9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (12) TMI 1541X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n deleting the addition made on account of unexplained cash credits under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act of Rs. 33,35,011/-? (b) Whether in facts and in law the tribunal was justified in confirming the action of CIT(A) in deleting the addition made on account of interest expenses of Rs. 3,10,478/-?" 2. The assessee filed the return of income for the year under consideration declaring the total income of 'NIL'. In the return of income filed by the assessee-Company, it disclosed the receipt of new unsecured loans with respect to 17 lenders. The assessee-Company was asked to furnish the confirmation letter, copy of acknowledgment of lenders, their balance sheet and bank statement for the year under consideration vide notice under ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ted to make the addition of Rs. 33,55,011/- under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act with respect to 17 lenders. However, it has been found that with respect to most of the lenders, except two, necessary documents, inclusive of confirmation with name, address and PAN Numbers, copy of the IT return and acknowledgment, balance sheet and profit and loss account and computation of total income in respect of all the parties, except two parties, were furnished before the Assessing Officer. Even with respect to the remaining two depositors the assessee filed the confirmation, address and PAN Numbers. Under the circumstances, when it was found that the assessee already discharged the initial onus cast upon him with respect to all the creditors and ac ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ficer to examine and bring any material on record which may help in rebutting the onus of assessee. The Assessing Officer has not brought any material on record in its support CIT(A) while deleting the addition has also relied on the decision of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Dy. CIT v. Rohini Builders [2002] 256 ITR 360 and the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court, in the case of Orissa Corpn. Ltd. 153 ITR 78. Before us, nothing has been brought on record by the revenue to controvert the findings of CIT(A). Revenue has relied on the decision of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of N.R. Portfolio (supra). We however find that the ratio of the aforesaid Delhi High Court decision are distinguishable on facts and the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
