TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (12) TMI 542
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..../09/2021, passed under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the Assessment Year 2020-2021. 2. The Assessee has raised following grounds of appeal : "1. The Hon CIT(A) erred in upholding the addition of Rs. 6,45,300/- as unexplained cash credit u/s 68 of the I.T. Act, 1961, on account of the difference between the balance of unsecured loan as per books of accounts of the appellant and that of his father, Shri Kundan Bhat, ignoring the fact that such difference was in the opening balance as at the start of the previous year and further the said difference had already been brought to tax in the earlier asst. years and therefore the addition of Rs. 6,45,300/- was not factually and legally justified in the year under appeal....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... before the CIT(A). Vide Order, dated 05/06/2025, the Learned CIT(A) disposed off the appeal as partly allowed. The Learned CIT(A) allowed Assessee's claim for deduction of INR. 1,50,000/- under Chapter VI-A of the Act. However, the disallowance of INR. 22,45,300/- (INR. 6,45,300/- + INR. 16,00,000/-) was confirmed by Learned CIT(A). 5. Not being satisfied by the relief granted by the Learned CIT(A), the Assessee has preferred the present appeal before this Tribunal on the grounds reproduced in paragraph 2 above. Ground No.1 6. Ground No.1 raised by the Assessee pertains to addition of INR. 6,45,300/- made by the Assessing Officer under Section 68 of the Act on account of unsecured loans credited in the books of accounts of the Ass....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....3 to 59). On perusal of the same we find that Assessing Officer had made identical addition of INR. 6,45,300/- in each of the said assessment years. We note that in appeal for the said assessment years, the first appellate authority had deleted the additions on the ground that same were not arising out of any incriminating evidence found in the course of search action under Section 132 of the Act. 10. Thus, from the above it is clear that the credit of INR. 6,45,300/- did not pertain to the Assessment Year 2020-2021 and therefore, the addition of INR. 6,45,300/- made by the Assessing Officer under Section 68 of the Act cannot be sustained. Accordingly, the addition of INR. 6,45,300/- is deleted and Ground No.1 raised by the Assessee is a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....either during the assessment nor during the remand proceedings had the Assessing Officer brought on record any evidence to dispute the genuineness of the aforesaid unsecured loan transactions. It was submitted that the Assessing Officer as well as the Learned CIT(A) had, without making any enquiries either with the lenders by way of notice under Sections 133(6) or by issue of summons under Sections 131 to examine the parties/documents placed on record, rejected the corroborative material furnished by the Assessee by merely stating that further documents should have been furnished by the Assessee. It was further submitted by the Learned Authorised Representative for the Assessee that the documents sought by the Assessing Officer during asses....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Bhatt. The Assessee was also covered under search and seizure action. Consequent to the search action, the case of the assessee was centralized in the charge of Central Circle-1(1). Mumbai and assessment under Section 143(3) was completed. During the assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer noted that the Assessee had taken unsecured loans from 03 parties. The Assessee was given opportunities to submit corroborative documents to prove the identity & creditworthiness of the above parties and genuineness of the above transactions vide notices dated 22/02/2021, 30/07/2021, 11/08/2021 & 03/09/2021. In Its reply, the Assessee merely submitted the names of the above mentioned parties and nothing else in this regard. In view of the failure by....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
...., proof of employees, Books of accounts, Complete GST Return, Truck bills etc. in respect of the above 03 parties." 18. On perusal of the above it becomes clear that the Assessee had filed as additional evidence (a) Ledger Account - Loan Confirmation, (b) Income Tax Return Acknowledgement for the relevant assessment year, and (c) bank statement of the 3 parties from which unsecured loan was taken by the Assessee. Thus, in our view, the Assessee had discharged the primary onus cast upon the Assessee and Section 68 of the Act to prove identity/creditworthiness of the lenders and the genuineness of the transactions. Perusal of the order passed by the Assessing Officer and CIT(A) as well as the remand report shows that neither any independen....