Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2012 (7) TMI 391

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Y 2005-06. 2. For both the assessment years the assessee has raised the following grounds: Assessment years - 2004-05 & 2005-06: 1. The learned CIT(A) has erred in confirming addition of Rs.5,16,166/- for assessment year 2004-05 and Rs.54,84,927/- for assessment year 2005-06 of unsecured loan as unexplained cash credit u/s 68 IT Act, 1961 is required to be quashed. Assessment year -2004-05 2. The learned CIT(A) has erred in upholding the action of the AO of disallowing of business expenditure of Rs.3,50,000/- which is required to be deleted. 3. The revenue has raised three identical grounds in both the appeals wherein ground No.3 is general in nature and does not survive for adjudication. The other two grounds are extracted herein bel .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... observing that the assessee has not complied with various statutory notices served during the assessment proceedings. 6. Ground No.1 of both the assessee's and revenue's appeal for the assessment year 2004-05 and 2005-06 (unexplained cash credit u/s 68 of the IT Act, 1961 Rs.5,16,166/- for assessment year 2004- 05 and Rs.54,84,927/- for assessment year 2005-06). On examining the balance sheet the learned AO noticed that the assessee had obtained unsecured loan of Rs.46,00,591/- and Rs.99,80,518/- for assessment year 2004-05 and 2005-06 respectively. The assessee did not furnish any details and confirmation letters in respect of the loan obtained. The learned AO, therefore, added these amounts as unexplained cash credit u/s 68 of the Act fo .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... nt of Rs.54,84,927/-. The balance amount pertained to the opening balance of the year and therefore, the learned CIT(A) deleted the same because it cannot be taxed for the current year under the provisions of section 68 of the Act. 8. Now, both the assessee and the revenue are in appeal before us against sustenance of addition and deletion of the addition by the learned CIT(A). 9. The learned AR submitted that the appellant had furnished the details from whom the amount was received during the relevant years and therefore, the same deserved to be deleted which amounts to Rs.5,16,166/- for assessment year 2004-05 and Rs.54,84,927/- for assessment year 2005-06. Further, the learned AR submitted that the learned CIT(A) had judiciously given .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... accounts, relevant records and categorically made a finding that the amount of Rs.41,83,925/- and Rs.46,00,591/- were the opening balances of the unsecured loans as on 01-04-2003 and 01-04-2004 respectively. Further, after verifying the books the learned CIT(A) came to the conclusion that the unexplained amounts credited during the assessment year 2004- 05 and 2005-06 was Rs.5,16,166/- and Rs.54,84,927/-. We, therefore, do not have any hesitation to confirm the order of the learned CIT(A) on this issue. It is ordered accordingly. Thus, ground No.1 of both the assessee's appeal and the revenue's appeal for the assessment year 2004-05 and 2005-06 are dismissed. 12. Ground No.2 of the assessee's appeal for assessment year 2004-05 relates to di .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... rder of the learned CIT(A) that the assessee did not furnish any details with respect to the loans received during the year including confirmation statement. On examining the books of accounts the learned CIT(A) excluded the opening balance of loans and brought to tax u/s 68 of the Act for the loan obtained during the year for want of details and confirmation. From the learned A.O's order it does not come out that the assessee had not produced the books of accounts before him. Therefore, it is very clear that the learned CIT(A) had not decided the issues before him based on evidences which were not produced before the learned AO. It could be presumed from the information available on record that the books of accounts were before both the re .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates