TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (11) TMI 940
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 2. On the facts and circumstances of the case as well as law on the subject, the learned CIT(A) has erred in confirming the action of Assessing Office in making the addition of Rs. 25,00,000/- on account of alleged bogus unsecured loan us/s 68 of the Act. 3. On the facts and circumstances of the case as well as law on the subject, the learned CIT(A) has erred in confirming the action of Assessing Officer in making the addition of Rs. 50,000/- on account of commission expenses to arrange such accommodation entries u/s 69C of the Act. 4. On the facts and circumstances of the case as well a law on the subject, the learned CIT(A) has erred in confirming the action of Assessing Officer in making the addition of Rs. 57,000/- on account of disallowance of interest paid on alleged bogus unsecured loan. 5. It is therefore prayed that addition made by Assessing Officer and confirmed by CIT(A) may please be deleted. 6. Appellant craves leave to add, alter or delete any ground(s) either before or in the course of hearing of the appeal." 2. Brief facts of the case are that assessee is a builder and developer of properties and film exhibition. The a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... assessment proceedings and complete statement of Manohar Lal Nanglia is not provided. The assessee requested to provide such complete statement and sought his cross-examination of such person. To support such contention, the assessee relied on various case law including in the case of Andaman Timber Industries vs. Commissioner of Central Excise (2015) 281 CTR 0241 (SC), Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of DCIT vs. Mahendra Ambalal Patel in Tax Appeal No.462 of 1999 dated 13.04.2010 [40 DTR 243] and other various decisions. 3. The assessee further submitted that they have provided complete details of lender and discharged their onus. The proposed action of Assessing Officer is based on suspicious and surmise. The transaction of assessee is genuine and received such loan through banking transaction. To support such contention, the assessee relied on decision of Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of DCIT vs. Rohini Builders (2003) 127 Taxman 523/256 ITR 360/182 CTR 373 (Guj); CIT vs. Orissa Corporation Pvt. Ltd. (1986) 25 Taxman 80F/159 ITR 78/52 CTR 138 (SC); CIT Vs. Ayachi Chandrashekhar Narsangji (2014) 42 taxmann.com 251 (Guj). For proposed interest dis....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....aking Tax Deducted at Sources was deposited in Central Government Account. The Assessing Officer has not made any investigation of fact and doubted the genuineness of transaction. 6. The Ld. CIT(A) after considering the submission of assessee and the assessment order confirmed the action of Assessing Officer by taking view that Manohar Lal Nanglia, in his statement recorded under section 131 has admitted that lender company is involved in providing accommodation entry and that he has controlled such companies also and provided accommodation entry by taking @ 2% commission. The assessee could not prove the identity, creditworthiness and genuineness of such transaction and that decision of Ahmedabad Tribunal in Soft Touch Fabrics Pvt. Ltd. Vs DCIT is directly applicable on the facts of present case. Once the addition of loan was upheld the disallowance of interest expenses and addition @ 2% commission was also upheld by Ld.CIT(A). Further aggrieved, the assessee has filed present appeal before the Tribunal. 7. 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. The Ld. AR....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... company is registered with Registrar of Company, Ahmedabad and is still active company as per the latest information available in website of Ministry of Corporate Affairs, Govt. of India, the details of active compliant is filed at page-78 of the paper book. The Ld. AR for the assessee further submits that he has filed complete details of lender including copy of confirmation bank statement and repayment of loan. The Ld. AR for the assessee submits that in case the addition of loan addition is deleted the disallowance of interest payment and addition of commission are consequential in nature. To support his submission, Ld. AR for the assessee relied on following case law: * CIT vs. Orissa Corporation Pvt. Ltd. [1986] 25 Taxman 80F/159 ITR 78/52 CTR 138 (SC) * DCIT vs. Rohini Builders [2003] 127 Taxman 523/56 ITR 360/182 CTR 373 (Guj) * CIT vs. Ayachi Chandrashekhar Narsangji [2014] 42 taxmann.com 251 (Guj) * Auradha Anilkumar Agarwal vs. DCIT (A.Y. 2012-13) ITA No.2911/AHD/2016 dated 14.11.2018 * Rajhans Construction (P.) Ltd. vs. ACIT [2022] 140 taxmann.com 370 (Surat-Trib.) * ITO vs. Hi-Choice Processors Pvt. Ltd. [ITA No.98/....