2021 (3) TMI 50 - AT - Income Tax

Addition u/s 68 - 'unsecured loans’ received by the assessee as ‘unexplained loans received by the assessee’ - AO took the view that the assessee has introduced its unaccounted cash through the bogus loans - HELD THAT:- As decided in own case [2018 (8) TMI 1766 - ITAT MUMBAI] and [2019 (2) TMI 835 - ITAT MUMBAI] AO had no valid basis for treating the ‘unsecured loans’ as ‘accommodation entries’. There is nothing on the record to show that the assessee admitted at any point of time to have procured accommodation entries of loans. - Decided in favour of assessee.

Disallowance of loss on of sale shares - As per AO company was not financial sound as per the valuation of the company and did not have real business activity - CIT-A deleted the addition - HELD THAT:- There is no cogent and convincing evidence on record to hold this fact that the business loss in the impugned scrip is bogus. It is also not apparent on record that the appellants name was appearing in any of the SEBI investigation in the impugned scrip. No evidence on record to which it can be assumed that the appellant had connived with any entry operator for executing the share transaction.

What adverse information was received from the wing of Calcutta/investigation wing Mumbai against the assessee is not apparent on record. The evidence adduced by the assessee was not rebutted by the AO. AO also took the contradictory stand by taxing the profit on the penny stock but disallowed the loss. No proper opportunity was given to the assessee to cross-examination of the witness as well as to rebut the other evidence on record. Taking into account of all the facts and circumstances mentioned above, we are of the view that the CIT(A) has decided the matter of controversy judiciously and correctly which is not liable to be interfere with at this appellate stage. Accordingly, this issue is decided in favour of the assessee against the revenue.