TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (11) TMI 1670
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....y the ld. AO u/s 68 of the Act in respect of unsecured loans taken by the assessee as well as interest paid thereon. 2.1. The facts in brief are that the assessee filed the return of income on 28.10.2017, declaring total income at Rs.11,64,510/-. The case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny under Computer Assisted Scrutiny Selection (CASS) and statutory notice u/s 143(2) and notice u/s 142(1) of the Act along with questionnaire were issued and served upon the assessee. In compliance to the same the assessee submitted before the ld. AO the documents/ details comprising details of share transactions during the year comprising audited accounts, computations of income, bank accounts, detail of loans received, loan confirmations, etc. T....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....eal of the assessee after taking into account the submission/evidences filed during the Couse of appellate proceedings. The ld. CIT (A) confirmed the addition u/s 68 of the Act in respect of 14 loan creditors as made by the ld. AO u/s 68 of the Act without correctly appreciating the facts on records. 2.3. After hearing the rival contentions and perusing the materials available on record, we observe that during the year the assessee has reported the total amount of loan received as on 31.03.2017 at Rs.9,48,31,452/-. The assessee also paid interest on these loans aggregating to Rs.1,16,28,393/-, which was charged to the profit and loss account. We note that the AO during the course of assessment proceedings, called upon the assessee to fil....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....as apparent from the records and the assessment order that the interest amounting to Rs.19,94,388/- has been added twice, which also showed that these is no application of mind by the ld. AO as well as by the ld. CIT (A). 2.5. Even considering the evidences filed by the assessee in respect of these loan creditors, we note that the assessee has discharged its onus by filing all the evidences qua the loan creditors in which neither the ld. AO nor the ld. CIT (A) has pointed out any deficiency or defect. Therefore, the addition made u/s 68 of the Act cannot be sustained as the mere non-compliance to the notice u/s 133(6) of the Act or to the summons u/s 131 of the Act cannot be a ground for making addition u/s 68 of the Act. The assessee ha....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ome evidence on which a conclusion could be arrived at, no question of law as such arose. The High Court was right in refusing to state a case." 2.7. The Hon'ble Calcutta High Court in the case of Crystal Networks Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT (supra ) has held that where all the evidences were filed by the assessee proving the identity and creditworthiness of the loan transactions, the fact that summon issued were returned un-served or no body complied with them is of little significance to prove the genuineness of the transactions and identity and creditworthiness of the creditors. The relevant portion of the decision is extracted below: "We find considerable force of the submissions of the learned Counsel for the appellant that the Tribu....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....peal, consider with due care all the material facts and records its findings on all the contentions raised by the assessee and the Commissioner, in the light of the evidence and the relevant law." The Tribunal must, in deciding an appeal, consider with due care all the material facts and record its findings on all contentions raised by the assessee and the Commissioner, in the light of the evidence and the relevant law. It is also ruled in the said judgment at page 465 that if the Tribunal does not discharge the duty in the manner as above then it shall be assumed the judgment of the Tribunal suffers from manifest infirmity. Taking inspiration from the Supreme Court observation we are constrained to hold in this matter tha....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s. We are of the view that order of Ld. CIT(A) does not call for any interference. It may be seen from the grounds of appeal raised by the revenue that the revenue disputed only the proof of identity of share holder. In this regard it is seen that for AY 2004-05 Shree Shyam Trexim Pvt. Ltd. was assessed by ITO, Ward-9(4), Kolkata and the order of assessment u/s 143(3) dated 25.01.2006 is placed in the paper book. Similarly Navalco Commodities Pvt. Ltd. was assessed to tax u/s 143(3) for AY 2005-06 by ITO, Ward-9(4), Kolkata by order dated 20.03.2007. Similarly Jewellock Trexim Pvt. Ltd. was assessed to tax for AY 2005-06 by the very same ITO, Ward-9(3), Kolkata assessing the assessee. In the light of the above factual position which is not ....