TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (1) TMI 416
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....are as follows: "(i) Ground Nos.1 to 4 on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the ld. CIT(A) has erred in holding that any addition during the assessment u/s 153C of the Act, has to be confined to the incriminating material found during the course of search u/s 132(1) of the Act, even though, there is no such stipulation in section 153C of the Act. Various courts held that assessment in search case can be concluded against interest of assessee including making additions even without any incriminating material being available against assessee in search under section 132 of the Act. (This covers ground no.1 to 4 in IT(SS)A No. 23/SRT/2021, for AY.2012-13 and ground no.1 to 4 in IT(SS) No.24/SRT/2021, for AY.2013-14) (ii) Ground No.5: Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting entire additions of Rs. 2,20,51,918/- under section 68 of the Act on account of unexplained credit and Rs. 30,65,650/- for want of evidences in respect of claim of agricultural income. (This covers ground no. 5 in IT(SS)A No. 23/SRT/2021, for AY.2012-13 and ground no.5 in IT(SS)A No. 24/SRT/2021, for AY.2013-14)" (ii) The concise and summarized grounds of appeal in As....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rs ground no. 2 raised by the assessee in ITA No. 118/SRT/2021 for AY.2014-15)" 3. Now we shall take above concised and summarized grounds of appeals, one by one. 4. First, we shall take Revenue's appeal in IT(SS)A No. 23/SRT/2021 for AY.2012-13 and IT(SS)A No. 24/SRT/2021 for AY.2013-14. Since, in these Revenues` appeal for AYs.2012-13 and 2013-14, the issues involved are common and identical; therefore, we shall adjudicate them together. The concise and summarized grounds of appeal in Revenue`s appeals, in IT(SS)A No. 23/SRT/2021 for AY.2012-13 and in IT(SS)A No. 24/SRT/2021 for AY.2013-14, are reproduced below for ready reference as follows: "(i) Ground Nos. 1 to 4 on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the ld. CIT(A) has erred in holding that any addition during the assessment u/s 153C of the Act, has to be confined to the incriminating material found during the course of search u/s 132(1) of the Act, even though, there is no such stipulation in section 153C of the Act. Various courts held that assessment in search case can be concluded against interest of assessee including making additions even without any incriminating material being available ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....identified as giving fresh loan, as well as receiving interest on such unsecured loan and details of the same is as under: S. No. Name Loan taken/added in the year under consideration 1 ARVIND SHANTILAL SHAH 10,00,000 2 J1GARTEX 1,45,00,000 3 KHENGARBHAI M BAHDIYADARA 11230000 4 RAKESH JANGID 1,50,0000 5 MUKESH JAGDISH 88,61,058 6 CHHAGANBHAI HARIBHAI SINPHAV 2,40,000 7 BAVALBHA1 HARIBHAI SINDHAV 1,83,464 8 HARIBHAI MERABHA! SINDHAV 2,40,000 9 MANUBEN RANCHODBHAI 6,08,000 10 RANCHODBHAI MALABHAI 52,40,000 Total 4,36,02,522 The assessee was asked to show cause as to why the amount of fresh loan and interest received from earlier loans shown in the name of various persons should not be treated as non-genuine, as creditworthiness of these parties have already been disproved by the then AO in A.Y. 2014-15 and why the same should not be added to the total income. The assessee has not given any plausible explanation in this regard. Therefore, the Assessing Officer noted that it is the first and foremost duty of the assessee to give complete details of the creditors, Ident....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....of income but has not adduced even an iota of evidence to substantiate the claim. Therefore, the assessing officer held that since the matter is already in Appeal for AY.2014-15 and agricultural income is claimed for the year under consideration, without complete details, establishing genuineness of the agricultural income, therefore addition of Rs. 31,55,500/- was made by Assessing Officer. 8. Aggrieved by the order of Assessing Officer, the assessee carried the matter in appeal before the ld. CIT(A) who has deleted the addition made by the Assessing Officer. The ld CIT(A) noted that for the assessment year under consideration, there is no mention of any incriminating document found during the course of search, which has been made basis for making these additions by the Assessing Officer. Therefore, it is undisputed fact that the additions made by the Assessing Officer, are not based on any incriminating material found during the course of search even at the premises of third party. The Ld CIT(A) also relied on the case law of PCIT Vs. Saumya Construction P. Ltd. (2016) 95 CCH 0335 Guj HC and deleted the addition. 9. Aggrieved by the order of ld. CIT(A), the Revenue is in ap....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ention of any incriminating material which was found during the search at third party premise and has been made basis of these additions, therefore, these additions were rightly deleted by the ld CIT(A). 