2025 (3) TMI 1675

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... r.w.s.153A of the Act on 31-12-2019. The sole grievance of the revenue is part deletion of certain addition as made by Ld. AO u/s 68 while framing the assessment order. Having heard vehement arguments of both the sides, the appeal is disposed-off as under. Assessment Proceedings 2.1 During assessment proceedings, pursuant to search action in the case of BNR group on 26-09-2017, notice u/s 153A was issued to the assessee. It transpired that the assessee raised unsecured loan of Rs. 167 Lacs from an entity by the name M/s Sun Moon Vision Infra- Developers Pvt. Ltd. (SVIPL) and another loan of Rs. 736 Lacs from M/s Sam Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. (SEPL). Accordingly, the assessee was required to satisfy the primary ingredients of Sec.68. The ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... impugned order. The same were subjected to remand proceedings wherein the assessee furnished Audited financial statements and Income Tax Returns of these two entities. Still, Ld. AO referred to the field enquiries and justified the impugned addition. On the other hand, the assessee relied on plethora of judicial decisions holding the field in assessee's favour. 3.2 The Ld. CIT(A), considering the provisions of Sec.68, noted that the assessee had filed various documents with respect to SEPL to establish the primary ingredients of Sec.68. These documents were - (a) Confirmation duly signed by the Director of SEPL for AY 2018-19 confirming the Loan transaction; (b) Acknowledgement of Income Tax Return of SEPL for AY 2018-19; (c) Copy of Ba....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... assessee, there was credit in the bank account of that entity for Rs. 10.66 Crores and there were no cash deposits. That entity filed Income Tax Return of Rs. 50.76 Lacs and paid Income Tax of Rs. 12.77 Lacs during AY 2023-24. The allegation that there was no fixed asset had nothing to do with the creditworthiness of the creditor. Upon perusal of statement of Shri Badan Singh (director of SEPL) as recorded on 27-12-2017, it was noted that there was no reference of SEPL and no question was posed to Sh. Badan Singh regarding 'SEPL' or affairs of 'SEPL'. Considering all these facts, Ld. AO was directed to delete the impugned addition of Rs. 736 Lacs. 3.3 More or less similar findings have been rendered with respect to SVIPL....