TMI Blog2011 (8) TMI 1271X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... A) has erred in deleting the addition of ₹ 12 lacs made by the AO under s. 69A of the IT Act, whereas in the cross-objection assessee is impugning reopening of assessment under s. 147 by issuance of notice under s. 148 of the IT Act. 3. First we take the appeal of the Revenue. The brief facts of the case are that assessee is a company engaged in the business of development of real estate. It has filed its return of income on 29th Nov., 2000 declaring total loss at ₹ 2,06,970. It emerges out from the record that search and seizure operation was carried out at the premises of Shri Gajendra Porwal and his group concern on 11th March, 2005. During the course of search, it was found that Shri Gajendra Porwal Group was engaged in p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ained investment of the assessee which deserves to be assessed under s. 69A of the IT Act. The assessee contended before the AO that it had repaid the loan taken in earlier years. No fresh loan was taken by the assessee during this assessment year, and therefore, there cannot be any addition in the hands of the assessee under s. 69A of the IT Act. The AO to some extent agreed with the contention of the assessee, but observed that it is a special case, therefore, the submission made according to the position of law is not acceptable. It is imperative upon us to take note of these observations made by the AO in para No. 12 which read as under : I have considered the facts of the case and the submissions of the assessee. The main emphasis ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... see from M/s JTFSPL during the accounting period relevant to this assessment year. It is the assessee who made payment by way of cheque against the old dues, any payment made against the old dues cannot be said to be unexplained investment in the hands of the assessee. It could not be taxed, as per the understanding of the AO. The assessee further contended that it has made payment through account payee cheque. It had already shown those loans in the books of account. Their genuineness was not doubted by the AO in the year in which such loan was received by the assessee. Shri Kothari learned counsel of the assessee took us through s. 69A of the Act in order to apprise what can be added under this section. 6. We have duly considered the r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y etc. which is not recorded in the books of accounts. In the present case, no such circumstance has been pointed out by the AO. The loan taken by the assessee from M/s JTFSPL and Gajendra Porwal was duly reflected in the books of account maintained by it. Its genuineness was not doubted by the AO. In this year assessee has just repaid the old existing credit balance. Their repayment would not come within the ambit of s. 69 or s. 69A of the IT Act. The repayment has also been disclosed in the books. The source of repayment is not in doubt. The AO himself has observed that in normal circumstance the submissions of the assessee would have been accepted. To our mind, the assessee can be put to the tax liability only if by his conduct he has co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