13. Therefore, we note that additions made by the Assessing Officer, while passing the assessment order u/s 153C of the Act, were without mentioning of any incriminating material found during the course of search, therefore addition made by the assessing officer is not justified. The assessee filed regular return of income on 31.03.2014 and on the date of search, no proceedings were pending. Once completed assessments cannot be interfered, if no incriminating material was found, during the course of search. The assessee cited several case laws before ld CIT(A). The assessee also submitted the judgment of jurisdictional High Court of Gujarat in the case of PCIT Vs. Saumya Construction P. Ltd. (2016) 95 CCH 0335 (Guj HC). During the year consideration, the Assessing Officer has made additions of Rs. 4,36,02,522/- considering loan as non-genuine by applying section 68 of the Act, however, these loans were examined by the assessing officer during regular assessment proceedings, henc....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 15. Therefore, ld CIT(A) held that keeping in view of facts that additions made by the Assessing Officer were not based on any incriminating material found during the course of search, even at the third party premises, and the binding judgement of Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat, as mentioned above, the additions made by the Assessing Officer were not found justified, hence, ld CIT(A) deleted the addition. That being so, we decline to interfere with the order of Id. CIT(A) in deleting the aforesaid additions. His order on this addition is, therefore, upheld and the grounds of appeal of the Revenue are dismissed. 16. In the result, concise and summarized grounds of appeal in Revenue`s appeals, in IT(SS)A No. 23/SRT/2021 for AY.2012-13 and in IT(SS)A No. 24/SRT/2021 for AY.2013-14, are dismissed. 17. Coming to Assessee's appeal in ITA No. 90/SRT/2022 for A.Y.14-15, we note that said appeal filed by the assessee is barred by limitation for one hundred sixty five (165) days. The contents of petition for condonation of delay are reproduced below: "1. With regards to above subject, it is submitted that I am in receipt of order u/s 143 r.w.s 153C of the I.T. Act on 09.03....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sides of litigation. Be that as it may, we have to do justice and the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Collector, Land Acquisition vs Mst. Katiji and others , reported in 167 ITR 471, (1988 SC 897) (7) observes .... "4. When substantial justice and technical considerations are pitted against each other, cause of substantial justice deserves to be preferred for the other side cannot claim to have vested right in injustice being done because of a non-deliberate delay." When we weigh these two aspects then the side of justice becomes heavier and casts a duty on us to deliver justice. We, therefore, condone the delay and admit the appeal for hearing. 21. The concise and summarized grounds of appeal in Assessee's appeal, in IT(SS)A No. 90/SRT/2022, for AY.2014-15, are reproduced below for ready reference as follows: "(i) Ground nos. 1 and 2: On the facts and circumstances of the case, as well as law, on the subject, the issuance of notice u/s 153C of the I.T. Act, 1961, in this case is bad in law, as no incriminating documents were seized or any material was found indicating any undisclosed income of assessee. The ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the order ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....uments are basically copies of diaries of units of the said project, as seen at page nos. 17, 18, 46, 47, 48 and 49 of Annexure: BS-51, which reveals acceptance of huge cash amounts for booking of flats in this project by the assessee. There are also various other seized materials such as Annexure BS-47 and Page no. 27 & 28 of Annexure BS-8, which also reveals acceptance of cash amounts for booking of flats. These seized documents pertain to A.Ys. 2014-15 to 2016-17. The assessee, vide notice u/s 142(1) of the Act, dated 16.11.2017 was asked to explain these transactions and to furnish the details of flats mentioned in the seized material. The assessee vide his submission dated Nil received by the Assessing Officer on 08.12.2017 has clearly denied of developing any such project either in his individual capacity or as partner of any firm. The assessee flatly denied having entered in any such transactions in respect of such project/flats mentioned therein. 