Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2019 (4) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (4) TMI 1376 - AT - Income TaxAddition made u/s 68 - as alleged parties are mere accommodation entry providers who provide accommodation entry in the form of unsecured loans as per the requirements of the beneficiary - CIT-A deleted the addition - HELD THAT:- CIT(A) after appreciating the facts had rightly relied upon the judgment in the case of Lovely Exports Pyt Ltd. [2008 (1) TMI 575 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] , wherein it was held that the AO is at liberty to bring to tax the amounts in their respective hands of the investors if their identity, genuineness and creditworthiness is not proved. AO should have made efforts to assess the amounts in the hands of the investors at least on protective basis. Even in case, the creditworthiness of the investors is not proved it will not automatically give license to the assessing authority to make additions in the hands of the recipient u/s 68 unless it is proved that it is the unexplained and unaccounted money of the appellant which has been introduced in its books of account in the name of bogus/non-existent entities. Since the AO had not observed the principles laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court, thus Ld. CIT(A) had rightly deleted the additions, more particularly after appreciating the facts that the assessee had filed all the details and supporting documentary evidences to prove the identity, genuineness and creditworthiness of the lenders. We also cannot lost sight of the fact that amount was paid by the investors from their running bank accounts which were also duly accounted in the books of the assessee as well as investors as is evident from the audited financial statements coupled with confirmation of the creditors. - Decided against revenue Addition made on account of ‘deemed rent’ - CIT-A deleted the addition - as per AO said premises were vacant during whole of the year and not let out at all during the year, hence the provisions Section 23(1)(c) would not apply and therefore assessee is not eligible for any deduction on account of vacancy and annual value of all the vacant property should be taken in terms of section 23(1)(a) - HELD THAT:- AO made additions u/s 23 of the Act on account of deemed rent in respect of the properties of the assessee lying vacant. Whereas assessee had categorically stated that he had all the intention to let out these premises but for want of suitable tenants, despite best efforts put in by the Estate Agents, whose services had been engaged, he could not find suitable tenants during the previous year under consideration and the said premises remained vacant for the whole of the year. Since the said properties remained vacant for whole of the relevant financial year, therefore Ld. CIT(A) taken into consideration the CBDT Circular No. 14/2001, wherein it was stated that "where the property or any part of the property is let and was vacant during the whole or part of the previous year and owing to such vacancy, the actual rent received or receivable is less than ALV, the sum so received or receivable during the year is less than the sum received or receivable during year shall be annual value, then no deemed rent could be assessed. CIT(A) also noted that the AO had not considered the admissible deduction towards Municipal taxes and society maintenance charges. See DR. PRABHA SANGHI [2013 (1) TMI 18 - ITAT DELHI]., SMT. POONAM SAWHNEY VERSUS ASSESSING OFFICER, WARD 31(2), NEW DELHI [2007 (10) TMI 445 - ITAT DELHI] - Decided against revenue.
|