TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (6) TMI 1139
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... order dated 30.12.2022 passed u/s 153C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred as 'the Act') by the DCIT, Central Circle-8, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the Ld. AO). 2. A search and seizure action was conducted in the case of Navneet Dawar & others group on 03.01.2018 wherein residential and business premises of various persons including the father of the present assessee was searched. During the search and seizure operations, certain documents were recovered. Amongst them a document relied by the AO belonging to Shri Sachet Duggal S/o Shri Gurvinder Singh Duggal. This alleged incriminating document Annexure A-5 has been reproduced by the AO in the assessment order at page No.3 as a scanned document. Further, the conten....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....lso contains the details of capital introduced by Sh. Sachet Duggal and Sh. Gurvinder Singh Duggal in Atom Corporation. The capital introduced by Sh. Sachet Duggal of Rs. 1,28,15,000/- and Sh. Sachet Duggal. Further, the amount of loan given of Rs. 22,50,000/-. The assessee was show caused on this issue and asked that why these amounts should not be added to your income as undisclosed investment for the A.Y. 2018-19. In response to this the assessee filed reply and stated that in the A.Y. 2018- 19, assessee had given loan of Rs. 25,37,478/- to M/s. Bloom Tap Technologies Pvt. Ltd. The assessee also submitted copy of ledger account of assessee in the books of Bloomtap Technologies Pvt. Ltd. alongwith balance sheet of Bloomtap Technologies Pv....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he Ld, CIT(A) has erred on facts and in law in confirming the addition of Rs. 22,50,001/- u/s 68 on account of alleged cash loan received by the assessee from Samik Chokshi upholding the order passed by the Assessing Officer under section 153C of the income tax act, 1961 3 The Ld. CIT(A) has erred on facts and in law in confirming the addition of Rs. 22,50,001/- u/s 68 on account of alleged cash loan received by the assessee from Samik Chokshi. 4 The Ld. CIT(A) has erred on facts and in law in confirming the addition of Rs. 25,000/- u/s 68 on account of capital informed in the partnership firm. 4 That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred on facts and in law ignoring the well-established judicial pronouncements including that of the jurisdiction H....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....er, cannot be said to have been found to be the 'owner' of money not recorded in the books of account. At the same time, source of loan transaction stood duly explained by the content of alleged incriminating document itself. Reliance is rightly placed by ld. AR on the decision of coordinate bench at Delhi in case of ACIT vs Vatika Greenfield (p) Ltd [2009] 121 TTJ wherein it is held that the AO cannot be permitted to treat the amount of loan as income for the purpose of assessing tax thereon while framing the assessment. Thus the ground no 1 to 3 deserves to be sustained. The addition deserves to be deleted. 7. In regard to ground no 4 arising out of addition on account of introduction of cash Rs. 25,000. We find that the assessee entered....