24. However, the assessing officer has rejected the contention of the assessee and noted that partners of Param Properties having admitted to have written the aforesaid documents in his own handwriting lends credibility whereby ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... satisfied that,- (a) any money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable article or thing, seized or requisitioned, belongs to; or (b) any books of account or documents, seized or requisitioned, pertains or pertain to, or any information contained therein, relates to, a person other than the person referred to in section 153 A, then, the books of account or documents' or assets, seized or requisitioned shall be handed over to the Assessing Officer having jurisdiction over such other person and that Assessing Officer shall proceed, against each such other person and issue notice and assess or reassess the income of the other person in accordance with the provisions of section 153A, if, that Assessing Officer is satisfied that the books of account or documents or assets seized or requisitioned have a bearing on the determination of the total income of such other person for six assessment years immediately preceding the assessment year relevant to the previous year in which search is conducted or requisition is made and for the relevant assessment year or years referred to in sub-section (1) of section 153A: Provided that in case of such other person, the r....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... such other person for the relevant assessment year or years referred to in sub-section (1) of section 153A, the Assessing Officer shall proceed against each such other person and issue a notice and assess or reassess the income of the other person in accordance with the provision of section 153A of the Act. The Assessing Officer has duly recorded the satisfaction for issuing the notice u/s 153C of the Act. Further, it is not the contention of the assessee that the Assessing Officer has not recorded the satisfaction in the assessee's case. It is fact that some documents have been found at the premises of M/s. Param Properties which belong to the assessee and the Assessing Officer has discussed these while passing the assessment order as well. Therefore, Assessing Officer was right in issuing notice u/s 153C of the Act, hence, Ground No.1 & 2 of appeal are dismissed." 26. Aggrieved by the order of ld. CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before us. 27. At the outset, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee, pleaded that the satisfaction note dated 16.10.2017 recorded, for initiating the proceedings under section 153C of the I.T. Act, 1961, is defective and bad in law, therefore asse....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ACLPV4173C, whereas M/s Gokul Developers PAN Number is ACDFS2431E, hence both the entities are different for levy of tax under Income Tax Act. The assessee`s (Vijaybhai Malabhai Bharwad) having different PAN Number cannot be held responsible to tax the receipts, if any, belonging to M/s Gokul Developers. The assessing officer should have issued notice under section 153C of the Act, separately on M/s Gokul Developers, who is having PAN Number as, ACDFS2431E. Therefore, satisfaction note has not been recorded on standalone basis for M/s Gokul Developers, hence the satisfaction note recorded by the assessing officer is bad in law. We are of the view that satisfaction note under section 153C of the Act ought to have been issued either on Shri Gokul Developer or Shri Jigar B. Shah, which the Assessing Officer has failed to do so, therefore assessment framed under section 153C/143(3) of the Act, framed in the assessee's hands, should be quashed. Therefore we quash the assessment order framed by the assessing officer under section 143(3) r.w.s. 153C of the Act, dated 29.12.2017. 32. As the assessment orders framed by the Assessing Officer under section 143(3) r.w.s. 153C of the Act, da....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rd both the parties and note that assessee has explained the reasons stating that sufficient time was not given to the assessee for submitting the these evidences before the AO hence ld CIT(A) has rightly admitted these additional evidences, therefore we dismiss the ground raised by the revenue. 36. In the result, ground no.1 raised by Revenue in ITA No.121/SRT/2021 for AY.2014-15, is dismissed. 37. Coming to ground Nos.2 and 3, which pertain to deletion of the addition of Rs. 13,67,52,800/- by ld CIT(A), and the Revenue and Assessee both are in appeal before us. 38. Brief facts qua above ground Nos.2 and 3 are that assessee filed return of income declaring an income of Rs. 1,07,43,930/- on 31.03.2015. Case of the assessee was selected under scrutiny through CASS, hence a notice u/s 143(2) was issued to the assessee, on 31.08.2015, which was duly served. Subsequently, a notice u/s 142(1) cum questionnaire was issued to the assessee on 17.08.2016. As per the terms of the notice, the assessee was required to submit the details on 26.08.2016. On the date of hearing no one appeared nor the submissions were filed before the Assessing Officer. During the course of assessment pro....