TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (11) TMI 1291
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....on account of loan taken from Anoop Saxena. The appellant prays that the said addition may please be deleted. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the ld. CIT(A) erred in confirmation addition of Rs. 10,14,500/- on account of loan taken from Lucky Motors. The appellant prays that the said addition may please be deleted. 3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming addition of Rs. 14,00,000/- on account of unsecured loan taken from Sanjeev Malhotra. The appellant prays that the said addition may please be deleted. 4. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the ld. CIT(A) erred in making addition of Rs. 40,000/- on account of payment to LIC and Rs. 53,724/- on account of drawing. The appellant prays that the said addition may please be deleted. 2.1 Grounds taken by the revenue are reproduced as under: 1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 20,00,000/- by AO on account of unsecured loan taken from Arvind Parikh even though the assessee was not able to discha....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....detailed explanations, explaining the nature and source of these entries and discharging the burden casted u/s.68 along with corroborative documentary evidences. However, ld. Assessing Officer did not find himself convinced with the submissions and made the addition of the above tabulated entries by applying provisions of section 68, to complete the assessment at total assessed income of Rs. 15,22,89,605/-. At the first appellate stage, assessee reiterated the submissions so made in the assessment proceedings. Assessee also filed certain additional evidences which were considered by ld. CIT(A) while adjudicating the appeal. 3.2. The details of the loan transactions undertaken by the assessee during the year under consideration is tabulated as under: Sr No Name Address PAN Jurisdiction Amount 1 Anoop Saxena 41, L. B Railway Staff Colony, Santacruz West Mumbai 400054 AFEPS8656M Income Tax Officer 42(2)(1), Mumbai 5,00,000 2 Arvind Kumar Purshottam Das Parekh 5117, Shobhana Building, Sion Main Road, Sion West, Mumbai 400022 AADPP0517E Income Tax Officer 23(1)(6), Mumbai 20,00,000 3 Lucky Motors Prop Mr. Ikhalaq Abdul Gaffa....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ught explanation on source of source for the loan transaction for which ld. CIT(A) noted that such a requirement u/s. 68 is applicable with effect from 01.04.2013 and not relevant for the year under consideration. 4.1. In respect of the loan taken from Mumbadevi Bullion, it was pointed out that similar loan transaction by the assessee with this lender in AY 2010-11 and AY 2012-13 was added in the hands of the assessee which travelled in appeal before the Coordinate Bench of ITAT, Mumbai in ITA No. 801and 6384/Mum/2018 for AY 2010-11 and in ITA No. 4285/Mum/2019 for AY 2012-13, order pronounced on 28.09.2022. The Coordinate Bench while dealing with the addition made in respect of loan taken by the assessee from this party, held in favour of the assessee. Coordinate Bench in para 10 took note of the comments offered by ld. Assessing Officer in the remand report which is extracted below: 5. Mumbadevi Bullion 9,46,69,537 On perusal of the confirmation, there is of an opening balance Rs.30,00,000/- and adjusting the transaction during the year, there is a closing balance of Rs. 9,76,69,537/-outstanding in the name of the assessee. Whereas, on perusal of the audited balanc....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....these deposits of cash were from sales made by the lender which was minuscule to the total turnover of Rs. 77.49 crore with bank balance of Rs. 21.95 crore at the year end. He further noted that ld. Assessing Officer did not choose to make any further enquiry or investigation in this regard to taint the loan transaction undertaken by the assessee. Thus, ld. CIT(A) deleted the addition so made in respect of loan from Mumbadevi Bullion. 4.4. For the transaction of loan with Rakhi Parikh, ld. CIT(A) noted about the doubt casted by ld. Assessing Officer of loan being taken without charging of any interest, was nothing but a baseless presumption and a mere suspicion. Assessee proved the onus casted u/s. 68 by furnishing all the relevant documentary evidences with which no discrepancy or deficiency was pointed out. Thus, ld. CIT(A) gave relief in respect of this addition. 5. Before us, assessee has placed on record two paper books, one containing 267 pages and the other 81 pages. These paper books contain the corroborative documentary evidences for each of the lender which were furnished before the authorities below, which have been perused. Before us, ld. CIT DR placed reliance on....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... had not appeared before the Assessing Officer and the summons could not be served on the addresses given as they were not traced and in respect of some of the parties who had appeared, it was observed that just before issuance of cheques, the amount was deposited in their account. The Tribunal has considered that the Assessee has produced on record the documents to establish the genuineness of the party such as PAN of all the creditors along with the confirmation, their bank statements showing payment of share application money It was also observed by the Tribunal that the Assessee has also produced the entire record regarding issuance of shares ie allotment of shares to these parties, their share application forms, allotment letters and share certificates, so also the books of account. The balance sheet and profit and loss account of these persons discloses that these persons had sufficient funds in their accounts for investing in the shares of the Assessee. In view of these voluminous documentary evidence, only because those persons had not appeared before the Assessing Officer would not negate the case of the Assessee. The judgment in case of Gagandeep Infrastructure (....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....scharged the onus that lies on it in terms of section 68. When the nature and source of the amount so invested is known, it cannot be said to undisclosed income. Therefore, the addition of such subscriptions as unexplained credit under section 68 is unwarranted." 6.5. Further, reliance is placed on the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Orissa Corporation (P) Ltd. (1986) 159 ITR 78 (SC) wherein it was held as under: "In this case the assessee had given the names and addresses of the alleged creditors. It was in the knowledge of the revenue that the said creditors were the income-tax assessee. Their index number was in the file of the revenue. The revenue, apart from issuing notices under section 131 at the instance of the assessee, did not pursue the matter further. The revenue did not examine the source of income of the said alleged creditors to find out whether they were credit-worthy or were such who could advance the alleged loans. There was no effort made to pursue the so-called alleged creditors. In those circumstances, the assessee could not do any further. In the premises, if the Tribunal came to the conclusion that the assessee had disc....