Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2023 (9) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2023 (9) TMI 946 - ITAT AHMEDABADNon-genuine unsecured loan u/s. 68 - assessee submitted that the assessee’s husband expired and business was carried out by the assessee with the help of family members - brother of assessee’s late husband arranged for the aforesaid unsecured loan in question and the loan was accepted by cheque and was repaid during the year itself from the account of brother of assessee’s late husband and since the funds were arranged through a broker, there was no direct contact with the lender and hence, confirmation could not be placed on record - HELD THAT:- As assessee had furnished details regarding the lender Shri Hariom Enterprise viz. postal address, PAN number, ledger account, ledger of lender in the books of AG Brothers (proprietary concern of brother of assessee’s late husband), bank statement of AG Brothers etc. and therefore, in our view, the assessee had discharged the initial onus which was cast upon the assessee under Section 68 of the Act. As observed in the preceding part of the judgement, when part of the loans taken from the same lender Shri Hariom Enterprise has been accepted by the Assessing Officer as genuine, then it is not understandable as to why the balance loan taken from the same lender should be treated as non-genuine on the ground that no “confirmation” from the said the lender has been filed. It has also been accepted that part of the loan has been repaid back to the aforesaid lender as well in the very same year. Accordingly, looking into the facts of the instant case, we are of the considered view that Ld. CIT(Appeals) has erred in facts and in law in confirming the addition made by the AO u/s 68 - Appeal of the assessee is allowed.
|