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.....2 First ground of appeal is against the additions of Rs. 16,94,90,881/- made by the AO considering unsecured loans as non genuine u/s 68 of the Act. The assessee has taken unsecured loan from several persons, therefore, each loan is discussed separately in the following paras after considering the assessment order, remand report, submissions of the assessee alongwith paper book filed & rejoinder. i) Shri Manharbhai C. Patel: - The assessee obtained loan of Rs. 3,75,00,000/ from Shri Manharbhai C. Patel during the year. As mentioned in the assessment order (Page 10 Sr. No. 4), the assessee submitted confirmation from creditor, copy of PANs and acknowledgment of IT return filed. The assessee also submitted copy of bank account of Shri Manharbhai C. Patel stating that source of loan is through transfer/clearing in the said bank account. During the remand report proceedings, summon u/s 131 of the Act was issued to Shri Manharbhai C. Patel but it was informed that he is out of India & cannot be personally available before the AO. But AR of Shri Manharbhai C. Patel appeared before the AO and submitted ledger amount of the assessee from Manharbhai's books of accounts, copy o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....39;s account are duly accounted and same can be proved producing cash book & creditors himself before the AO (Page No. 11 Sr. No. 5 of the assessment order). During the remand report proceedings, summon was issued to Shri Jigar Shah who appeared before the AO & his statement was recorded u/s 131 of the Act on 30.05.2018. Before the AO, he confirmed on oath about the loan of Rs. 1.68 cr. given to the assessee. He further stated that he & the assessee are partner in M/s Gokulul Developer, a partnership firm engaged in the business of development of real estate. He also stated that there was opening balance of Rs. 1.45 cr as on first date of financial year. During the year, the assessee paid Rs. 2.40 cr. to Shri Jigar Shah & out of which, Rs. 1.68 cr. were paid to the assessee. He submitted ledger of the assessee from his books of accounts. But the AO stated that bank statement of the editor was not submitted. The findings of the AO in the remand report are contrary to the findings mentioned in the assessment order. In the assessment order on page no. The AO stated that the assessee submitted bank statement of the creditor and he find some cash deposits in the said bank account. Thus ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....om he received money to give loan to the assessee. But the creditor stated that he obtained loan from his family members and all transaction are through normal banking channel. No cash was found deposited in the bank account of the creditor immediate before issue of cheque to the assessee. The AO's finding in the assessment order stating assessee had small income found factually incorrect, as alongwith the returned income of Rs. 307460/-, the assessee had exempted income of Rs. 31,25,000/- as share of profit from the partnership firm M/s DRB Ravani Developers & Rs. 1,67,908/- was his agricultural come. Keeping in view the facts narrated above, the assessee has discharged his onus to prove identity of the creditor, genuineness of the transaction and creditworthiness of the creditor. Thus, additions of Rs. 1,00,00,000/- are deleted. iv) Shri Nareshbhai Bhagubhai Patel :- The assessee obtained loan of Rs. 1cr from Shri Nareshbhai Bhagubhai Patel. The assessee submitted detail on 21.12.2016 in support of this loan transaction but the AO stated that this has been submitted at the fag end of the year. Moreover, returned income is small, therefore, genuineness & creditworthin....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... in next financial year. These facts prove genuineness of transactions & creditworthiness of the creditor. Thus, addition of Rs. 1,00,00,000/- made by the AO are deleted. v) Mukeshbhai J. Bhadiadra: - The assessee received loan of Rs. 97,05,000/ during the year from Shri Mukeshbhai J. Bhadiadra. The AO stated in the assessment order that detail was filed on 21.12.2016, which is not complete. Thus summarily made additions alongwith other 14 creditors loan amount. During the remand report proceedings, Shri Mukesh J. Bhadiadra was summoned and his statement u/s 131 of the Act was recorded on 29.05.2018. He confirmed the transaction with the assessee. He said that he gave loan to the assessee, as he wanted to purchase some piece of land from the assessee. He also stated that he took loan from others and given name of those people to the AO. He produced copy of ledger account of the assessee from his books of account, copy of ITR filed & copy of his hank statement. Thus, he has proved source of source with the help of his hank account. But the AO stated that the assessee having small returned PAN & address of his creditors not given and details of land to be purchased has not s....