TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (3) TMI 1344
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..../s Steel Impex and M/s Cloud Zone to the tune of Rs. 3,33,00,000/- and Rs. 2,58,21,000, respectively. The said amounts were paid back during the year itself through proper banking channel as claimed by the assessee. The case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny under CASS on account of "unsecured loans." Notices, therefore, u/s 143(2) of the Act dated 22.09.2019 was served upon the assessee. The assessee was further requested to verify unsecured loans squared up during the year as reflected in the balance sheet. Few documents were also sought for from the assessee by the AO as it is evident from page 2 of the assessment order in response thereto the assessee duly submitted the details pertaining to unsecured loans claimed at Rs. 19,65,67,060/- as per the return of income/books of accounts. In regard to the two loan creditors, namely, M/s Steel Impex and M/s Cloud Zone involving total amount of Rs. 5.91 crores supporting details whereof having not been placed by the assessee as claimed. However, the Ld. AO added the same in the hands of the assessee which was further confirmed by the First Appellate Authority, hence, the instant appeal before us. 3. It is the case of the Rev....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the same refer to non-related individual Mr. Rahul Chawla etc. Hence 133(6) enquiries could not be made as the assessee submitted wrong PAN. Explanation: M/s Steel impex is a proprietorship firm and its proprietor is Rahul Chawla who has signed confirmation of account as per his ledger acts. The PAN: ADIPC0422B belongs to Mr. Rahul Chawla as confirmed and accepted by AO in his assessment order. 3 (iii) Comprehensive confirmation from these parties as appearing in their books of accounts confirming the closing balances were submitted on 27.03.2021 including their Name, Address, PAN, E-Mail ID, Signatures. The assessee offered to verify the correctness of Name, Address, PAN of the firms by sending letter or personally someone which was not done by the Department. Bank Statement of these parties was submitted on 30.03,2021 i. e. before passing the assessment order on dt. 31.03.2021. The above details are on record. 3 (iv) The submissions were not taken on record by the Department and the assessment order was framed as per show cause notice itself on dt. 31.03.2021. The assessee was able to submit the required details well within time on dt. 27.03.2021 and 3....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....assessee inspite of availing sufficient time and opportunities as per IT Act." 5. In view of the above, the assessee requests your honour to delete the additions made by the AO and drop the penalty proceedings initiated. The assessee relies on various orders passed by Hon'ble Delhi High Court. (i) DJ Surfactants vs National E-Assessment Centre Delhi, W.P. (C) 4814/2021 dt. 03.05.2021 (ii) Lemon Tree Hotels Limited vs NFAC Delhi, W.P. {C} 5427/2021 dt. 21.05.2021. (iii) Naresh Kumar Goyai vs NFAC Delhi WP(C) 6245/2021 dt. 12.07.2021. The assessee reserves the right to add after modify, amend, delete any ground before Hon'ble CIT (A)" B. "WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS BEFORE THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) IN THE CASE OF M/s GLOBAL STAINLESS, 17 MEERA TOWER GROUND FLOOR, WAZIRPUR INDUSTRIAL AREA, NEW DELHI - 110052 FOR THE ASSESMENT YEAR 2018-19 PAN : AAJFG7209G ASSTT. YEAR : 2018-19 1. The assessment is bad in law and on facts. It is against the principles of natural justice as everything has been done without going into the facts and submissions of the case. The submissions made by the assessee ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....in his assessment order. The Proprietorship firm M/s Steel Impex is owned by Mr. Rahul Chawla and his PAN is ADIPC0422B which has been confirmed by AO himself. iii. The AO further alleged that with reference to other loan creditors M/s Cloud Zone, the assessee merely submitted PAN without giving verifiable details of email - id etc. to examine the claim u/s 133(6) with this loan creditor. Accordingly, this loan creditor also apparently neither reconcilable nor explainable as claimed by the assessee and also as assessee failed to submit basic details of this loan creditors involving PAN, Email-id etc. to examine the assessee claim u/s 133(6). Explanation : - Comprehensive confirmation from M/s CIoud Zone as appearing in their books of accounts confirming the closing balance was submitted on 27.03.2021 including their Name, Address, PAN, E-Mail ID, Signatures. Bank Statement of these parties was submitted on 30.03.2021 i.e. before passing the assessment order on dt. 31.03.2021. The above details are on record. But the same were not considered and the assessment order was framed without considering the documents and submission of the assessee. 