TMI Blog2012 (4) TMI 725X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by the Assessing Officer for the respondent-assessee was not able to file confirmation of the aforesaid alleged unsecured loan from Pankaj Aggarwal, a shareholder. She relies upon the order passed by the CIT(Appeals), who had confirmed the said addition. 3. The Tribunal by the impugned order has deleted addition of ₹ 98.50 lacs for the reasons which have been set out and stated below in paragraph 9 of this order. The Tribunal has sustained addition to the extent of ₹ 22.70 lacs. We clarify that we are not examining the question whether this addition of ₹ 22.70 lacs is justified or not. 4. The assessment order is devoid of details. It merely records that the assessee had not filed confirmation from Pankaj Aggarwal and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... have enough money therefore Srilankan company will offer a loan to Shri Pankaj Aggarwal who will in turn invest in the company as his share which will be refunded/ adjusted over a period of time. Hence Srilankan company paid about 1.41 crores to Shri Pankaj Aggarwal and his associate concern M/s. Lotus Foodstuff (P) Ltd. as remuneration/ loan to Shri Pankaj Aggarwal which he invested in the company. Therefore, the source of the amount of investment of Shri Pankaj Aggarwal gets established. It was further submitted by the assessee that subsequently Shri Pankaj Aggarwal had carried the matter before the Company Law Board and the appellant company compromised the matter with Shri Pankaj Aggarwal. As a result of settlement, an amount of ₹ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t-assessee. Initially, Pankaj Aggarwal was working with the respondent-assessee and was 20% stake holder in the joint venture assessee company, between Ceylon Biscuits Ltd., Sri Lanka and Pankaj Aggarwal. Pankaj Aggarwal had paid ₹ 1.21 crores to the respondent company pursuant to mutual understanding. Later on disputes arose between Pankaj Aggarwal and Ceylon Biscuits Ltd., Sri Lanka and there was a compromise pursuant to which shareholding of Pankaj Aggarwal was purchased by Ceylon Biscuits Ltd., Sri Lanka and payment of ₹ 1,49,80,000/- was made by them to Pankaj Aggarwal. The compromise application and order passed by the CLB are not disputed. 8. With the aforesaid evidence we fail to understand how and on what basis it ca ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion of the Revenue that Pankaj Aggarwal is the Hawala entry operator or accommodation entry provider. It is also apparent from the bank account statement of Pankaj Aggarwal that various amounts were deposited and withdrawn from his bank account. Payments were made to the respondent assesse from the bank accounts. No enquiry has been made by the Revenue to find out the source of the said amounts. Pankaj Aggarwal has not been examined by Revenue. His income tax returns have not been examined and referred to. The respondent has pointed out and given details of payment made by them to Pankaj Aggarwal when they entered into the joint venture. These payments have not been denied. The respondent assessee cannot be held responsible and liable fo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
