TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (10) TMI 1142
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... he is to be directed to readjuicate the appeal de nova?" 2. The Hon'ble Third Member after duly hearing both the parties held as under: "34. Thus, on overall considerations of the facts and materials on record, I agree with the view expressed by ld. Accountant Member that in the given facts and circumstances of the case, Id. CIT(A) was justified in partly allowing the appeal of the assessee. The question of reference is accordingly decided. The original records may be returned hack to the Registry to place before the Division Bench to pass the confirmatory order as per majority view. Reference is decided as above." 3. Since the Hon'ble Third Member concurred with the view expressed by the Hon'ble Accountant Member vide order dated 18.07.2025. 4. In consequence of the same and in view of the majority opinion, the appeal filed by the revenue in ITA No. 2624/Mum/2023, is hereby dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court on 01.10.2025 SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, VICE PRESIDENT (THIRD MEMBER) ORDER 18-07-2025 The Hon'ble President Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT for short) has nominated the undersigned as Third Member to resolve the following quest....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..../- as 'unsecured cash credit' u/s. 68 of the Act and added to the income of the assessee. Further, the A.O. held that the interest aggregating to Rs. 57,74,334/- paid on unsecured loans taken or availed in the current year as well as in the past assessment years. Proceeding further, the A.O. held that the purchases effected from Pranali Enterprises and Pragati Civil Solutions P Ltd., aggregating to Rs. 11,61286/- are non-genuine. He also held that labour and job work charges aggregating to Rs. 5,33,426/- paid to Shri Gemsingh Rathod and Md. Afrohosen Idrish are also non genuine and bogus. Accordingly, he disallowed such bogus purchases and bogus labour and job work charges, aggregating to Rs. 16,93,712/- u/s. 37(1) of the Act. 4. Contesting the aforesaid additions, the assessee preferred an appeal before the first appellate authority. 5. Before the first appellate authority, the assessee again furnished voluminous documentary evidences to prove the genuineness of the unsecured loans availed not only during the year but in earlier years. The assessee also furnished documentary evidences to prove the genuineness of purchases and payment of labour and job work charges. The asses....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e observed that as per the materials on record, the assessee had not availed any fresh loan from M/s. Adeshwar Gems during the year under consideration. In the year under consideration, the assessee had only paid interest on loan availed earlier. Further, to prove the genuineness of the loan transaction, the assessee had furnished copy of loan confirmation, copy of income tax return of the creditor, bank account statement of the creditor, copy of GST return, Form-16, etc. After verifying the documentary evidences, the First Appellate Authority, being satisfied that the assessee has established the genuineness of the transaction had allowed the interest paid to M/s. Adeshwar Gems. Thus, in sum and substance, the first appellate authority deleted all the additions made by the A.O. 8. Being aggrieved with the decision of first appellate authority, the Revenue preferred an appeal before the Tribunal. 9. After conclusion of hearing in appeal, ld. Judicial Member proposed an order setting aside all the issues relating to the additions made back to the file of the First Appellate Authority for de novo adjudication through a speaking order after duly considering the submissions of th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Proceeding further, he observed that identical nature of dispute arose in assessee's case for some other assessment years and nature of evidences produced by the assessee qua the issues were also identical. He observed, while in sesein of those appeals, the first appellate authority has called upon the A.O. to examine the evidences and furnish a remand report. He observed, after detailed scrutiny of the evidences, the A.O. had furnished a remand report and based on such remand report furnished by the A.O. as well as evidences available on record, the First Appellate Authority has deleted the additions while deciding the issues on merits. The ld. Accountant Member further observed that the decision of ld. CIT(A) was also upheld by the Tribunal. Thus, in these circumstances, according to ld. Accountant Member, there is no justifiable reason in not upholding