4. The submiss....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Department. The AO says that the assessee submitted confirmations from these loan creditors with supporting details as applicable to these loan creditors except in the case of two loan creditors involving total amount of Rs. 5.91 crores against these two parties namely (i) M/s Steel Impex (ii) M/s Cloud Zone. 6. The assessee has received unsecured loans during the year from various parties including from these two parties: - i. M/s Steel Impex (a) Proprietor: Mr. Rahul Chawla : Rs. 3,08,00,000/- PAN: ADIPC0422B 8819, Street No. S Multani Dhanda Paharganj, New Delhi -110055 E-Mail ID: [email protected] (b) Proprietor: Mr. Gaurav Goel : Rs. 25,00,000/- PAN : AMPPG8095G 76A, Dilshad Garden Shahdara, New Delhi - 110055 E-Mail ID : [email protected] M/s Cloud Zone : Rs. 2,58,21,000/- Partnership Firm PAN: AAMFC8905C &n....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... could not be established by the assessee inspite of availing sufficient time and opportunities as per IT Act" 8. In view of the above, the assessee requests your honour to delete the additions made by the AO and drop the penalty proceedings initiated. The assessee relies on various orders passed by Hon'ble Delhi High Court. (i) DJ Surfactants vs National E-Assessment Centre Delhi, W.P.(C) 814/2021 dt. 03.05.2021 (ii) Lemon Tree Hotels Limited vs NFAC Delhi, W.P.(C) 5427/2021 it 21.05.2021. iii) Naresh Kumar Goyal vs NFAC Delhi WP(C) 6245/2021 12.07.2021. The assessee reserves the right to add, alter, modify, amend, any ground before Hon'ble CIT(A)" 4. It appears that the Ld. AO while making addition observed that the confirmations stated to have been submitted were never submitted, neither the ledger account of the two creditors in the books of account of the assessee were furnished before him. The confirmations/bank accounts, e-mail ids of sundry creditors for the impugned transactions being unsecured loans amounting to Rs. 3,33,00,000/- and Rs. 2,58,21,000/- from M/s Steel Impex and M/s Cloud Zone, respectively, we....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Investigation) revealed that assessee had taken accommodation entries in form of bogus unsecured loans from said companies which were operated by one Praveen Kumar. lain who had admitted that companies under their control were paper companies with no real business transactions. The Hon'ble ITAT also rejected the assessee's contention that the loans have been repaid during the year under consideration therefore the set off of the same should also be given to the assessee. The relevant portion of the order is reproduced as under: "4. For the sake of conciseness and brevity, in AY 2010-11 unsecured loans have been taken from Ryan International of Rs. 25 lakhs, in AY 2011-12 from Casper Enterprises Pvt. Ltd of Rs 5 lakhs and in AY 201213 Rs. 20 lakhs taken from Duke Business Pvt Ltd. The common cause for treating the unsecured loan as unexplained and added u/s 68 of the Act is the information received from DGIT (Investigation). Mumbai that Shri Pravin Kumar Jain through a web of concerns run and operated by him is engaged in providing accommodation entries in the nature of bogus unsecured loans, bogus share application etc through various paper entities and the assessee is....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e Bench despite availing numerous opportunities. Consequently, we find no illegality or perversity in the impugned order passed by Ld.CIT(A), hence, aforesaid appeals filed by both the assessee's, namely, Shri Pravin Kumar Jain and Shri Pankaj Jain are hereby dismissed. 19 Since addition of Rs. 12,39,00,000/- in hands of Casper Enterprises Pvt Ltd is on protective basis, the substantive addition having already made in the hands of Shri Pravin Kumar Jain, the addition of Rs. 99,56,560/- in case of Casper Enterprises Pvt Ltd is confirmed." 7. Considering the facts of the case in toto and in the light of the decisions of the coordinate bench (supra), we have no hesitation in confirming the addition made u/s 68 of the Act for the captioned Assessment years. The contention of the Id. counsel that the, loans have been re-paid during the year under consideration therefore the set off of the same should also be given to the assessee does not hold any water as it has been established that the impugned loans were nothing but accommodation entries and the repayment is also nothing but return of accommodation entries therefore, the money which has been brought in the garb of ....