Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2022 (3) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2022 (3) TMI 774 - ITAT AHMEDABADUnexplained cash credit u/s 68 - onus to prove - HELD THAT:- The primary onus that lay on the assessee to establish the identity and capacity of the concerned loan creditors as well as the genuineness of the relevant loan transactions was duly discharged by the assessee and in the absence of any evidence brought on record by the AO to prove to the contrary, the unsecured loans cannot be treated as unexplained cash credits under Section 68 of the Act and the addition made by the AO on this issue was unsustainable. In our opinion, the Assessing Officer was not justified to require the assessee to establish the source of source while examining the relevant cash credits representing the unsecured loans and the addition made by the Assessing Officer under Section 68 of the Act by treating the unsecured loan of ₹ 32,00,000/- as unexplained cash credits was rightly deleted by the learned CIT(A). In that view of the matter, we uphold the impugned order of learned CIT(A) giving relief to the assessee on this issue and dismiss Ground No.1 of the Revenue’s appeal. Addition treating the capital introduced by the partners of the assessee-firm as unexplained cash credits under Section 68 - HELD THAT:- Respectfully following this decision of Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of PCIT Vs. Vaishnodevi Refoils & Solvex [2018 (1) TMI 861 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT] we uphold the impugned order of the learned CIT(A) deleting the addition made by the Assessing Officer by treating the capital introduced by the partners of the assessee-firm as unexplained cash credits under Section 68 of the Act. Ground No.2 of the Revenue’s appeal is accordingly dismissed. Disallowance under Section 40A(3) - assessee has made certain payments exceeding ₹ 20,000/-, in a single entry in cash , on account of purchase of diesel - HELD THAT:- Nothing on record to establish that the payments in question against the purchase of diesel were made by the assessee in cash to the suppliers who ordinarily was carrying on his business in such village or town which on the date of payment was not served by any bank. As a matter of fact, all these payments aggregating to ₹ 4,72,176/- were made by the assessee against the purchase of diesel regularly made throughout the year, apparently from one party, and there is nothing on record to show that the said party always refused to accept the payment by crossed-cheque or crossed draft or that the said party was carrying on the business of sale of diesel in a village or town which was not served by the bank. We, therefore, set aside the impugned order of the learned CIT(A) giving relief to the assessee on this issue and restore the disallowance made by the Assessing Officer under Section 40A(3) of the Act. Ground No.3 of the Revenue’s appeal is accordingly allowed.
|