the decision of first appellate authority merely because he has not called for a fresh remand report while deciding the appeal for the impugned assessment year. 12. He observed, it is the prerogative of the first appellate authority to call for a remand report or not. He observed that the role of the Tribunal is to either confi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Since, the impugned assessment year was outside the block of six preceding assessment years, relying upon the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court, the A.O. reopened the assessment u/s. 147 of the Act. However, as could be seen from the show cause notice issued u/s. 148A(b) of the Act on 30.05.2022, reproduced in the body of the assessment order passed u/s. 147 of the Act, the assessment was reopened based on the materials found in course of search and seizure operation as well as post search investigation. Thus, the materials utilized in assessment proceedings initiated u/s. 153A of the Act as well as the impugned assessment year are more or less identical. As discussed elsewhere in the order, in the impugned assessment order the A.O. has made additions on account of unsecured loans treated as unexplained cash credit u/s. 68 of the Act, disallowance of interest paid on such unsecured loans, disallowance of alleged bogus purchases and bogus labour and job work charges. Insofar as unsecured loans are concerned, the A.O. has referred to loan transactions with the following parties: Sr. no. Name of the Lender Interest Amount 1 Badam Trading Pvt. Ltd. 6,69,167/- 2....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....deciding the issue of genuineness of the unsecured loans availed by the assessee, the facts relating to A.Ys. 2013-14 were also before the First Appellate Authority. This is very much evident from the following observations of the First Appellate Authority in order dated 08.07.2022, passed for A.Ys. 2014-15 to 2021-22: 9.3.1 The facts of the case of the appellant are that during the A.Y. 2013-14 to A.Y. 2019-20, the appellant had received unsecured loans from the following parties Sr. No. Name Amount 1 Badam Trading P. Ltd. 1,10,00,000 2 Bahubali Diamonds P. Ltd. 1,68,00,000 3 Kothari Impex 5,23,00,000 4 Lalita Gems P. Ltd. 1,16,00,000 5 Raja Antibiotics Ltd. 80,00,000 6 Saffron Gems P. Ltd. 2,71,50,000 7 Shikha Diamond P. Ltd. 1,76,00,000 8 Tanman Jewels P. Ltd. 1,74,00,000 9 Vardhan Diamond P. Ltd. 60,00,000 10 Kailash Surana HUF 62,60,000 11 Yashwant Surana HUF 60,54,000 12 Yogesh Construction 25,00,000 13 Satish Surana HUF 1,58,40,000 14 Pratap Const. Co. 1,23,00,000 15 Moksh Enterprise 22,50,000 9.3.2 The A.O. has mad....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ity, being of the view that the evidences require further verification, directed the A.O. to verify the evidences and furnish the remand report. In the remand proceedings, the A.O. had not only verified the evidences but had also issued summons u/s. 131 of the Act and notices u/s. 133(6) of the Act to all the lenders requiring their participation in the enquiry to prove the loan transactions. In response to the summons /notice issued by the A.O., the lenders had not only appeared before the A.O. but had also confirmed the loan transactions with the assessee and furnished the requisite documentary evidences. It is necessary to observe, in the appellate order passed for A.Ys. 2014-15 to 2020-21, the First Appellate Authority has specifically discussed the issue of unsecured loans availed from Saffron Gems P. Ltd, Raja Antibiotics Ltd. and Shikha Diamonds Mfg. Co. P. Ltd., in the following manner: (vii) In respect of unsecured loan taken from Raja Antibiotics Ltd., the details provided to the A.O. included PAN address, contact no and email id of the lender parties, the confirmation letter, acknowledgement of the ITR, bank statements, balance sheet and P & L Account of the len....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ha Diamond Pvt. Ltd. in A.Ys. 2014-15, 2015-16 and 2016-17. Whereas, the assessee had repaid an amount of Rs. 24 lacs to Shikha Diamond Pvt. Ltd. in A.Y. 2015-16 and the loan account was settled in A.Y. 2017-18 on payment of balance Rs. 32 lacs. 25. Insofar as Saffron Gems Pvt. Ltd. is concerned, the assessee had availed loan of Rs. 1,09,00,000/- in A.Y. 2013-14, which was shown as opening balance in A.Y. 2014-15. Again in A.Y. 2014-15, the assessee had availed fresh loan of Rs. 27,50,000/- and repaid of Rs. 35 lacs. Further, repayments were made on A.Ys. 2015-16 and 2016-17. Ultimately, the account was settled in A.Y. 2017-18. 