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t of Rs. 75,00,000/- received by the creditor in his bank account through transfer/clearing. Thus, the assessee has proved identity of the creditor, genuineness of the transaction and creditworthiness of the creditor. In this case, it is found that the assessee has not proved the genuineness of the transaction. The assessee failed to furnish copy of ITR filed by the creditor. The creditor does not maintain books of accounts as per section 44AD which can prove genuineness of the transactions. Moreover, the loan was taken in 2013, i.e. about 8 years ago and no repayment of loan even partly has been made to the creditor. Moreover, the creditor has not been paid any interest during all these years. With these facts, the assessee failed to prove the genuineness of the transaction, Hence, addition of Rs. 50 lakh made by the AO are confirmed. vii) Rakesh Jangid Prp. Of Rajla Trading:- The assessee obtained loan of Rs. 40,00,000/- from Shri Rakesh Jangid. The assessee filed copy of PAN, ITR and bank statement during assessment proceedings. The AO stated that because of small returned income of the creditor, the transaction is not genuine. During remand report proceedings, the AO i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 2014 15. Keeping in view the fact that the creditor has confirmed the transaction, creditor is income tax assessee, transaction is through regular banking channel, no cash was found deposited in the bank account of creditor immediate before issue of cheque to the assessee and entire loan has been repaid in next FY.2014- 15, the additions of Rs. 33 lacs made by the AO are not found sustainable. Thus, these are deleted. ix) Massimo Enterprise:- The assessee obtained loan of Rs. 30,62,800/ from the above named creditor. During remand report proceedings, notice u/s 133(6} was issued, which was replied by the partner of M/s Massimo Enterprise. The partner confirmed the transaction with the assessee. Copy of ITR & bank statement also filed before the AO. The AO did not find the confirmation satisfactory stating that the books of account are not maintained. There are several credit entries in the bank account of the creditor, no interest was charged and returned income is Nil. The assessee stated that there was opening balance of the creditor with the assessee amounting to Rs. 70 lakh which has been accepted by the AO, as no proceedings has been initiated by the AO by reopening ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ctually incorrect, as the assessee had paid interest of Rs. 36,986/- for FY 2013-14, Rs. 2,28,320/- for FY 2014-15 & Rs. 11,894/- for FY 2015-16, These amount have been paid through regular banking channel. Hence, the addition of Rs. 25 lakh made by the AO are deleted. xi) Shri Rameshbhai C. Patel:- The assessee obtained loan of Rs. 25,00,000/- from Shri Ramesh Patel. During the assessment proceedings, the assessee submitted confirmation, copy of PAN & ITR and bank statement of the creditor. The assessee also stated that the loan was given from the credit by transfer/clearing in the bank account creditor. The AO stated that details are submitted at the fag end of the year and amount advanced was not from the balance lying in the bank account of the creditor, thus additions were made. During the remand report proceedings, the assessee was issued summons u/s 131 of the Act and he produced himself before the AO on 31.05.2018. His statement was recorded, in which he confirmed the transaction with the assessee. He stated that he is close friend of the assessee. His returned income for the year 2014-15 was Rs. 51,66,370/-. He further stated that source of loan given is withdrawa....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....gh regular banking channel and no cash has been found deposited in his bank account immediate before issuing cheque to the assessee. Even the source of source has been explained through the bank account of the creditor. The assessee further stated that the entire loan has been repaid through normal banking channel during FY.2014-15. Keeping in view the fact narrated above that the creditor has confirmed the, transaction to the AO, he is assessed to income tax & filing regular returns, transaction is through regular banking channel, no cash has been found deposited in the bank account of the creditor immediate before issue of cheque to the assessee and the entire loan was repaid through normal banking channel during next FY 2014-15, the assessee has discharged his onus of proving identity, genuineness of the transaction u creditworthiness of the creditors. Thus, the addition of Rs. 25,00,000/- made by the AO are deleted. xiii) Ishwarbhai L. Prajapati:- The assessee obtained loan of Rs. 25,00,000/- from the named creditor. In the assessment order, the AO mentioned this transaction as sported one but at page number 6 (bottom para) in the order sheet reproduced by AO, it is wr....