TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (6) TMI 1740
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nd in law, the Ld. CIT(A)-3, Noida has erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 3,15,18,000/- made by the Assessing Officer u/s 68 of the Income Tax Act on account of unexplained cash credit being unexplained unsecured loans, without appreciating the facts brought on record during the course of assessment proceedings. 2 Whether on facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in not appreciating the fact that creditworthiness of the lenders of the unsecured loans amounting to Rs. 3,15,18,000/- has not been established properly for want of ITR, complete bank accounts and other details during the course of assessment proceedings. 3 Whether on facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....esh among others. On request by the assessee to centralize their case with DCIR, Meerut, jurisdiction order was passed by the PCIT, Kanpur on 11.01.2018. Accordingly, notice u/s 153A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [the Act, for short] was issued to the assessee on 12.07.2018. 6. In response, the assessee vide reply dated 29.08.2018 submitted that original return filed on 27.07.2013 declaring income of Rs. 13,27,350/- may be treated as return filed in response of notice u/s 153A of the Act. Notice u/s 143(2) of the Act was issued 08.10.2018 and duly served upon the assessee. Notice u/s 131 of the Act was also issued to the assessee on 17.12.2018 to confront with the seized material, because the assessee did not make any compliance. 7. The....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....00/- and treated the same as unexplained cash credit u/s 68 of the Act and added back to the income of the assessee. 10. Aggrieved, the assessee went in appeal before the ld. CIT(A) and vehemently submitted that the Assessing Officer has completed assessment u/s 153A of the Act when no incriminating material was found as a result of search and the assessment order deserves to be quashed on this ground alone. The ld. CIT(A) relied upon the decisions of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Kalpatru Power Transmission, the decision in the case of Sahara India 169 Taxmann 328, Maneka Gandhi Vs. UOI 1 SCC 248, Dhakeshwari Cotton Mills 26 ITR 775 SC deleted the impugned addition. 11. Now the department is aggrieved and has come in appe....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ave been given out of bank accounts of the lenders and details are clearly mentioned. The assessee has also furnished before us the details of loans taken and the creditworthiness of persons giving loan to the assessee. The ld DR has not provided any materials to dislodge the claim of the assessee regarding the identity, genuineness and creditworthiness of the transactions. 16. We find that the ld. CIT(A)held that once the assessee has furnished the identity, details of the investor alongwith their bank account statement showing credit worthiness and genuineness. The onus shifted on the Assessing Officer to prove that the investor did not have sufficient balance of funds to provide the money to the assessee company. We are of the conside....