26. Thus, the aforesaid facts clearly reveal that the facts, materials and evidences considered by the First Appellate Authority, while deciding assessee's appeals in A.Ys. 2014-15 to 2020-21 are very much germane for deciding the issue in dispute arising in the impugned assessment year. It is relevant to observe, on perusal of the detailed discussion made by the First Appellate Authority in the appellate order for A.Ys. 2014-15 to 2020-21, it is quite clear that in addition to the evidences furnished by the assessee in course of assessment and first a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....o produce the copies of purchase order, complete set of invoices, e-way bills, delivery challans, lorry receipts, consumption register, purchase and consumption reconciliation statement, bank statement etc. On perusal of the details submitted by the assessee to the search team, it was noticed that the assessee had made purchases from the following 3 parties for the period from F.Y. 2012-13 to F.Y. 2018-19 totalling to Rs. 30,57,788/-. S. No. Name F.Y. 12-13 F.Y. 13-14 F.Y.14-15 F.Y. 15-16 F.Y. 16-17 F.Y. 17-18 F.Y. 18-19 Total 1 Pranali Enterprises 2,16,615 2,91,194 3,69,917 5,86,725 1,39,017 16,03,468 2 Kanchan Enterprises 87,030 44,076 3,78,543 5,09,649 3 Pragati Civil Solutions P Lid. 9,44,671 9,44,671 Total 11,61,286 2,91,194 4,56,947 6,30,801 5,17,560 30,57,788 Further, the Investigation carried out by the department revealed that certain entities from whom purchases were made had dubious financials or were non-existe....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the assessee uses various construction material, which are purchased from other parties. It transpires from facts on record that the assessee had purchased RCC pipeline, manhole frame from Pranali Enterprises, which were used in execution of the contract work. Pragati Civil Solutions P Ltd. is another entity from whom the assessee had purchased certain other construction related items. 30. In course of search related assessment proceedings as well as the connected appellate proceedings the assessee had furnished all documentary evidences to prove the purchases. Even, in course of remand proceeding, not only the evidences available on record were reexamined but further evidences to prove the purchases were also furnished. In fact, the selling parties responded to notices issued u/s. 133(6) of the Act appeared before the A.O. The statements of the concerned parties were recorded by the A.O., wherein they confirmed of having sold the goods to the assessee. Even, in course of proceedings before the departmental authorities in the impugned assessment year all such evidences were available. Considering the body of evidences available before him, the First Appellate Authority, while d....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ied in following the decision of his predecessor while deciding the issue in the impugned assessment year. It is relevant to observe, in case of interest paid to Adarsh Gems, since, it was not decided in the A.Ys. 2014-15 to 2020-21, the First Appellate Authority, after verifying the issue with reference to the evidences available on record has given his independent finding. 32. Considered in the aforesaid perspective, I do not find any justifiable reason for setting aside the issues to first appellate authority for de novo adjudication. There cannot be two opinions on the observations of learned Judicial Member that the theory of res judicata does not apply to income tax proceedings and the rule of consistency ipso facto does not permit lower authorities to decide the issues simply relying on earlier orders as the facts of each assessment year has to be considered in light of the evidences furnished by the assessee. However, it is equally true that rule of consistency has to be followed on account of parity of facts. If facts relating to a particular issue permeating through different assessment years are identical, then consistency has to be maintained. This is simply for the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f the learned Judicial Member in the above appeal, however, I failed to convince myself with the reasoning and the result of the appeal, precisely to remand the appeal back to the file of the Id. CIT (A) which is summarized in the order proposed by the Id. JM holding as under :- "14. From the above observation, we are of the considered view that all these issues raised on the addition made by the learned AO and deleted by the learned CIT (A) requires to be re-adjudicated de novo by the learned CIT (A) by a speaking order, after duly considering the submission of the assessee and on perusal of the documentary evidence produced by the assessee. For this purpose, we remand all these issues back to the file of the learned CIT (A) who is directed to decide the issue on the merits of the case and in accordance with the provisions of the law." 02. Therefore, I propose to write my separate order. 