Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2018 (11) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (11) TMI 1110 - ITAT AHMEDABADAddition as unexplained credit - identity, creditworthiness and genuineness of transactions - Held that:- AO should have compared the capital account of the Jay Jewellers, with the account of Jay jewellers in the hands of the assessee, it’s proprietor. We have compared these two accounts and these two accounts are actually mirror images of each other. As rightly accepted by the AO in the remand proceedings, the capital introduction of ₹ 1,85,65,955/- stands explained in the books of Jay Jewellers. CIT(A) has, however, given it a different twist. He has noted that the assessee has, in his personal books of accounts, accepted unsecured loans of ₹ 8,52,58,022/-, including an amount of ₹ 7,91,19,400/- from Harshad Jewellers, and “the assessee was required to have established their identity, creditworthiness and genuineness of transactions in respect of loans taken in the personal account.” That, however, was not the case of the AO nor any requisition in respect of the same was made at the assessment or appellate stage. The addition u/s 68, in such a case, should have been made for ₹ 8,52,58,022/-, and not ₹ 1,85,65,955/- - as is the situation in the present case. What is before us is the addition of ₹ 1,85,65,955/- and that credit is reasonably explained and even admitted to be so by the AO. CIT(A) has mentioned about the need of verification about the creditors of ₹ 8,52,58,022/- but made no additions in respect of the same. It cannot be open to us to enlarge the scope of proceedings at this stage, or deal with an aspect in respect of which no additions are made. So far as the addition impugned in this appeal is concerned, and that is what we are concerned with, it is explained and we delete the related additions of ₹ 1,85,65,955/-. - Decided in favour of assessee.
|