TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (9) TMI 588
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... dispute are involved in these appeals, they were heard together and disposed of by way of this consolidated order for sake of convenience. 2. At the outset, despite notifying, neither anyone attended on behalf of the assessee nor was any application for adjournment filed on behalf of the assessee. Therefore, we were of the opinion that the assessee was not interested in prosecuting the appeal; hence, the appeals were heard ex-parte qua the assessee after hearing the arguments of the learned Departmental Representative. 3. Firstly, we take up the appeal of the assessee for Y 2012-13 for adjudication, finding of which shall be followed mutasis mutandis in other assessment year. The grounds raised by the assessee for AY 2012-13 are repr....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ll the documentary evidences to prove the same. 4. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Learned CIT (A) erred in passing non-speaking and cryptic order without considering or adjudicating the specific contentions and grounds. factual matrix and without appreciating various evidences furnished by the Appellant thereby violating the principles of natural justice. 5. That the Learned CIT (A) erred in not considering the contention of the Appellant that the loan has been taken and have been repaid through the banking channel and the interest has also been paid after deduction of TDS and also issued TDS Certificate, thereby the Appellant proved genuineness of the loan. 6. The Id. CIT(A) faile....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s and holding that the Appellant has failed to place on record any material to demonstrate that the losses claimed were determined in accordance with law. 10. The Id. CIT(A) failed to consider the judicial precedents relied upon by the Appellant in support of its case thereby rendering the impugned order sustainable in law." 4. The Assessing Officer noted that, pursuant to information received from the Investigation Wing, the lender, M/s Bright Diamonds Pvt. Ltd., was stated to be one of the entities allegedly involved in providing accommodation entries. The assessee had shown receipt of an unsecured loan of Rs.1,00,00,000/- from the said entity during the relevant previous year. During the reassessment proceedings, the assessee....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ce the lender for examination. According to the learned CIT(A), the material placed on record did not satisfactorily establish the creditworthiness of the lender or the genuineness of the loan transaction. 5.2 The learned CIT(A) further held that, in the facts of the case, mere confirmation, PAN particulars and routing of funds through banking channels were not sufficient to discharge the onus under section 68. He accordingly confirmed the addition of Rs.1,00,00,000/- under section 68 and the consequential disallowance of interest of Rs.28,356/-. 5.3 As regards the additional claim of current-year and brought-forward business losses, the learned CIT(A) observed that the same had neither formed part of the reasons recorded for reopenin....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....scapement of income arising from the unsecured loan of Rs.1,00,00,000/-. At the stage of recording reasons, the Assessing Officer was required to form a prima facie belief on the basis of the material available with him and was not required to conclusively establish the escapement of income. The reasons recorded, as emerging from the material before us, disclose a live nexus between the information received and the formation of belief that income chargeable to tax had escaped assessment. We, therefore, find no infirmity in the assumption of jurisdiction under section 147 of the Act. The grounds challenging the validity of the reassessment are accordingly dismissed. 6.3 Coming to the merits, the assessee claimed to have received an unsecu....