03. This appeal is filed by The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle - 5 (1), Mumbai (the learned AO) against the appellate order passed by The Commissioner Of Income Tax (A) - 53, Mumbai (the learned CIT - A) wherein the appeal filed by the assessee against the reasses....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....2021. Subsequently because of the decision of the honourable Supreme Court in case of Union of India versus Ashish Agarwal, the reassessment proceedings were redeemed to have been commenced by issue of notice under section 148A of the act and reopening of the assessment was treated as a show cause notice under section 148A (b) of the act dated 30/5/2022. 07. In fact, reopening of the assessment was made because of the reason that information is received from The Deputy Director of Income Tax (Investigation) - 4 (4), Mumbai on 6/11/2019 that the assessee was covered in search and seizure action conducted under section 132 (1) of the act. Post search investigation, it was asserted that the entity has been а beneficiary of accommodation entries in the form of bogus loans, bogus of contract charges, bogus labour charges etc. for financial year 2012 - 13 related to the assessment year 2013 - 14. Reasons recorded that assessee has bogus loans from nine parties amounting to Rs. 539 lakhs to whom interest paid of Rs. 6,468,000/-, bogus purchases from three different parties amounting to Rs. 1,934,491/- and bogus labour and Job work charges from two parties amounting to Rs. 533,426....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....vade taxes by fraudulent means, do not pay taxes regularly and huge outstanding credits in their books suggesting the character of a typical dummy company. During field enquiry by the investigation wing, it was found that the entity is not existing at the registered address. In case of parties listed at serial number 10 at page number 8 of 12 of the assessment order, in case of M/s Raja antibiotics Ltd, the AO held that on verification of the balance sheet for the assessment year 2013 - 14 it is found that the total assets in the form of long-term loans and advances and short-term loans and advances are less than Rs. Twenty lakhs genuineness of the transaction is not found correct. d. Thus, the learned assessing officer made addition under section 68 of the income tax act in case of only three parties out of ten parties amounting to Rs. 115 lakhs and disallowed the interest with respect to all the ten parties of Rs. 5,774,334/-. e. With respect to the bogus purchases with respect to two parties the addition of Rs. 11,61,286/- was made. f. With respect to the bogus labour charges and job works the addition of Rs. 533,426/- was made with respect to two part....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....disallowance of interest with respect to the 10th party namely Adeshwar Gems. iii. Thus, on the merits the additions were deleted by the appellate order dated 29/05/2023. 13. The learned AO is aggrieved before us and has preferred this appeal as per grounds of appeal extracted earlier. 14. The learned departmental representative vehemently supported the order of the AO and submitted that the addition has been wrongly deleted. by the learned CIT - A.by merely following the orders of the learned predecessor CIT - A. It was further contended that the assessee has failed to discharge the onus cast under section 68 of the income tax act as well as the genuineness of these expenditure of job work and purchases. 15. The learned authorised representative furnished paper book containing IX annexure. This included the decision of the coordinate bench in ITA number 2704/M/2022 dated 3/4/2023 in assessee's own case which was relied upon by the learned CIT - A. He also referred to the various other decisions of the coordinate bench which were with respect to the sister concerns of the assessee involving identical facts wherein the additions are deleted. He further referred....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 17. Therefore, according to him the issue is covered by the several decisions of the coordinate benches in the group concern and the decision of the coordinate bench in assessee's own case for the same search, involving the same documents. He therefore submitted that this appeal is covered in favour of the assessee and no infirmity is pointed out in the order of the learned CIT - A in following the orders of the coordinate bench and his predecessor. 18. We have also directed the assessee during hearing to file the paper book filed before the learned CIT - À, the learned authorised representative submitted two box files of such information. 