TMI Blog2018 (8) TMI 1484X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... MBER AND PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessee by : Shri D.K.Sheth, AR Revenue by : Shri Suvendu Datta, DR O R D E R Per N.S.Saini, AM This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the CIT(A)- Cuttack, dated 25.10.2017 for the assessment year 2012-2013. 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: 1. For that under the facts and circumstances of the ca assessment as made is unjustified and unlawful . 2. For that the learned AO is wholly unjustified to make an additi of ₹ 1,82,00,000/- (wrongly typed 1,80,00,000/-) merely on suspicion and surmises . 3. For that the loan creditor, a register Private Limited Company, being genuine and identifiable person should not have been treated as unreal and un-genuine or in other words the transaction being a loan transaction should not have been disbelieved . 4. For that the learned AO eared in arriving at a conclusion that the loan transaction was in fact not Real Loan but a Gift . 5.For that in any view of the case the addition of ₹ 1,82,000/- (wrongly typed ₹ 1,80,00,000/-)under head Income from other Sources as made is arbitrary and unj ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... istence. He submitted that the submission of the reply by the said loan creditor to the notice issued by the Assessing Officer was not within the realm of his control and for this no adverse inference could be drawn against the assessee. It was further submitted that from the bank statement of the said loan creditor, it will be seen that there is no deposit of cash before issuance of cheque for advancement of loan to the assessee. Thus, the voluminous evidences produced by the assessee goes to show that the loan taken by the assessee from M/s. Pyramid Suppliers (P) Ltd., is genuine and the identity is proved from the PAN No. and the creditworthiness of the said loan creditor is proved from his bank statement from where the cheques have been issued to the assessee for advancement of the said loan. In view of these voluminous documents produced by the assessee, which are not disputed by the revenue by bringing any cogent and relevant material on record, it cannot be said that the loan taken by the assessee is not genuine. It was submitted that in the statement given by Shri Raj Kumar Tharad to the Investigation Wing, neither the name of the loan creditor nor the name of the assessee ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... creditor, genuineness of the loan transaction and creditworthiness of the loan creditor were discharged by submitting the above documents. He pointed out that PAN was allotted by the Income tax Department to the said loan creditor. Thus, the identity of the said loan creditor is not in doubt. Further, confirmation from the said loan creditor as well as copy of the bank statement where from loan was advanced by the said loan creditor establishes the genuineness of the loan transaction. Further, no cash was deposited in the bank account of the loan creditor before advancing the loan to the assessee. The availability of fund in the bank account of the loan creditor and the reflection of the said loan amount in the audited balance sheet of the said loan creditor shows the creditworthiness of the loan creditor. He submitted that merely because no reply was given by the loan creditor to the notice issued u/s.133(6) of the Act by the Assessing Officer to the said loan creditor cannot be taken as a reason to draw adverse inference against the assessee. On the other hand, non-return of the notice issued u/s.133(6) shows that the said notice was duly served upon the loan creditor. It was not ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ledge of the Revenue that the said creditors were income-tax assessees. Their index numbers were in the file of the Revenue. The Revenue, apart from issuing notices under section 131 at the instance of the assessee, did not pursue the matter further. The Revenue did not examine the source of income of the said alleged creditors to find out whether they were creditworthy or were such who could advance the alleged loans. There was no effort made to pursue the so-called alleged creditors. In those circumstances, the assessee could not do anything further. In the premises, if the Tribunal came to the conclusion that the assessee has discharged the burden that lay on him, then it could not be said that such a conclusion was unreasonable or perverse or based on no evidence. If the conclusion is based on some evidence on which a conclusion could be arrived at, no question of law as such arises. 14. In respect of the statement of Shri Raj Kumar Tharad, assessee filed a copy of the same before us and pointed out that nowhere therein neither the name of the loan creditor from M/s. Pyramid Suppliers (P) Ltd., nor the name of the assessee is appearing. Thus, we find force in the submission ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
