9911796707
Advanced Search 
TMI Blog2013 (12) TMI 1053X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cts of the issue are that the assessee is engaged in the business of disposal of liquidated industrial undertakings. The Assessing Officer while completing assessment under section 143(3) of the Act noticed that the assessee has received unsecured loans from the following parties : S. No. Name Amount (Rs.) Remarks 1. Padmavathi 12,00,000 Loan 2. K. Venubabu 8,00,000 Advance 3. J. S. Chowdary 4,00,000 Advance 4. P. Sailaja 1,61,335 Advance 5. P. Sailal 6.38,665 Advance 6. P. Sridevi 8,00,000 Advance 7. Venkateswar Rao 16,00,000 Advance 8. New Smile 8,00,000 Advance Total 64,00,000 4. As the assessee failed to establish the identity, creditworthiness and ge ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ioner of Income-tax (Appeals) observed that as the assessee furnished details of all the eight parties along with cheque/ demand drafts details and also bank account in respect of four parties and also explained circumstances under which the cash credits were received, the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) deleted the addition. Against the deletion of addition, the Revenue is in appeal before us. 6. The learned Departmental representative submitted that the assessee has not discharged the burden cast upon it with regard to identity and capacity of the parties and genuineness of the transactions. He submitted that bank statement for the complete year of those parties was not given. She also submitted that in those creditors' accounts che ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of all the parties before the lower authorities and also bank accounts of four of them and established authenticity of the transactions. According to the authorised representative the assessee discharged the initial burden cast upon it and to prove it otherwise, the Assessing Officer shall bring the facts to show that the entries are bogus or accommodation entries. Further, he relied on the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Bharat Engineering and Construction Co. [1972] 83 ITR 187 (SC) for the proposition that the assessee cannot derive huge profit within a few days of commencement of business and it is reasonable to presume that the cash entries are capital receipts and cannot be considered as unexplained cash credits und ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... us year, (ii) the assessee offers no explanation about the nature of source of that sum, and (iii) the explanation is not, in the opinion of the Assessing Officer, satisfactory ; where the sum credited may be in the assessee's name or in the name of a third party, the assessee is liable to place necessary evidence in support of the claim to facilitate the Assessing Officer to cause the necessary enquiry. The Assessing Officer has every power to enquire into all the relevant facts brought on record by the assessee. 10. In the present case the assessee has taken a plea that the assessee has furnished requisite details to the Assessing Officer. But the facts brought on record by the Assessing Officer which is evidenced by the remand report da ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the burden on the assessee to establish the identity of the creditors, capacity of the creditors to advance money and genuineness of the transaction. Once the assessee discharged the burden then the burden will shift to the Department. It is not correct to state that the Assessing Officer is not entitled to reject the explanation of the assessee, if in his opinion the evidence produced by the assessee is not enough to believe that the transaction is genuine. It is incumbent upon the assessee to prove that the credit entry in its books of account does not represent any income and that the party in whose name the amount is credited is not fictitious party but real, and the assessee is also required to prove that the entry made in the books of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ity of the creditors to advance money and genuineness of the transaction is not acceptable. We are of the opinion that the assessee is expected to establish proof of identity of the creditors, capacity of the creditors and genuineness of the transactions in order to discharge the onus cast on the assessee. By merely filing bank account details of the alleged creditors, it is not enough to hold that the assessee has satisfied the above ingredients of section 68 of the Act. 13. Our view is fortified by the judgment of the jurisdictional High Court in the case of R. B. Mittal v. CIT [2000] 246 ITR 283 (AP) wherein similar view has been taken. In view of the above discussion, we are inclined to reverse the order of the Commissioner of Income-t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
