TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (5) TMI 2146
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....as confirmed the additions made by the Assessing Officer [hereinafter referred to as "AO"] under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as "the Act"]. Facts of the Case: 2. The assessee is a Private Limited Company engaged in the business of real estate development. The return of income for the AY 2012-13 was filed on 30-09-2012 declaring a total income of Rs. 55,04,490/-. The assessment was completed under Section 143(3) of the Act, vide order dated 09.03.2015, determining the total income at Rs.73,57,487/-. The AO made the following additions/disallowances: i. Disallowance of Rs. 1,06,269/- under Section 40(a)(ia) of the Act, on account of non-deduction of TDS on financial charges paid to a Non-Bank....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..../- made by AO on account of unexplained cash credit in respect of two parties without proper consideration and appreciation of the facts of the case and submissions filed. In view of the facts of the case and elaborate submissions filed coupled with supporting documentary evidences and legal position, no addition is warranted and the Id. CIT(A) ought to have deleted the same. The impugned addition of Rs. 17,00,000/- thus requires to be deleted. 2. The learned CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in confirming the disallowance u/s. 40(a)(ia) of the Act of Rs. 1,06,269/- made by AO in respect of financial charges paid to NBFC without proper consideration and appreciation of the facts of the case and submissions filed. In view of....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... post debit of these cheques, there are credits of same or more amounts in the same bank account amounting to Rs. 6,00,000/- and Rs. 44,000/- and Rs. 47,000/-. Addressing the earlier inconsistencies regarding the lender's name, the AR clarified that the loan was initially recorded in the books of the assessee as received from Neelam Ahuja, but upon later verification, it was established that the actual lender was Shri Narayan P. Ahuja. Consequently, a rectification entry was passed in FY 2012- 13 to correctly reflect the transaction under the correct lender's name, which was also supported by the relevant ledger accounts. The AR also submitted that this loan has been repaid in the subsequent financial years. The AR pointed out that the ledg....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e contention that the loan was not sourced from any recent cash deposits but was disbursed through an overdraft facility, as evidenced by the account description "OD IVP/KVP (STAFF)". Additionally, the assessee has rectified the initial misreporting of the lender's name and has submitted sufficient corroborative evidence to establish the genuineness of the transaction. 7.1. We also take cognizance of various judicial precedents, including those of the jurisdictional Gujarat High Court, which establish that when a loan has been subsequently repaid through proper banking channels, the addition under Section 68 of the Act cannot be sustained. These decisions emphasize that once the identity and creditworthiness of the lender are established....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....reason for the same. It is further noticed that the appellant has also failed to furnish the copy of ITR of the above said lender." 7.3 In our opinion, this conclusion of the CIT(A) is factually incorrect, as the bank statement of Supreme Gold was never submitted at all. Even the additional evidence submitted before us does not include the bank statement of the said lender. The DR also could not satisfactorily explain how the CIT(A), based on the remand report, arrived at the conclusion that the bank statement of Supreme Gold was on record and that there were cash deposits of identical amounts just before the remittances. It is evident from the records that the bank statement of Supreme Gold was never submitted at any stage of the procee....