....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he assessee filed its Return of Income on 23-02-2010 declaring total income of Rs. 14,61,410/-. The return was processed under section 143(1) of the Act. Thereafter the assessment was reopened by issuing a notice u/s. 148 of the Act on 31-03-2016 on the ground that the unsecured loan of Rs. 10,00,00,000/- received by the assessee from Smt. Hansaben Manilal Patel as not genuine. The assessee vide its letter dated 17-11-2016 to treat the original return in compliance to the above under 148 notices. 4.1. The assessee during the course of reassessment proceedings, submitted Ledger account of Smt. Hansaben M. Patel, Copy of the bank statement reflecting the transaction with Smt. Hansaben M. Patel, Copy of Return of Income for A.Y. 2009-10 filed by Smt. Hansaben M. Patel and her bank statement reflecting the above transaction with the assessee. Further the assessee also filed copy of confirmation received from Smt. Hansaben M. Patel and repayment of loan in the next financial year through Account Payee Cheques with bank statements. 4.2. The assessee also clarified that he has not paid any interest on the above loan taken from Smt. Hansaben M. Patel. Thus the assessee claimed that h....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the lands to M/s. Applewoods Estate Pvt. Ltd. just within 13 days after purchased from original land owners. 5.2. In view of the above facts, the assessee failed to prove the identity, genuineness and creditworthiness of the unsecured loan of Rs. 10,00,00,000/- and also it is proved that Smt. Hansaben M. Patel has given accommodation entry to the Assessee in guise of unsecured loan, the unsecured loan of Rs. 10,00,00,000/- is added to the total income of the assessee under Section 68 of the IT Act, as unexplained cash credits and demanded taxes thereon. 6. Aggrieved against the addition, the assessee filed an appeal before Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) after considering the submissions of the assessee, deleted the entire addition made u/s. 68 of the Act observing as follows: "....6.2 Facts of the case as mentioned in assessment order, submissions of the appellant and case laws cited upon by the appellant have been carefully considered. There is no dispute that the loan of Rs.10 crore was obtained by the appellant through account payee cheques. It is established, accepted & settled legal principle that to prove the genuineness of credits, three parameters ie. identity, ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....be doubted in absence of adverse finding like immediate deposits of cash etc. These facts prove that the appellant satisfactorily established the identity of the creditor, genuineness of the transactions and creditworthiness of the creditor with documentary evidences. Hence, the additions made by the AO are not found justified. Regarding the financial relations of the appellant with JP Iscon group, the appellant did not deny and admitted that he had financial relations with Kotak family since his father's days but all these transactions have been found entered into regular books of accounts. Therefore, any adverse inference without any substantial documentary evidence is not legally sustainable. The appellant's case has been further found covered by the following judgments :- i) In the case of Meenaben Lakhani TA No.104 of 2011, the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court held as under: "In our opinion, when the loan has been received by the assesse by way of account payee chèques from depositor under the Income Tax Act and the PAN as well as confirmation by such creditor has been furnished to the Assessing Officer, before deciding to proceed further it is t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r in examining the lenders of the assessee was a wrong approach. Moreover, we find that those lenders have made inconsistent statement as pointed out by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) and in such circumstances, we find that both the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) and the Tribunal were justified in setting aside the deletion as the Assessing Officer, without taking step for verification of the Income Tax Return of the creditors, took unnecessary step of further examining those creditors. If the Assessing officers of those creditors are satisfied with the explanation given by the creditors as regards those transactions, the Assessing Officer in question has no justification to disbelieve the transactions reflected in the account of the creditors. In other words, the Assessing Officer had no authority to dispute the correctness of assessments of the creditors of the assessee when a co-ordinate Assessing Officer is satisfied with the transaction." iii) In the case of DCIT v/s Rohini Builders 256 ITR 360 (Guj), Hon'ble High Court held as under :- "substantial Question of law - Cash Credit Assessee furnished complete addresses of - all the creditors ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....on, Return of Income filed by the assessee and that of Smt. Hansaben M Patel, details of land sold by Smt. Hansaben M. Patel and Bank statements of Smt. Hansaben M. Patel reflecting the loan transactions. Ld. Counsel brought to our notice that similar unsecured loans given by Smt. Hansaben M. Patel to M/s. Rachana Finlease Pvt. Ltd., Capaxo Logistics Pvt. Ltd. and Ambe Tradecorp Pvt. Ltd. were considered by the Co-ordinate Benches of this Tribunal and deleted the addition made u/s. 68 of the Act. Thus the present addition made by the Assessing Officer is liable to be deleted and relied upon Co-ordinate Bench decision in the case of ACIT Vs. M/s. Rachana Finlease Pvt. Ltd. in ITA No. 63/Ahd/2020 dated 05-07-2023 wherein it was held as follows: ".....6.1. In the case of M/s. Capaxo Logistics Pvt. Ltd. and Ambe Tradecorp Pvt. Ltd. wherein funds were received from the above two parties namely Shri Rameshji Thakor and Smt. Hansaben Manilal Patel. When the additions made by the Assessing Officer were deleted by Ld. CIT(A) which are now confirmed by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Tribunal in ITA No. 1264/Ahd/2019 and ITA No. 1235/Ahd/2019 observing as follows: In the case....