TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (7) TMI 2049
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....) as made by the ld. AO on account of bogus unsecured loans u/s 68 of the Act. Besides, the ld. CIT (A) also deleted the disallowance of interest of Rs.1,10,18,307/- and Rs.5,75,000/- on account of commission paid, which were also added by the ld. AO. 05. The facts in brief are that the assessee filed the return of income on 15.02.2022 by declaring total income of Rs.3,85,60,090/-, which were processed u/s 143(1) of the Act 31.05.2022. The assessee company is engaged in the business of trading of HDPE/ LLDPE, which is used in manufacturing of cables and conductors. During the year, the Revenue from operation was Rs.103,58,43,299/- and other income of Rs.1,24,69,622/-. A search action u/s 132(1) of the Act as well as survey u/s 133A of the Act were conducted on the Goel Group of cases on 15.03.2022, of which the assessee was also a part and a related entity. During the course of search on the Goel Group, various incriminating materials were seized which suggested that the group was engaged in common the practice of routing its own unaccounted fund through shell entities in guise of unsecured loans with the help of various entry operators. During the assessment proceedings, the ld....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ommission paid towards arranging the unsecured loan by applying a rate of 0.5%. 06. In the appellate proceedings, the ld. CIT (A) allowed the appeal of the assessee after taking into consideration the contentions and submissions of the assessee and the evidences filed by observing and holding as under: - "5.0 Decisions: 5.1 I have carefully considered the facts of the case, submission of the appellant and the assessment order. In the assessment order, there have been detail discussions with respect to search on Laser Power and Infra Pvt Ltd. and Goel group of companies and their directors and key persons, wherein certain incriminating documents were found. In the assessment order, there is detail discussions on statements of various persons also. The Assessing Officer has finally come to conclusion that the assessee company has failed to prove the creditworthiness of the loan creditors, though the Assessing Officer is satisfied with respect to identity of loan creditors. The Assessing Officer has also raised doubt on the genuineness of the transactions 5.2 There was search and seizure operations under section 132(1) of the Act aswell as survey under se....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ion paid in cash etc cannot be drawn in the hands of the appellant company. Under any circumstances, the said data file contains the list of loan transactions of Laser Power and Infra Pvt Ltd and not the appellant company. Thus, in my view, no adverse inference can be drawn with respect to the aforesaid statement of Navin Kumar Saffar. 5.4 Further, in the assessment order, the Assessing officer has referred to the statement of various person such as Arun Nangalia recorded on 15.03.2022, Anuj Bukrediwala dated 16.05.2016, Jivendra Mishra dated 28.09.2014, Raj Kumar Kothari dated 02.03.2016, Subhash Kumar Banka (date of recording his statementnot mentioned in the assessment order) etc. In page 9 of the assessment order, the Assessing Officer has relied on statement recorded of Arun Nangalia dated 15.03.2022, wherein he allegedly confirmed that M/s Dailmer Industries Pvt Ltd. had received accomodation entries from the said M/s Vikas Developers & Promoters Pvt Ltd. ('VDPPL') and Leoline Suppliers Pvt Ltd. ('LSPL'). In this connection, the appellant submitted that the said VDPPL and LSPL are not the loan parties of the appellant in the instant case. Thus, statem....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... can be given to these statements. 5.9 In the concluding para of the assessment order, the Assessing Officer has finally come to conclusion that the assessee company has failed to prove the creditworthiness of the loan creditors, though the Assessing Officer is satisfied with respect to identity of loan creditors. The Assessing Officer has also raised doubt on the genuineness of the transactions. Detailed discussions has been made with respect to each loan creditors in the assessment order and/or submissions filed by the appellant at the assessment hearing stage. 5.10 Regarding loan taken from Indian Infotech and Software Ltd ('IISL'), I find from the records that during the instant year the assessee company has taken unsecured loan of Rs. 6,50,00,000/- from IISL. Interest on such loan was Rs. 15,55,892/-(subject to TDS of Rs. 1,16,694/-). The said loan was outstanding as at 31.03.2021 is Rs.6,50,00,000/-. The said loan was repaid in FY 2022-23 It is seen that Indian Infotech And Software Limited is an Non-Banking Financial Company (Registration No. B-13.00221) registered with Reserve Bank of India and is engaged in the business of financing & investment a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....olation after ignoring the debit entries despite the debit entries were carried out in the later years. The relevant portion of the impugned judgements are reproduced here as under: The Hon'ble ITAT Kolkata in Poddar Realtors Vs ITO, (ITA 265/Kol/2023 dated 22.06.2023) in the context of loans which have been repaid, it has been inter-alia held as follows: "We have heard both the parties and perused the material placed before us and carefully gone through the decisions relied upon by the assessee. The assessee has primarily challenged the addition of Rs.25,00,000/- made by the AO u/s. 68 of the Act in relation to the unsecured loan of Rs.25,00,000/- received by the assessee from M/s Evermore Sales Pvt Ltd. It is noticed that the assessee had filed all documentary evidences which it was required to maintain in the ordinary course to substantiate the identity and creditworthiness of the lender and genuineness of the transaction. On perusal of the records it is noted that the assessee had received the loan on several dates from M/s Evermore Sales Pvt Ltd holding PAN AACCE8179M, aggregating to Rs.25,00,000/- through proper banking channel and that there was no cash....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....T and it was held that "Once repayment of the loan has been established based on the documentary evidence, the credit entries cannot be looked into isolation after ignoring the debit entries despite the debit entries were carried out in the later years. Thus, in the given facts and circumstances, were hold that there is no infirmity in the order of the Ld. CIT-A." In this scenario, when the appellant has discharged its onus on ingredients of section 68 of the Act, the action of the AO in considering the loan received by the appellant company of Rs. 11,50,00,000/- as unexplained cash credit u/s 68 is not sustainable and stands deleted. In view of the same, Ground No. 2 and 3 are allowed. Since I am holding the view that additions with respect to loan taken from the above parties is not tenable in the eyes of laws as per discussions made in above paras, the question of disallowance of interest does not arise. In view of the same, Ground No. 5 is allowed. ZOMERARTMENT the same. Since I am holding the view that additions with respect to loan taken from the above parties is not tenable in the eyes of laws as per discussions made in above paras, the question of....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....eepak Goel 10.05.2022 and the ld. AO relied on the statement of Arun Nagalia wherein he alleged that the assessee had received an accommodation entry from M/s Vikas Developers & Promoters Pvt. Ltd., whereas we note that the said parties are not the lenders in the assessee company and therefore, the statement of Shri Arun Nagalia is irrelevant so far as the assessee's case is concerned. So far as the statement of Anuj Bukrediwala dated 16.05.2016, is concerned, the ld. CIT (A) noted that the statement was recoded six years before the date of the search on the Goel Group and the parties mentioned in the statement of the said person namely Rareview Commercial Pvt. Ltd and Rudramala Vyapaar Pvt. ltd. were not the lender parties, who lent money to the assessee. Similarly, the statement of Jivendra Mishra dated 28.09.2014, which mentioned Badal comotrade Pvt. ltd. and Contship Commodities Pvt. ltd. being shell companies but the fact of the matter is that these were not the loan parties who lent money to the assessee. Therefore, the statement of Shri Jivendra Mishra is not relevant. Similarly, the ld. AO refrered to the statement of Raj Kumar Kothari dated 02.03.2016, who referred two com....