Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + HC Income Tax - 2019 (5) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (5) TMI 698 - HC - Income TaxAddition of explained cash credit u/s 68 - exemption u/s 10(23C)(iiiad) - assessee had received unsecured loan in cash from various persons - genuineness & creditworthiness of the lenders - HELD THAT:- The Tribunal while confirming the addition made on account of unsecured loan received, had noticed that the lenders of funds have not, at any stage, discharged their onus in furnishing documentary evidence in respect of cash deposits made in their accounts and against which loans were advanced to the assessee. The creditworthiness of the lenders and the genuineness of the transaction was not clear and even the lenders summoned by the Assessing Officer had not submitted their income tax returns. Therefore, the addition made by the Assessing Officer u/s 68 was rightly confirmed by the CIT(A) and did not call for any interference by the Tribunal. Since the assessee had failed to discharge its onus in respect of unsecured loan, therefore, on adding the same with its receipts from fees and interest, the gross receipts amounted to ₹ 1,40,03,382/- (₹ 67,75,000/- + ₹ 72,28,382/-) which exceeded Rs. one crore. Since, the gross annual receipts of the assessee exceeded Rs. one crore and the assessee having not taken prior approval from the Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, Panchkula, thus, the assessee was not eligible for exemption u/s 10(23C)(iiiad). Therefore, the said exemption was rightly disallowed and as a consequence the excess of income over expenditure shown at ₹ 7,89,745/- was also rightly added to the unsubstantiated unsecured loan and the taxable income of the assessee determined. The aforesaid findings of fact recorded by the authorities cannot be held to be perverse based on non-appreciation of material or based on the misreading of any evidence on record which may warrant interference by this Court. No question of law, much less, substantial question of law arises in the appeal - appeal is dismissed
|