Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2017 (12) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2017 (12) TMI 1253 - AT - Income TaxUnsecured loans unexplained - amount taken from Ghisubhai Jain and Vishal Jain HUF - Held that:- Identity of these parties who were basically investors / customers of the project undertaken by the assessee are clearly proved and also genuineness of the total investment of ₹ 39 lakhs in the project of the assessee firm was proved. Under these circumstances, considering the totality of facts and circumstances of the case, we do not find any merit in the addition of ₹ 39,00,000/- so made with respect to the amount taken from Ghisubhai Jain and Vishal Jain HUF. In respect of loan payment from Pradeep Dharmesh Poddar, the assessee has filed confirmation dated 16/12/2010 and 09/08/2011. The full particulars and PAN Number of the loan creditor was also filed. Assessee has repaid loan of ₹ 7,00,000/- on 26/09/2009 and ₹ 8.81 Lakhs on 31/03/2010. We have considered rival contentions and found from record that in respect of Pradeep Dharmesh Poddar, the assessee has discharged its initial burden and also after filing confirmation has repaid the entire amount of loans on the dates discussed above, we accordingly do not find any merit for the addition of ₹ 15,81,000/- made in respect of Pradeep Dharmesh Poddar. Similarly , in respect of loan of ₹ 4,00,000/- taken from Shah Dhirajlal Harilal HUF and ₹ 1,50,000/- from Shah Dhirajlal Harilal HUF, the assessee has discharged its primary onus, accordingly, no addition is warranted. AO is directed to delete the addition in respect of above loan creditors. In respect of loan taken from Lala Ji, we found that assessee has not discharged its primary onus of proving the identity and genuineness of loan transaction. Accordingly, we confirm the same. - Decided partly in favour of assessee. Disallowance of brokerage paid to Mr.Jayesh Bhanshli - Held that:- We found that the Ld. Assessing Officer merely relying upon the statement of Mr.Vijay Bhanushali, brother of Mr. Jayesh Bhanushali, in which he has stated that Mr. Jayesh Bhanushali has not rendered any services to M/s. Tirupati Construction had disallowed the same. However, Mr. Vijay Bhanushali does not have any rights or locus-standi to comment on the transactions of the assessee with the third parties and also, the same is not reliable. No merit for the disallowance of commission paid to Mr. Vijay Bhanushali on which TDS has also been deducted by the assessee at source. We direct accordingly.
|