TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (1) TMI 470
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....oans. Notice u/s 143(2) of the Act was issued on 28.09.2018 followed by notices u/s 142(1) alongwith questionnaires from time to time. In response assessee filed submissions and after considering submissions made by the assessee, order was passed u/s 143(3) of the Act wherein an addition of Rs. 4,87,00,000/- was made u/s 68 of the Act being loan received from M/s. Height Propcon (P) Ltd held as unexplained credit. 3. Against the said order, assessee preferred an appeal before Ld. CIT(A), who dismissed the appeal of the assessee. 4. Aggrieved by the said order, assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal by taking following grounds of appeal:- 1.0 That, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the disallowance, imposition of tax, and interest with reference thereto, as well as the quantification of taxable income and tax liability, are unjustified, erroneous, and unsustainable, and it is prayed that necessary directions be issued to the Learned Assessing Officer (Ld. AO) to grant appropriate relief in accordance with the law. 2.0 That, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT-(A) has erred in upholding the order of Ld. AO without....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....of persons recorded on oath during the survey conducted u/s 133A of the Act at the premises of M/s. Height Propcon Pvt. Ltd. and disproved the identity of said company and adjudged legitimate business transaction as a non-genuine transaction and treated as an accommodation entry. 7.0 That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT-(A) has erred in treating the appellant company as an accommodation entry recipient by relying on statement recorded at back of the appellant without providing an opportunity by the Ld. AO to cross examine the same. 8. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT-(A) has erred in upholding the order of Ld. AO without considering the fact that assessment proceedings was done merely on the basis of suspicion and assumptions/ presumptions derived from search conducted in case of M3M Group. 9.0 That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT-(A) has erred in upholding the order of Ld. AO without considering the fact that no adverse inference has been drawn in the assessment order of impugned party i.e. M/s. Height Propcon Pvt. Ltd. during the year under consideration wit....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....and all three terms used are having different meaning and cannot be read together more particularly when they are alternatively used. It is thus prayed by ld. CIT DR that AO has rightly made the addition towards unsecured loan which is one of the reasons for limited scrutiny. She Prayed accordingly. 10. Heard the parties and perused the material available on record. After considering the facts of the case at hand, we find that the AO has not exceeded the jurisdiction while examining the credits in the shape of loans as it lies well within the scope of reasons for limited scrutiny. As observed hereinabove, one of the reasons of limited scrutiny was "Investments/Advances/ Loans" and the AO has examined loans which is well within his jurisdiction of limited scrutiny. Once examination of "loans" is observed to be forming a part of the reasons recorded, we find no error in the action of the AO. The ld. AR for the assessee has placed reliance on principle of "ejusdem generis", however, the same is not applicable to the facts of present case as all the three terms i.e. 'Investments', 'Advances' and 'Loans' are used alternatively and not as 'synonymous' to each other. Thus, it cannot be....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rom M/s Height Propcon Pvt. Ltd. Ld. CIT DR submits that AO relied upon the statement of Shri Puran Bahadur, director of eh lender company recorded on oath u/s 132(4) of the Act during search & seizure action conducted on 21.07.2016 at C-13, Sushant Lok-1, Gurgaon in which Shri Puran Bahadur accepted that he works as driver for Shri Basant Bansal and his family members from three years and getting a salary of Rs 17,000/- per month in cash. Ld. CIT DR further submits that Investigation Wing also made inquiries through Inspector who personally visited the address registered at MCA website and reported that lender company, M/s Height Propcon Pvt Ltd, does not exist at the registered address. Ld. CIT DR also drew our attention to the fact that during survey proceedings conducted u/s 133A of the Act, statements of owners/tenants were recorded in which they have disproved the identity of M/s Height Propcon Pvt Ltd. It is thus prayed by ld. CIT DR that the made by AO deserves to be sustained. She prayed accordingly. 14. Heard both the parties and perused the material placed before us. In the instant case, revenue alleged that assessee has failed to establish identity as well as creditw....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....se of the Assessee that the Assessee has duly repaid the loan amount and provided the details of identity, creditworthiness and genuineness of the transaction before the A.O., however, the same has not been considered while framing the assessment. The Ld. Counsel has provided the chart showing repayment made to the parties and also produced evidence in support of such re-payment made. The chart produced by the Assessee is reproduced as under:- Name of the party Amount of Repayment (in Rs.) Date of Repayment Paper Book Page No. Sunrise Propbuild Private Limited 1,00,00,000/- 20.01.2013 321 of Addl. PB 2,00,00,000/- 24.01.2013 321 of Addl. PB 1,00,00,000/- 29.01.2013 321 of Addl. PB 3,00,00,000/- 16.01.2013 323 of Addl. PB 40,00,000/- 25.06.2013 324 of Addl. PB 30. Further, in order to prove the identity, creditworthiness and genuineness of the parties, the Assessee along with the reply filed before the A.O., produced the copy of confirmation of accounts, ITR acknowledgement, bank statements and audited financial statements of the party from which loan has been taken. Those do....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ls any form of disguise on the part of the assessee and dispels the perception of any sordid or extraneous affairs. The clinching evidences towards loan procurement discharge the primary onus which lay upon the assessee under s. 68 of the Act. Besides, the loan itself having been repaid, the assessee does not ultimately stand to gain any spurious benefit from such alleged unexplained cash credit. Such fact justifies the plea of the assessee towards existence of Bonafide in the transactions. In the totality of facts, where the trail for obtaining of loan and repayment thereof is proved and the lender has duly filed its return of income encompassing the transaction carried with the assessee, the action of the Revenue cannot be countenanced in law. 9.4. In the wake of peculiar facts subsisting in the present case, the additions towards unexplained credit under s. 68 and estimated addition under s. 69C is wholly unjustified. 9.5. The Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the cases of CIT Vs. Ayachi Chandrasekhar Narsangji, 42 Taxmann.com 251 (Guj) and CIT Vs. Mahavir Crimpers, 95 Taxman.com 323 (Guj) have held that when the Department has accepted the factum of repayment, the....