2012 (8) TMI 1245

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... challenged. 2. Facts indicate that Assessing Officer made addition of Rs. 1,98,64,646/- as unexplained cash credit u/s 68 of the Act against which assessee preferred appeal in which action of the Assessing Officer in regard to addition u/s 68 of the Act was challenged and Ld.AR of the assessee submitted before first appellate authority that during the year under consideration, the assessee received interest free unsecured loans, from its directors as under: 1. Sh. Gurinder Singh Dhillon - Rs. 50,00,000 2. Smt. Shabnam Dhillon - Rs. 1,00,000 3. The Assessing Officer, on perusal of the audited annual accounts for the year ended 31.03.2008, observed that the following amounts of the loans extended by the directors of th....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....0,000/- 7. Ld.AR of the assessee further submitted before first appellate authority that it is settled law that in terms of provisions of section 68 of the Act, the primary onus to frame the nature and source of the amount, so found to be credited is on the assessee. However, once reasonable explanation is furnished by the assessee, the onus shifts to the Revenue and number of decisions were cited in first appeal proceedings and attention was invited to the copy of the bank account of Shri G.S. Dhillon for the period 01.04.2007 to 31.03.2008 as contained at pages 60-61 of the paper book filed in appeal and it was contended that Rs. 50,00,000/- was advanced to the assessee on 18.10.2007 on which date Shri G.S. Dhillon was having balanc....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ile considering and accepting the appeal of the assessee has concluded to delete the impugned addition as per para.3.3 of his order which reads as under: "Under the facts and circumstances of the case stated above, it is held that the appellant had discharged its burden of proof u/s 68 of the Act since the appellant has proved not only the identity of the creditor but have also proved the creditworthiness of the creditor and genuineness of transaction by showing the bank statements. Even if human probabilities are to be considered as propounded by Hon'ble Supreme Court in cases relied by Assessing Officer, still the evidence on record should suggest so as to draw adverse inference. It is not subjective satisfaction of the Assessing Office....