TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (6) TMI 221
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ross violation of the principle of Natural Justice without giving proper opportunity of being heard. 3. The appellant craves leave to add, alter, delete or modify all or any of the above grounds of appeal. All the above grounds are without prejudice to each other." 2. Brief facts of the case are that assessee is an individual and filed his return of income for assessment year (A.Y.) 2017-18 on 07.11.2017 declaring total income at Rs. 1,92,940/-. The case was selected for scrutiny. During the assessment, the assessing officer noted that assessee has shown unsecured loans of Rs. 27,23,805/-. The assessee was asked to justify the fresh unsecured loans as per scope of under section 68 of Income Tax Act. The assessee filed his reply dated 11.12.2019 and filed confirmation of unsecured loans. The assessing officer noted that assessee has shown unsecured loans of Rs. 10.00 lac each from two persons namely ChetanRasiklal Shah and DarshakRasiklal Shah. With regard to unsecured loans of ChetanRasiklal Shah, the assessee furnished confirmations, bank statement, and return of income of lender. On perusal of bank statement of lender, the assessing officer noted that an amount of Rs.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed on account of loan refund/repay by other party who given loan in earlier years. As evident from the copy of bank pass book. Hence, there was no question of return income with commensurate of loan amount when both the creditors have given confirmation. The action of assessing officer is merely based on suspicious which should have been brought to the notice of assessee for seeking further clarification or if required to submit additional evidence in support of explanation offered eralier. The assessee satisfactory discharged his onus in providing identity of the loan creditors and genuineness of transaction should have been added to the total income of assessee. Section 68 can only be invoked if assessee offers no explanation about the nature and source of the amount credited in the books of assessee or explanation offered by assessee, in the opinion of assessing officer not satisfactory. The assessing officer has to specify himself about the nature of the amount credited and source of amount so credited. The assessing officer has not raised questions of source of fund. 4. The ld. CIT(A) on considering the submission of assessee noted that on perusal of bank statement of both ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Shah and Darshak Rasiklal Shah. The assessee furnished complete details of lender which consists of name, address, PAN ITR and bank statement and thus discharge his primary onus. The assessing officer has not made any enquiry against such evidences. The assessee proved the identity, creditworthiness and genuineness of transaction. Identity was proved by furnishing complete address and PAN No. Creditworthiness were proved by furnishing bank statement and copy of ITR of creditors. The transaction was carried out through banking channel. Thus, the assessee is also proved the genuineness of transaction. Once the assessee discharged his onus. The onus was shifted from assessing officer to bring adverse evidence on record. The action of assessing officer as well as ld. CIT(A) based on mere presumption and suspicious. In support of his submission, the AR of the assessee relied upon the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in CIT Vs Orissa Corporation Pvt. Ltd. 159 ITR 78 (SC). 7. On the other hand, ld. Sr. DR for the Revenue on the plea of condonation of delay submits that assessee has taken a general plea that order was not served through e-mail provided by assessee. The assessee has no....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ing officer has not disputed the identity of lender nor disputed the fact that loan was received through banking channel. The assessing officer doubted the creditworthiness of lender on taking view that as return of income is not income commensurate with the unsecured loans. We find that on furnishing name, PAN, address, ITR and bank statement, no further show cause notice for confronting the income of lender with the loan amount with the assessee. Before ld. CIT(A), in addition to similar contention as pleaded before assessing officer, the assessee explained that the lender have received / repayment of loan given in earlier years which is evident from the bank pass book. Moreover, the loans were given from savings bank account and were not part of business transaction. We find that such fact is not countered by ld. CIT(A). The ld. CIT(A) simply concurred with the finding of assessing officer. It is settled law that once the assessee discharged primary onus by furnishing identity, creditworthiness and genuineness of transaction, the onus shifts on the Revenue. 11. We find that the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in The Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in CIT Vs. Amber Tra....