Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2023 (4) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2023 (4) TMI 536 - ITAT DELHIAddition u/s 68 - unexplained loan/advances - huge increase in loan/advances from related parties - AO concluded that assessee had introduced his unaccounted money in the garb of loan from share holders and relatives of share holders and from whom the assessee can get confirmation or any other documents as per his convenience - CIT-A deleted the addition - HELD THAT:- Apparently, during the assessment proceedings or during the remand proceedings the learned AO has not made any attempt to exercise his powers of inquiry from jeweler or from other available open sources to establish any suspicion. AO has stressed on his belief that the assessee was under an obligation to explain the source and occasion of jewellery purchased and received by these nine parties. Bench is of considered opinion that learned CIT(Appeals) has taken a more prudent approach by observing that AO has not questioned the sale transactions. As such he has merely added the LTCG amount earned by respective parties on the jewellery sold. It is also coming up that these parties in fact had transactions earlier and they were old depositors of the assessee who had received further deposits during the previous year. CIT(Appeals) has also made a valid observation that there was no legal mandate for them to furnish wealth-tax returns. For the purpose of Section 68 of the Act, the assessee had brought sufficient explanation of the source of deposits. Circumstances how so ever strong, the same can never take the place of proof, upon the discharge of the burden, with what so ever probabilities. The findings of CIT(Appeals) require no interference. - Decided against revenue.
|