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....mall and funds have been routed through these accounts, thus made the addition. During the remand report proceedings, notice u/s 133(6) of the Act: was issued, which was responded by the creditor. The creditor confirmed the transaction with the assessee & submitted copy of ITR and bank statement. The AO did not find all these satisfactory stating that income of the creditor is only of Rs. 1,92,903/- and books of accounts are not maintained. The assessee stated that transaction was confirmed by the creditor who is Income Tax assessee. He explained the source of source with the help of bank account stating that credit received Rs. 20,50,000/- from Rajesh, Rs. 5,00,000/- from Rani Sales Corporation and Rs. 11 lakh from Rashmi marketing through normal banking (ham id. Out of these funds, creditor issued cheques to the assessee. Thus source of source is also proved. The entire loan was repaid in FY 2014-15. Keeping in view the fact stated above, it is held that the assessee has discharged his onus to prove identity of the creditor as notice u/s 133(6} was directly replied to the AO. The creditor is regularly assessed to Income Tax. The genuineness is proved, as the transaction is throug....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....fact of the case as stated above, I inclined to agree with the assessee's contention and therefore, addition of Rs. 19 lakh made by the AO are deleted. xvii) Jitender Kantilal Shah: The assessee received Rs. 18 lakh from the above name creditor. During the assessment proceeding, the assessee submitted confirmation, ITR acknowledgement and copy of the bank account of the creditor. The AO did not find satisfactory stating that the creditor has small returned income. During the remand report proceedings, the AO did not offer any comment on this. The assessee stated that Rs. 7,00,000/- was deposited in the bank account of the creditor immediately before issue of cheque to the assessee and were from his past savings. The assessee stated that the creditor has confirmed the loan. The loan was through regular banking channel and it was fully repaid during FY 2014-15, therefore, addition may be deleted. All the fact of the transaction are considered in totality. The cash deposit of Rs. 7,00,000/- in the bank account of the creditor is found and it is not commensurate to his returned income and cannot be considered from past savings. Therefore to the extent of rupees 7 lakh, the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he creditor, which was replied by filing confirmation of the transaction with the assessee, copy of ITR and bank account. The AO did not find all these satisfactory stating returned income of the creditor is only of Rs. 198304/-, interest was not paid and amount was received by the creditor through transfer/clearing immediately before issue of cheque to the assessee. The assessee contended that the creditor directly confirmed the transaction to the AO by filing documentary evidences, he is assessed to tax, transaction was through regular banking channel and credits in to creditors bank account are explained, which prove source of source & the entire loan was repaid during FY 2014-15, additions may be deleted. On-going through the fact stated above, it is found that the creditor has confirmed the transaction, it is through normal banking channel & entire loan has been repaid. The assessee has discharged onus to prove identity of the creditor, genuineness of the transaction & creditworthiness of the creditor, hence, addition of Rs. 15 lakh made by the AO are deleted. xx) Shri Bharatbhai Tibadiya:- The assessee obtained loan of Rs. 12 lakh from Shri Bharatbhai Tibadiya. Durin....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.....e. Rs. 7.30 lakh & Rs. 3.50.) But no payment has been made during the year. No interest has been credited or paid to e creditor. The loan was taken in FY 2013-14 & earlier year, but not a single rupee has been repaid by the assessee till date i.e. even after more than 8 years. Moreover, the assessee failed to file copy of the bank account of the creditor. All these facts clearly prove that the assessee failed to discharge onus of proving genuineness of the transaction & creditworthiness of the creditor. These additions of Rs. 10.80 lakh made by the AO are confirmed. xxii) Raiesh J. Doodhwala:- The assessee obtained loan of Rs. 10,70,000/- from the above named creditor. The AO has considered loan from this creditor as unreported loan in the assessment order. During remand report proceedings, the AO stated that confirmation & IT acknowledgement was filed but no bank account copy was filed. Thus, the assessee did not discharge onus fully. The assessee contended that he had opening balance of Rs. 1,01,25,000/- from the above creditor & during the year, only Rs. 10,70,000/- has been obtained as new credit through regular banking channel. Therefore, additions may be deleted. Fa....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... of cheque to the assessee and the entire loan amount has been repaid during FY 2015-16 with interest, the addition made by the AO are not found justified, hence addition of Rs. 10 lakh are deleted. xxiv) Manishbhai Kalidas Desai: The assessee obtained loan of Rs. 10 lakh from the above named creditor. The AO find the return income of the creditor small and made the additions. During the remand report proceedings, the creditor replied to the notice issued u/s 133(6) of the Act and confirmed the transaction with the assessee. He produced copy of ITR & copy of bank statement but the AO did not find all these satisfactory stating that returned income is only Rs. 2,35,714/-, the creditor did not get interest & not maintaining books of accounts. The assessee contended that the creditor confirmed the transaction to the AO in response to the notice issued u/s 133(6), copy of ITR & bank statement was filed before the AO, transaction is through regular banking channel, no cash has been found deposited in the bank account of the creditor before issue of cheque to the assessee and the entire loan alongwith interest has been repaid during FY 2015-16. The AO's finding that no inter....