2025 (11) TMI 1510

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... assessee-Company filed an affidavit dated 28th August, 2025 before the ITAT in support of condonation of delay of 92 days mentioning that due to non-consideration of the submission made against the order u/s. 250 of the Act dated 02.01.2025 passed by the ld. Addl./JCIT(Appeals)-3, Bengaluru requesting rectification u/s. 154 of the Act, and the rectification has been rejected on flimsy grounds on 06.06.2025, i.e. after the limitation period of two months from the end of the month in which the order u/s. 250 was passed, which was beyond the control of the management. Against Defect No.1 of the notice issued that appeal fee not filed as others in details of payment, which is not treated as appeal fees and with a request to treat the payment a....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Notice under section 143(2) was issued on 18.07.2018 requiring to produce the details/documents/accounts or any other evidence. On 20.08.2018, a notice under section 142(1) along with questionnaire was sent to the assessee, and in response, the assessee-company filed details/documents against the said notice. Consequently a letter was issued to the assessee-company on 25.09.2018 requesting it to produce the Director of M/s. Pushker Trading & Holding Pvt. Ltd. within seven days of receipt of the letter, the transaction made with the stated company would be treated as a sham transaction and the amount of Rs. 5,00,000/- would be treated as unexplained cash credit, but the Director of the assessee-company failed to produce the Director of M/s. ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he Income Tax Act is confirmed. 6. On being aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Tribunal and raised the following grounds: Ground - 1: That the Ld. Addl./JCIT(A) was not justified in confirming the additions of unsecured loan of Rs. 5,00,000/- made by the Ld. A.O. as unexplained cash credit u/s 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, even when the appellant has proved the identity, genuineness and credit worthiness of the lender and more so when the same has not been repudiated by the Ld. A.O. and hence the additions of Rs. 5,00,000/- is liable to be deleted. Ground - 2: That the Ld. Addl./JCIT(A) and the Ld. AO has wrongly and arbitrarily disregarded the evidences in form of PAN, ITR, Financial Statements an....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....impugned orders like statement, investigation wing report, etc. and not allowing the cross examination to the appellant and hence the impugned assessment order passed u/s 147/143(3) of the Act dated 27.11.2018 is liable to be quashed. Ground - 6: That the Ld. Addl./JCIT(A) was not justified in confirming the additions of unsecured loan of Rs. 5,00.000/- made by the Ld. A.O. as unexplained cash credit u/s 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, even when on the facts and in the circumstances, the Ld. AO wrongly, arbitrarily and without jurisdiction issued notice u/s 148 of the Act, dated 30.03.2018, which is void-ab-initio since he had no reasons to believe as stated in section 147 of the Act and hence the impugned assessment order passed u....