TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (5) TMI 1627
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....usiness of works contracts for the construction of Affordable Group Housing projects and filed its return of income for the AY 2019-20 on 29.10.2019 declaring income of Rs. 15,37,230/-. A revised return of income was subsequently filed under section 139(5) on 24.2.20220, declaring a total income of Rs. 25,39,180. The assessee thereafter received a notice under section 148 of the Act, alleging "that the books of accounts or documents seized under section 132 of the Act in the case of Shri Himanshu Verma pertain to the assessee, or that the information contained therein relates to the assessee or to any other person in respect of whom the assessee is assessable under the Act" In compliance with the notice under section 148, the assessee filed....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ommission accordingly. Hence, he noted that the assessee company received an accommodation entry of Rs. 40,00,000/- in the form of loan and paid commission of amounting to Rs. 13,561/- which was charged (showing as interest paid) only in FY 2018-19 at the time of receiving of loan. Hence, accommodation entry amounting to Rs. 40,00,000/- received by the assessee company from non- descript entities was added to the income of the assessee company as unexplained cash credit u/s. 68 of the Act on account of failure on the part of the assessee to establish the unexplained cash credit and amount of Rs. 13,561/- paid as interest being added to the income of the assessee as unexplained expenditure u/s. 69C of the Act, thus made the total addition of....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n from M/s RCM Finance and Leasing Pvt. Ltd. whereas RCM Finance and Leasing Pvt. Ltd. has no relation with the party searched Himanshu Verma ( as per notice u/s. 148) and Galaxy Group (as per notice u/s. 142(1) without any cogent evidence. 5. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the CIT(A) has erred by not providing the copy of reasons recorded and without providing the copy of approval of PCIT-03, New Delhi for issuing notice u/s. 148. 6. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the CIT(A) has erred by not considering that no show cause notice was issued before passing the final assessment order. 7. That on the facts and circumstances of the ace and in law the CIT(A) has e....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....proceeded to treat the transaction as sham transaction and added the same in the hands of the assessee. He relied upon the decision of the Coordinate Bench of Delhi Tribunal in the case of Real Innerspring Technologies Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ACIT in ITA no. 647/Del/2023 (AY 2016-17) vide order dated 27.3.2025. 6. On the other hand, Ld. DR of the Revenue brought to our notice page 14 of the assessment order and submitted that the conditions of section 68 was not fulfilled in the transactions carried on by the assessee with the sham transaction. All these facts were found during the search conducted in the case of Galaxy Group and coordinated search carried out in the case of Shri Himanshu Verma. He relied on the findings of lower Authorities. 7....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ns including ITRs, balance sheets, bank statements, confirmations, and NBFC certificates of the lenders, without indicating what further evidence was lacking to establish identity, creditworthiness, and genuineness of the transactions. The assessee submitted voluminous relevant evidences to prove the triple test of section 68 which has been rejected by the assessee is not found tenable due to Interest Not Paid in the next year while the interest was paid for the A.Y. in question and also added by stating modus operandi of some entry operators. The transaction was carried out through proper banking channels, fully supported by documentary evidence, and has been entirely paid. Moreover, even assuming without admitting that interest nonpayment....