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ing the remand report proceedings, no enquiry was made from the above creditor by the AO. The assessee stated that he filed confirmation, ITR & bank statement. Thus discharged onus as required under section 68 of the Act. But the assessee's explanation was not found satisfactory for the reason that i) there is cash deposit of Rs. 9.50 lakh in the bank account of the creditor immediately before issue of cheque to the assessee. The assessee stated that it is from his day to day cash book, but it cannot be believed that reason having annual returned income of Rs. 2.91 only can deposit cash of Rs. 9.50 within few days. Thus creditworthiness of the creditor is not proved by the assessee, li) the loan was received in 2013 but the assessee neither paid any interest on this loan nor any repayment has been made to the creditor for a period of more than 8 years. This prove that the transaction is not genuine. Keeping in view the facts above, additions of Rs. 10 lakh made by the AO are confirmed. xxvii) Shri Himmatbhai D Savaliya:- The assessee obtained Rs. 8 lakh loan from Himmatbhai D. Savaliya. During the assessment proceedings, bank statement of creditor was not filed before ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... repaid and only Rs. 3.20 lakh remain closing balance as on 31.03.2018. Transaction are through regular banking channel and in the bank account of the creditor before issue of cheque to the assessee, no cash was found deposited. Thus, he discharged onus as required u/s 68 of the Act. On considering the above facts in totality, it is found that the assessee has discharged onus of proving identity, genuineness of the transaction & creditworthiness of the creditor, therefore, addition of Rs, 9 lakh made by the AO are deleted. xxix) The assessee has obtained loan from the following persons during the year. The assessee submitted confirmation, copy of ITR & bank statement of all these persons before the AO. All these transactions are through regular banking channels and no cash was found deposited immediately before issue of cheque to the assessee in the bank account of the creditor. Moreover, the assessee had repaid all these loan entirely Di partly in subsequent financial years. Some of the creditors have opening balance, which have not been disturbed by the AO. Keeping in view the above facts, it is held that the assessee has discharged onus to prove identity of the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d the additions of various parties to the tune of Rs. 3,34,40,000/-. The Revenue is in appeal before us against the deletion of addition of Rs. 13,67,52,800/- and Assessee is in appeal before us against addition of Rs. 3,34,40,000/- sustained by ld CIT(A). 42. Learned DR for the Revenue argued before us that ld CIT(A) deleted the addition of various parties to the tune of Rs. 13,67,52,800/- without looking into the genuineness and creditworthiness of the parties, hence addition made by the assessing officer should be sustained. On the other hand, ld Counsel for the assessee submitted that assessee has submitted bank statements, Pan Number, name and address of the parties, Income Tax return of the parties, therefore balance addition sustained by ld CIT(A) of Rs. 3,34,40,000/- may be deleted. Besides, ld Counsel fairly agreed that assessee submitted additional evidences for the parties, where the amount involved is to the extent of Rs. 1,86,65,000/-, therefore, the same may be remitted back to the file of the assessing officer for his examination and adjudication in accordance with law. 43. We have heard both the parties. We note that following additions made by the assessing o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nces should be remitted back to the file of Assessing Officer for his examination. Therefore, out of total addition of Rs. 3,34,40,000/- sustained by ld CIT(A), we remit the various creditors mentioned in para (xxxi) of ld CIT(A) order, at Rs. 1,86,65,000/- to the file of the assessing officer for his examination and to adjudicate the issue in accordance with law and balance addition of Rs. 1,47,75,000/- (Rs.3,34,40,000- Rs. 1,86,65,000) is hereby deleted. Thus, ground no.1 raised by the assessee in ITA No.118/SRT/ 2021, is partly allowed in above terms. 