19. We have carefully considered the rival contention and perused the orders of the learned lower authorities. We have also considered the various decisions of the coordinate benches cited before us. 20. Ground number 1 of the appeal of the AO is with respect to the deletion of the addition of Rs. 1,161,286/- on account of bogus purchases, ground number 2 is with respect to deleting the addition of Rs. 533,426/- as bogus labour charges and ground number 3 is with respect to deleting the addition of Rs. 115 lakhs/- under se....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....decisions and quash the assessment order. On merits, the CIT (A) has also relied on the remand report of the AO and granted relief. We considering the facts and judicial decisions as discussed above are of the view that CIT (A) has passed the reasons and conclusive order. Accordingly, we do not find any infirmity in the order of the CIT (A) in quashing the assessment order and uphold the same and dismiss the grounds of appeal of the revenuе." 25. Thus, it is evident that on these facts, the remand report is also available which was considered by the learned CIT - A, the ITAT is also perused the same and thereafter has confirmed the order of the learned CIT - A the deleting the additions on merit. No fruitful purpose would have been served by asking the remand report once again from the assessing officer on the same material. Thus, there is no justification in not upholding the order of the learned CIT - A because CIT - A should have asked for the remand report. Even otherwise it is the prerogative of the learned CIT - A call for the remand report if he wants to. Failure on the part of the CIT - A to obtain remand report does not empower us generally to remand back the issu....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... of the assessing officer was called for wherė the statement of Mr Avinash Jain partner of the supplier was recorded wherein the details were confirmed. For assessment year 2015 - 16, the addition was made by the learned AO, deleted by the learned CIT - A and such order of the learned CIT - A was confirmed by the ITAT. 28. In case of Pragati Civil solutions private limited which is a company engaged in the business of real estate and supply linked to construction activities. This party has supplied CIMJ band Tee & End cap and MS pipes of various sized to the assessee. During the assessment proceedings the assessee has submitted Ledger confirmation, copies of bills, bank statement of the supplier,: bank statement of the assessee, sales tax return of the assessee. During the assessment proceedings the AO issued notice under section 133 (6) of the act which was responded by the supplier filing the necessary details. The statement of Mr. Vinod Shah of the supplier was also recorded. In the case of group concern, the identical addition was deleted and confirmed by the ITAТ. 29. With respect to the delivery of the goods, the assessee submitted that bills also contained t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....assessee submitted the Ledger, Sample copy of labour invoices, bank statement of the contractor, assessee's bank statement and submitted that he has carried out the small labour work. Notice under section 133 (6) of the act was issued to that party was submitted all the details. Identical additions were made for earlier years wherein the same are deleted by the learned CIT - A - by the ITAT. 32. With respect to labour charges of Rs. 301,459 to Mr Mohammad A Idrish assessee submitted that he is also а labour Mukadam providing labourers for small job work for laying of soil, concrete, shattering and GSB Etc. He is also assessed to tax and filing the return of income under section 44AD of the act. During assessment proceedings, the assessee submitted his invoices, his Ledger account, his bank statement, and the bank statement of the assessee. In response to notice under section 133 (6) of the act he submitted all the details through the learned assessing officer the reply before the learned assessing officer and the learned CIT - A are tabulated at point number 10.3.2.3 of the written submission made by the assessee before the learned CIT - A. Merely because these two par....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nd advances and short-term loans and advances are less than Rs. 20 lakhs however the assessee has claimed Rs. 20 lakhs loan from this party. Hence the genuineness of the transaction is not found correct. 