Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2019 (3) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (3) TMI 1733 - AT - Income TaxUnaccounted sales - Addition on the basis of contents of the documents impounded during the course of survey - HELD THAT:- Since the premises where the loose sheets were impounded belong to M/s Intime Promoters Pvt Ltd, the CIT(A) has rightly considered the same in the hands of the right person. Therefore, there is no occasion to make addition in the hands of M/s Taneja Developers & Infrastructure Ltd. In the hands of M/s Intime Promoters Pvt Ltd., the Assessing Officer himself has verified the entries in the books of account and since the entries were found recorded in the regular books of account there is no reason why the addition could be made. The addition has been rightly deleted by the CIT(A) and, therefore, no interference is called for. Accordingly, the common grievance raised in both the appeals is dismissed. Unexplained credits u/s 68 - investigation made in respect of accommodation entry provider and oaon receiving no plausible reply AO made the addition - HELD THAT:- No doubt, the initial onus is upon the assessee to explain the credit transaction in its books of account in the light of provisions of section 68 of the Act. However, this burden of proof is not permanent but keeps oscillating, meaning thereby, that once the initial burden has been discharged by the assessee, the burden shifts upon the revenue to make further enquiry. The letter written by the CIT(A) to the Assessing Officer, which is exhibited elsewhere, clearly shows that the CIT(A) has directed the Assessing Officer to make necessary enquiry from the two creditors. The remand report of the Assessing Officer clearly reveals that he did make enquiry from M/s Rangoli Buildtech Pvt Ltd and came to the conclusion that M/s Rangoli Buildtech vpt Ltd is, in fact, a debtor of the assessee and not a creditor. In so far as M/s Epic Developers Pvt Ltd is concerned, the bank statements clearly show that there was no cash found to be deposited before issuing cheque to the assessee company. Moreover, the balance sheet of M/s Epic Developers Pvt Ltd clearly shows that they have received ₹ 17.35 crores from Benda Amtek Ltd and Amtek Auto Ltd and from this, ₹ 17.35 crores, have lended ₹ 14.50 crores to the assessee. If the CIT(A) has exercised his power vested upon him by provisions of section 250(4) of the Act, the same cannot be faulted with. The CIT(A) has gone one step further in examining the availability of funds with M/s Epic Developers Pvt Ltd and subsequently found that M/s Epic Developers Pvt Ltd had sufficient available funds to lend money to the assessee. No adverse inference can be drawn from such findings of the CIT(A). The contention of the ld. DR that the first appellate authority has admitted some additional evidences is without any basis. Assessee has successfully explained the transaction with M/s Epic Developers Pvt Ltd and in so far as M/s Rangoli Buildtech Pvt. Ltd is concerned, it being a debtor of the assessee, section 68 of the Act is clearly not applicable. We, therefore, do not find any merit in the grievance of the revenue. The findings of the CIT(A) are upheld. This ground of the revenue is dismissed.
|