48. Coming to summarized ground No. (iii) of Revenue, the ld DR for the Revenue argued that CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 24,27,140/- made by the Assessing Officer on account of unexplained claim of agricultural income without appreciating the fact that the assessee has not carried out any agricultural activities on his own and also failed to furnish evidences to substantiate receipt of agricultural income, therefore, ld DR contended that addition made by the assessing officer may be confirmed. On the other hand, ld Counsel for the assessee defended the order passed by the ld CIT(A). 49. We have heard both ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nd justified by ld CIT(A), hence, ld CIT(A) deleted the addition. We have gone through the above findings of ld CIT(A) and noted that there is no infirmity in the order of ld CIT(A). That being so, we decline to interfere with the order of Id. CIT(A) in deleting the aforesaid additions. His order on this addition is, therefore, upheld and the grounds of appeal of the Revenue are dismissed. 51. In the result, ground no.4 raised by the Revenue in ITA No.121/SRT/2021 for AY.2014-15, is dismissed. 52. Coming to ground no.2 raised by the assessee in ITA No.118/SRT/2021 for AY.2014-15, ( vide summarized ground no.-iv), wherein the ld. CIT(A) has confirmed the action of Assessing Officer in making disallowance of Rs. 1,01,41,034/- u/s 54B of the I.T. Act, 1961. 53. Succinct facts qua the issue are that during the assessment proceedings, the assessing officer noted that assessee had claimed exemption of Rs. 1,01,41,034/- u/s 54B of the Act. The assessee claimed such exemption on sale of Sarasana-347 land, and assessee earned capital gain and same was claimed as exempted u/s 54B of the Act, as the assessee purchased another agricultural land. The AO noted that assessee had filed on....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....from 7/12 and 8A form, return of income filed by the assessee and assessment made by the AO for various assessment years u/s 153A of the Act, after search was conducted upon the assessee, on 27.12.2012. Thus, the assessee has satisfied the conditions prescribed about the land sold, despite this fact ld CIT(A) denied exemption under section 54B of the Act. We note that assessee is regularly showing agricultural income for several years in the income tax returns filed and the same was accepted by the department even in the assessment under passed u/s 153A of the Act after search was conducted upon assessee on 27.12.2012. Therefore, we note that assessee has satisfied the condition prescribed u/s 54B of the Act, therefore exemption should be granted to the assessee u/s 54B of the Act, hence, we allow exemption under section 54B of the Act. 58. In the result, ground no.2 raised by the assessee in ITA No.118/SRT/2021 for AY.2014-15, is allowed. 59. In the combined result, appeal filed by the Revenue in IT(SS)A Nos. 23 & 24/SRT/2021 for AY. 2012-13 & 2013-14 are dismissed, appeal filed by the Assessee in IT(SS)A No. 90/SRT/2022 for AY.2014-15 is allowed, whereas appeals filed by th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....is is an original diary issued by Gokul group, in respect. Document 2 of flat no. C-704 of the project 'Gokul Skyline'. Page no. 2 of this diary specifies 21 the rate as Rs. 3651/- per sq. ft., which is written in coded form as 36 /51. This diary reflects cash payments of Rs.5,00,000/ and a cheque payment of Rs.3,60,000/- on 03.06.2015. 1 5. BS-51 Page 17 & 18- This is a zerox copy of a page of the original diary issued by Gokul Group in respect of its Gokul Skyline project, wherein, the booking rate is Rs.3651/- per sq. ft. The flat featuring on this page is D-703. The assessee has not identified the purchaser. The developer is M/s. Gokul Developers. The cash payments reflecting on page no. 18 is Rs.24,00,000/- received in F.Y. 2014-15. 6. BS-51 Page 46 to 49- This is the zerox copy of the original diary issued by Gokul group in respect of unit nos. B-203, F-302 of 'Gokul Skyline' project. The cash payments reflecting on these pages were received by the builder in F.Y. 2014-15. These pages reveal cash receipts of Rs.54,00,000/- by the builder. In nutshell, seized documents in the case of M/s. Param Properties evidencing huge cas....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Mithabhai A. Chauhan 50000 L Mashribhai S. Patel 440000 M Chetanbhai 400000 N Karsan bhai V Barad 0 Jai corporation 300000 2000000 Total 1,86,65,000/- Document 6 Sr. No. Name Amount A Ajay Bharat Mehta 900000 B Arvind Shartlal Shah 625000 C Mansukhbhai Jain 500000 Document 7D F Nirav Naresh Mehra Ramniklal Manilal Shah 1700000 1000000 Total 47,25,000/- Document 8 Amrutbhai N. Luhar Sr. No. Name A B Ashvin Enterprise C Bharat V. Sanghavi Amount 615000 1000000 500000 Hirabhai Prajapati E Varsha B. Singhavi Viresh Kantilal Shah 1200000 500000 500000 Rinkesh Prakash Modi H Mili Ankit Shah Geetaben K. Jhaveri Hasmukhbhai Lallubhai Patel Balvantbhai Lallubhai Patel 900000 600000 400000 1750000 1750000 Total 97,15,000/- Document 9 Sr. no. Name of the creditor 1 S/Shr. Manharbhai C. Patel Amounts (Rs.) 37500000/ 2 Jigar B. Shah Prop of Jigar Tex 16800000/- 3 Balvantbhai D. Patel 10000000/- 4 Nareshbhai Bhagubhai Patel 10000000/- 5 Mukeshbhai J. Bhadiadra ....