34. The assessee before the learned assessing officer has made submissions on 13/6/2022, 12/9/2022, 13/9/2022, 30/11/2022 and in response to a show cause notice dated 27 /2/2023. The assessee has submitted name, address, permanent account number, contact number and email idea of the lender, confirmation statement, income tax act of returns of income filed by the parties, bank statement of the lenders showing payment/receipt and bank statement showing the repayment to the lenders by the assessee, balance sheet and profit and loss account and ledger copy from the books of the assessee. In the earlier scrutiny assessment, on the identical confirmation, the learned assessing officer accepted the identity, creditworthiness, genuineness of these loans. It was further stated that identically for assessment year 2014 - 15 and 2015 - 16 these additions were made by the learned assessing Officer, deleted by the learned CIT - A and on further appeal before the ITAT the order of the learned....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ount in the books of the lender, income tax return, copy of the bank statement of the lender, bank statement of the assessee, Master data of Ministry of corporate affairs, GST reports showing the GST number of the lender, balance sheet and profit and loss account of the lender. During assessment proceedings notice under section 133 (6) of the act was issued to the lender who confirmed the above transaction. In submission at paragraph number 11.4.10.2 before the learned CIT - A, creditworthiness and genuineness of the loan was shown. The company has balance sheet of Rs. 181 crores, cash and bank balance of Rs. 6.63 crores whereas undoubtedly it has a lower turnover but that does not prove that the loans are not genuine, and the party does not have the creditworthiness of giving loan to the assessee. The tax deduction at source in case of the lender itself is Rs. 45 lakhs. On submission of these details, the learned assessing officer has merely relied on the finding of the investigation wing that these parties do not exist. However, when the assessee has produced such an extensive detail, the reasoning given by the learned assessing officer by placing reliance on the report of the in....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... of the AO, then only the AO is authorised to make an addition under section 68 of the act. The pendulum of onus swings and whenever it stops by no response or inadequate response from the assessee, then only the addition under section 68 can be made. That is the stage where the nature and source of the credit is not proved to the satisfaction of the AO by the assessee. But when the learned assessing officer keeps mum, relies upon opinion of somebody else, merely does the table work as an analyst, the addition under section 68 cannot be sustained. The onus lies very heavily on the assessing officer if the assessee discharges its initial onus completely. Such is the fact of the case with respect to these additions. The learned assessing officer has merely rested addition on the opinion of the investigation wing. 39. In the result we do not find any infirmity in the order of the learned CIT - A in deleting the addition of Rs. 115 lakhs under section 68 of the act, accordingly, ground number 3 of the appeal is dismissed. 40. Ground number 4 is with respect to the disallowance of interest expenditure of Rs. 5,774,337/- on unsecured loans. The only reason of disallowance made by t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ccountant Member BEFORE SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, AM AND MS. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL, JM ORDER PER KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL, J M: This appeal has been filed by the Revenue, challenging the order of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) ('ld.CIT(A) for short), National Faceless Appeal Centre ('NFAC' for short) passed u/s. 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('the Act'), pertaining to the Assessment Year ('A.Y.' for short) 2013-14. 2. The Revenue has challenged the order of the ld. CIT(A) in deleting the addition of Rs. 11,61,286/- on account of bogus purchases, addition of Rs. 5,33,426/- on account of labour and job work expenses Rs. 1,15,00,000/- towards unsecured loans u/s. 68 of the Act and Rs. 57,74,337/- being interest expenses on unsecured loans. 