Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + HC Income Tax - 2019 (12) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (12) TMI 92 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURTAdditions u/s 68 - Unsecured loans from non genuine companies - upon physical verification, companies were not found at the given address - HELD THAT:- In the present case, the appellant-assessee had explained in assessment proceedings that he had taken loan of Rupees Two Crores from TTPL and a loan of Rupees One Crore from POCPL. As during the course of assessment proceedings, it transpired that the said companies were not genuine. The Inspector, Income Tax, had made verification with regard to genuineness of creditor companies. As per the report of the Inspector, reproduced in the order dated 20.11.2017 passed by the CIT (A), Ajmer, it was found that address of both the companies was same. When the Inspector went to the disclosed addresses of the companies, it was found that the premises was a seven storied old building having many offices and residential flats. The creditor companies were not found at the disclosed addresses. No signboards or letter-boxes in the names of creditor companies were found at the given address. The room was found locked. Inspector had met various persons in the vicinity and no person could state the existence and business activities of both the companies. During the course of arguments, learned counsel for the appellant had stressed that the creditor companies were also being assessed under the Income Tax Act. The documents shown by the learned counsel for the appellant with regard to Income Tax Returns of the creditor companies, filed for the assessment year 2012-13, reveal that addresses of the companies are the same on which verification had been done by the Inspector, Income Tax. Thus, it is evident that the AO had conducted inquiry with regard to assessment proceedings and on inquiry, it transpired that the creditor companies were not genuine. Hence, the burden shifted on the assessee to controvert the material brought on record by the AO. It has been noticed by the Tribunal that the assessee had failed to produce any contrary material to controvert the evidence brought on record by the Assessment Officer. The Tribunal, after elaborately considering the material on record, has rightly dismissed the appeal filed by the appellant-assessee. The judgments relied upon by the learned counsel for the appellant-assessee fail to advance the case of the appellant-assessee as they are not applicable to the facts of the present case.
|