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... by learned CIT (A) then amount received by the assessee from that company cannot be held as unexplained under section 68 of the Act in the absence of contrary information. Likewise, there cannot be addition of one item in the hands of two different persons. 9.3 Nevertheless, the assessee has submitted PAN, address, ledger confirmation, own bank statement and bank statement of M/s Rachna Finelease Pvt. showing amount received through banking channel. The assessee also claimed before the learned CIT (A) that M/s Rachna Finelease Pvt. has received money from Smt. Hansaben Patel and Shri Ramesh Thakor which can be verified from the bank statement of M/s Rachna Finelease Pvt. and also from the finding of the AO in paragraph 6.1.3 which reads as under: On verification of the bank book of Rachna Finelease Pvt. Ltd. it is found that the fund have travelled within minutes of being credited from the bank account of Hansaben H. Patel and Rameshbhai Thakor and immediately the funds have landed in the bank account of JP Fincorp Services Pvt. Ltd.(Renamed as Ambe Tradecorp Pvt. Ltd.). 9.4 Smt. Hansaben Patel sold immovable property for Rs. 102.93 crores and paid due t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....le to be dismissed. 8. We have given our thoughtful consideration and perused the materials available on record. It is settled principle of law the Income Tax Act nowhere provides that parallel assessments can be made in respect of the same income on two different persons. The assessee right from the beginning of the reassessment proceedings submitted that the source of the funds from the creditors and their source (i.e. source on source) is also proved by the assessee. Therefore the Assessing Officer made a protective addition of Rs. 28.68 crores as unexplained money in the hand of the assessee. The Co-ordinate Bench of this Tribunal in the case of M/s. Capaxo Logistics Pvt. Ltd. and M/s. Ambe Tradecorp Pvt. Ltd. are on identical additions deleted the same observing identity, creditworthiness and genuineness of the transactions are clearly established by the assessee. The Assessing Officer has not pointed out any deficiency in these documentary evidences submitted by the assessee and also not brought on record any contrary evidences in the reassessment proceedings. 8.1. It is seen from the appellate record, the assessment made in the case of Smt. Hansaben Manilal....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....oan availed was repaid in the next financial year to the creditor namely Smt. Hansaben M. Patel through cheque payments and the bank statement also filed before the Lower Authorities. Therefore we are of the considered opinion, the provisions of section 68 does not attract in the above transaction and thereby we uphold the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) deleting the addition made u/s. 68 of the unsecured loans availed from Smt. Hansaben M. Patel. Thus the grounds raised by the Revenue are devoid of merits and the same are liable to be rejected and ITA No. 945/Ahd/2018 filed by the Revenue is hereby dismissed. 10. Following the above decision of ours, we hereby delete the addition made on account of unsecured loans from Smt. Hansaben M. Patel by the respective assessee in ITA Nos.1249/Ahd/2018, 1252/Ahd/2018, 1253/Ahd/2018, 1254/Ahd/2018, 457/Ahd/ 2020, 477/Ahd/2020 & IT(SS)A No. 54/Ahd/2021 are hereby deleted and the respective grounds raised by the Revenue are held to be devoid of merits. Thus the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed. 11. In IT(SS)A No. 54/Ahd/2021 (for A.Y. 2010-11), apart from the unsecured loan from Smt. Hansaben M. Patel of Rs. 2.92 crores another ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Therefore addition of Rs. 75,55,000/- made by the AO is deleted." 12. The Ld. D.R. appearing for the Revenue supported the order passed by the A.O. and could not file any contra evidences as against the findings of the Ld. CIT(A). Further Mr. Kamal Gohil is also one of the party who sold the land at Sanand District, Ahmedabad and the loan transaction is done through banking channels. Therefore we have no hesitation in deleting the above addition made by the Ld. CIT(A). Thus the Grounds raised by the Revenue is devoid of merits and the same is liable to deleted. 13. ITA No. 477/Ahd/2020 (for A.Y. 2010-11). In this case, apart from the unsecured loan of Rs. 1.31 crores from Smt. Hansaben M. Patel another unsecured loan of Rs. 1.55 crores received from Shri Mukesh J. Shah by the assessee which was added as unexplained income u/s. 68 of the Act by the Assessing Officer. The Ld. CIT(A) deleted the same observing as follows: "....It is contended by the appellant that they have submitted ample evidences, such as bank statement of appellant and Shri Mukesh Jayantilal Shah, conformation and copies of sale deeds of land of Rs.51,90,90,000/-. Each bank transaction is tallied wi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tion from DDIT Unit 1(3), Ahmedabad, after detailed investigation by DDIT Unit 1(3), Ahmedabad. On such basis appellant contended that allegation made by AO is without any basis. It is further contended by the appellant that ITO Ward 5(3)(4), Ahmedabad who is a AO of Shri Mukesh Jayantilal Shah, has initiated proceedings u/s. 226(3) of The Act for recovery of demand of Shri Mukesh Jayantilal Shah from the appellant. Appellant has submitted all the details to AO of Shri Mukesh Jayantilal Shah and submitted that they have repaid entire amount to Shri Mukesh Jayantilal Shah and there is a NIL balance as on 31.03.2011. AO of Mukesh Jayantilal Shah has verified these details and after his due satisfaction, has dropped recovery proceedings against the appellant. In these circumstances, the appellant submitted that all the receipt and payment have been made through banking channel therefore it is proved that appellant has not sold plot and has not introduced these amount in its books of accounts by using name of Shri Mukesh Jayantilal Shah. Further it is also contended that in the case of Shri Ramesh Gobarji Thakor (Who is known to the appellant) for the Assessment Year 2010-11 addition o....