3. The brief facts are that the assessee firm is engaged in the business of construction of roads and bridges and has filed its return of income dated 30.11.2013, declaring total income at Rs. 3,15,82,890/-. The same was processed u/s. 143(1) of the Act. The assessee's case was selected for scrutiny and assessment order dated 27.03.2023 was passed u/s. 143(3) of the Act where the learned Assessing Officer (ld. A.O. for ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r short) for the assessee contended that on identical facts, the ld. CIT(A) had passed a consolidated order for A.Ys. 2014-15 to 2020-21, deleting the additions made on account of similar transactions pertaining to this year, which was further upheld by the Tribunal in the appeal filed by the Revenue for A.Y. 2015-16 as the other years were falling under the low tax effect. The ld. AR further contended that in the case of group company M/s. RPS Infra Projects Pvt. Ltd., pertaining to A.Y. 2019-20, on identical facts, was also decided by the co-ordinate bench in favour of the assessee and also in the same assessee for A.Y. 2013-14, the co-ordinate bench has decided the issue in favour of the assessee. The ld. AR relied on various other decisions where the Tribunal has deleted the impugned additions on identical facts. 9. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the materials available on record. It is observed that the pursuant to a search and seizure action conducted in the case of the assessee dated 06.11.2019, relevant to A.Y. 2020-21, the assessment was made for A.Y. 2014-15 to 2020-21 u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 153A of the Act where the ld. A.O. made disallowance on: ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... in the previous years for which no addition can be made on the loan or the interest paid by the assessee. Apart from this, we do not find any discussion in the order of the ld. CIT(A) with regard to the impugned additions made during the year under consideration. 12. In the above factual matrix of the case, it is pertinent to point out that the assessee in its submission has stated that inspite of all the details pertaining to the said transaction has been filed before the lower authorities, the ld. A.O. has failed to appreciate the said evidences. From the order of the ld. CIT(A), it is evident that the ld. CIT(A) has also failed to appreciate the evidences filed by the assessee and had merely allowed the appeal of the assessee by following his predecessors order. We are of the considered view that in case of bogus transactions, the documents pertaining to the said transactions have to be looked upon by us with regard to that particular year and there can be no precedence where the transactions are separate and distinct to each year. Notably, the ld. A.O. in the assessment order at pg. nos. 4 & 5 have tabulated the parties to whom the assessee has transacted along with the det....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nditure incurred for the purposes of school or the educational institution. The said findings of the Assessing Authority were set aside by the short and cryptic order of the CIT (Appeals) directing the Assessing Authority to exempt the income of the assessee under section 10(22) of the Act. That was not found to be justified by the learned ITAT and, therefore, the Tribunal has remanded the case back to the CIT (Appeals) for re-deciding the issue and give appropriate findings of fact. Without comparing the facts of assessment year 1996-97 with the facts of the previous assessment year 1995-96 the learned CIT (Appeals) could not have mechanically observed that the facts were identical to those obtaining in the previous assessment year. Since the mis-utilisation of funds is a question of fact which may be different in different assessment years this exercise of enquiry for giving findings of facts was necessary at the end of the CIT (Appeals) before bluntly setting aside the findings of the Assessing Authority. Having not done so, we find that the learned Tribunal was only justified in remanding the case back to the learned CIT (Appeals) for fresh enquiry. 14. From the above observ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 14 Pratap Construction 25,00,000 25,00,000 15 Moksha Enterprises 4,50,000 . AY 2016-2017 INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT Sr No Party Name Opening Receipt Payment Closing 1 Kothari Impex 2,19,00,000 45,00,000 1,74,00,000 2 Raja Antibiotics Ltd 20,00,000 20,00,000 No 3 Saffron Gems Pvt Ltd 55 50.000 50,00,000 5,50,000 4 Shikha Diamond Pvt Ltd 32,00,000 32,00,000 NO fresh 5 Vardhan Diamond Pvt Ltd 20,00,000 20,00,000 Kailash Surana HUF 6 9,50,000 1,90,000 11,40,000 71ª Yashwant Surana HUF 9,80,000 9,80,000 8 Yogesh Construction 25,00,000 25,00,000 Satish Surana HUF 37,10,000 37,10,000 10 Pratap Construction 25,00,000 5,00,000 30,00,000 11 Moksha Enterprises AY 2017-2018 INCOME . 4,50,000 TAX DEPARTMENT 4,50,000 r No Party Name Opening Receipt Closing to have a look balance of details of at the unsecured unsecured loans yearwise loans in are opening respect summarised balance, receipt, of each as under payment and closing assessment yearwise. The payment and closing balance of unsecured loans in respect of each party assessment yearwise. The details of un....