TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (10) TMI 418
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nces filed by the assessee before Ld. CIT(A). 2. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) is justified in deleting the addition of Rs. 2,85,56,973/- made by the assessing officer by disallowing the unsecured loan and addition Rs. 34,56,000/- on account of cash deposits without considering the proviso to section 251(1)(a) of the IT. Act vide which the assessment could have been set aside to the file of the AO for deciding it afresh after giving opportunity to the assessee. 3. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) is justified in deleting the addition of Rs. 2,85,56,973/- disallowing the unsecured loan and Rs. 34,56,000/- disallowing the cash deposits without appreciating the fact that the assessee company has filed additional evidence during the appellant proceedings and Ld. CIT(A) should remand back to assessing officer for examine the same as per rule 46A of the income tax Act. 4. "The appellant craves leave to add, alter, amend or delete all or any of the aforesaid grounds of appeal." 2. None appeared on behalf of the assessee nor was any adjournment application filed. Considering that the matter has bee....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d G. Puthanpure- Director of the Company "L' 122 to 123 14. RBI master list for NBFC (page no. 192), MCA master data, confirmation, ITR acknowledgment, bank statement, audited financials of Manba Finance Ltd. 'M' 124 to 164 5.3 It is pertinent to note that the addition u/s. 68 of the Act can be resorted to if either no explanation with regard to the 'nature and source of the credits appearing in the Books has been offered or the AO is not satisfied with the explanation of the assessee with regard to the 'nature and source' of such credits. As far as the nature of the credits is concerned, it must be a genuine business transaction. For the source, the identity, creditworthiness, and genuineness of the transaction are required to be ascertained. 5.4 In the case of the appellant, it is noted that the AO has added a sum of Rs. 2,85,56,973/- as unexplained cash credit on account of the difference of unsecured loan amount standing in the Balance Sheet of the appellant as of 31.03.2011 and 31.03.2012. Therefore, firstly, it is imperative to have a closer examination of the Balance Sheet of the appellant for AY 2011-12 and 2012-13, specif....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... is noted that during the year under consideration, M/s. Manba Finance Ltd. has shown a total revenue of Rs. 12,65,39,643/- from its operations, which again points to the fact that they are into genuine financial business. The above facts establish the creditworthiness of the lender to advance a sum of Rs. 2.85 crore to the appellant during the year, beyond any doubt. The appellant has also provided the Bank Statement of the lender, where the immediate source of the funds being transferred to the appellant can be seen to be routed through clearing and not in any cash deposits. 5.6. The appellant has also submitted the details such as the loan confirmation ledger account in respect of all the other lenders, along with copies of their respective ITRs and audited financials. This evidence duly explains the nature and source of the unsecured loan availed by the appellant during the year under consideration and also the previous year, i.e., FY 2010-11. This transaction is a genuine unsecured loan, hence, the same cannot be brought to tax. 5.7 The appellant, during the current proceeding, has also submitted the reconciliation statement of the unsecured loan and an expla....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....0/- had deposited in the Bank account. SR NO. INVOICE NO INVOICE DATE NAME OF CUSTOMERS INVOICE AMOUNT INSURANCE AND RTO CHARGES CASH RECEIVED DURING THE YEAR 1 388 11-Apr-11 Mahesh Babulal Mehta 47459 5809 48568 2 428 12-Apr-11 Ashish Chandrakant Dhalpe 47459 6109 48568 3 600 18-Apr-11 hemant dattaray kotwal 50978 5519 48568 645 19-Apr-11 Kojar Nauman Yunus 64842 6689 66531 661 20-Apr-11 Lalit A.Gediya 47459 6109 48568 852 26-Apr-11 anagha atul sawant 47959 6209 54168 7 930 28-Apr-11 Khimji Vira Manodara 47459 6109 43568 60 8117 12-Jan-12 Krushna D.Bhosle 49109 1200 50309 61 8132 13-Jan-12 Kavita Rajesh Rath 48859 10134 58993 62 8207 16-Jan-12 Anil D.Chaudhary 48859 8357 57216 63 8395 25-Jan-12 Nitesh Suryakant Sanghv 48859 6367 55226 64 8443 27-Jan-12 Jayesh Lal Lohana 48859 6141 55000 65 8480 31-Jan-12 bharatkumar kanjibhi vaghasing 48859 8921 57780 66 8....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ofession". Therefore, adding the same sum again as unexplained cash credit would tantamount to double taxation. 6.6 Since the cash sales are found to have been duly recorded in the Books of the appellant, the addition of cash deposits in the bank as unexplained by the AO is not justified. It would be tantamount to double taxation. The AO is therefore directed to delete the addition of Rs. 34,56,000/-." 7. Against the said findings, the Revenue is in appeal before us. 8. During the course of hearing, the Ld.DR submitted that the Ld.CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition, without appreciating the fact that the assessee-company did not provide relevant supporting documentation during the course of assessment proceedings and the AO did not get a chance to examine the additional evidences filed by the assessee before the Ld.CIT(A). It was further submitted that the Ld.CIT(A) instead of deciding the matter should have remanded the matter back to the AO by drawing our reference to proviso to section 251(1)(a) of the Act. 9. We have heard the Ld.DR and perused the material available on record. Firstly, it is noted that it is a case where the assessment proceeding....