TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (9) TMI 120
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... dispute in the present appeal is confined to addition of Rs. 5,67,82,752/- under section 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short, 'the Act'). 3. Briefly the facts are, the assessee is a resident individual. For the assessment year under dispute, assessee filed his return of income declaring income of Rs. 1,36,59,470/-. The return of income so filed was selected for scrutiny for the following reasons: i. Large addition made in earlier years. ii. High liabilities as compared to low income/receipts. 4. In course of assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer noted that in the year under consideration, the assessee had availed the following unsecured loan: i. Balu Forge Private Limited Rs. 9,50,000/-. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....authority, insofar as unsecured loan availed from Nitan Chhatwal, observed that in response to the notice under section 133(6) of the Act, the said lender had not only confirmed the loan transaction but furnished all requisite documentary evidence to establish his creditworthiness. Thus, based on the supporting evidence, the first appellate authority concluded that the creditworthiness of the lender stands established, there cannot be any question regarding the genuineness of the transaction. Accordingly, he deleted the addition of Rs. 6,70,00,000/-. 8. Insofar as unsecured loan of Rs. 5,67,82,752/- from Hotel Imperial Palace, the first appellate authority found deficiencies in the documentary evidence furnished by the assessee. Thus, he....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....l Imperial Palace a partnership firm, wherein the assessee is a partner. On perusal of confirmation of accounts issued by the partnership firm, it is to be noted that as on 31st March, 2023, there was negative capital balance of Rs. 68,73,77,410/- in assessee's capital account in the books of Hotel Imperial Palace. During the current financial year, various expenses aggregating to Rs. 5,67,82,752/- has further been debited to the capital account of the assessee in the books of Hotel Imperial Palace. Thus, as is evident from the audited financial statements placed in the paper book. In course of proceedings before the Departmental Authorities, the assessee had furnished various documentary evidences relating to transactions between the asses....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....er to other related party, M/s Balu Forge Private Limited and Mr. Nitan Chhatwal. To establish such fact, even the bank statement of the partnership firm was furnished. On perusal of the bank statement of the partnership firm placed in the paper book, it is noticed that prior to each of the debit entries concerning assessee, there was sufficient balance in the bank account of the partnership firm. 13. On careful perusal of the said bank account, it cannot be said that it is assessee's money which was ploughed back through the partnership firm. Except making general observation, the first appellate authority has not recorded any reasonable basis for discrediting the evidences furnished both by assessee and the partnership firm. Since the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ansaction, but even the lender, in response to a notice issued under section 133(6) of the Act, furnished his reply not only confirming the loan transaction but furnished all supporting evidences. The Assessing Officer has treated the loan advanced by Shri Nitin Chatwal as unexplained cash credit without pointing out any deficiency in the supporting evidences. Whereas, after proper evaluation and appreciation of evidences, learned first appellate authority has recorded a categorical finding of fact that not only the assessee had furnished supporting evidence, including the income tax return, loan confirmation, the bank statements and account statements of the lender, were filed, but the documentary evidences clearly demonstrated the creditw....