9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (5) TMI 1370X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 1, Indore. 2. The Revenue has raised following grounds of appeal; "1. Whether in the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Ld. CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 1,70,00,000/- made by the AO u/s 68 of the IT Act. 2.Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case the Ld. CIT(A) erred in law by ignoring the fact that the cheque book was issued by the Bank in the month of Aug'2011 then how it could be possible that unsecured loan in question of Rs. 1,70,00,000/- was received through cheque dated 30.03.2011 and 31.03.2011." 3. Briefly stated facts as culled out from the records are that the assessee is a limited company engaged in manufacturing of soya refined oil, Soya Solvent oil and DOC. E-return of income ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the Act being non genuine and added it to the income of the assessee. Other minor disallowances of refinery expenses at Rs. 3,50,783/-, disallowance of repairs and maintenance and staff welfare of Rs. 5,00,000/- were also made. The income assessed at Rs. 1,66,92,000/-. 4. Aggrieved assessee preferred appeal before Ld. CIT(A) against all the additions made by the Ld. A.O. Ld. CIT(A) after examining the detailed submission filed by the assessee, documentary evidences, order of CIT(A)-II, Indore dated 31.12.2015 in the case of the alleged cash creditor Gajanand Ramlal Agrawal deleted all the additions made by the Ld. A.O. 5. Now the revenue is in appeal before the Tribunal raising two grounds but the sole grievance is against the findin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Ld. A.O about the identity, genuineness and creditworthiness of the transactions. Even the similar amount of addition made in the hands of Gajanand Ramlal Agrawal stands deleted by Ld. CIT(A)-II, Indore vide his order dated 31.12.2015 which further substantiate the contention that the alleged loan of Rs. 1.70 crores should not be treated as unexplained and Ld. CIT(A) has rightly deleted the addition. 8. We have heard rival contentions and perused the records placed before us. The sole grievance of the revenue is against the deletion and addition of Rs. 1.70 crores by Ld. CIT(A) for the addition made u/s 68 of the Act by Ld. A.O for treating the loan of Rs. 90 lakhs and Rs. 80 lakhs from Gajanand Ramlal Agrawal as unexplained cash cred ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nand Ram Lal Agrawal has also been deleted by the CIT(A)-Il, Indore vide his order in Appeal No. IT-121/14-15 dated 31/12/2015. Appellant has also explained that as a result of the above no cash was introduced and filed the bank reconciliation also. Considering all the material placed on record the addition of Rs. 17000000/- is directed to be deleted in appeal. These grounds of the appellant are therefore allowed. Rs. 17000000/- deleted". 9. On perusal of the finding of Ld. CIT(A) and the records placed before us we observe that the assessee has regular business transaction with Gajanand Ramlal Agrawal for purchase of soya bean. Ledger account of the business transaction of purchase of soya bean. and the payments made against it are shown ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... duly reflected in the books of the party and have been carried out through proper banking channel and Ld. A.O has not found any infirmity in the transaction entered in the alleged course of the business. So we can safely conclude that the alleged three entries of totaling Rs. 1.70 crores have no relation with the alleged transaction of receiving loan of Rs. 90 lakhs and Rs. 80 lakhs by the assessee from Gajanand Ramlal Agrawal and therefore the first basis taken by Ld. A.O of linking this trade transaction with the loan transaction is baseless. 11. Now the second basis for making addition by Ld. A.O that the loan amount of Rs. 1.70 crores received by two cheques of Rs. 90 lakhs and Rs. 80 lakhs were entered in the books on30.3.2011 and 31 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in August, 2011. Revenue authorities have not disputed about the creditworthiness and identity of cash creditor Gajanand Ramlal Agrawal. Even the genuineness is not in doubt because the cheques are actually cleared in the bank account. Merely for entering the transaction in March, 2011 and the cheque getting cleared in August 2011 cannot be a reasonable basis to treat the loan amount as unexplained u/s 68 of the Act because the validity of cheque was for 6 months at that point of time. The alleged transaction is duly reflected in the books of both the parties, duly confirmed by the cash creditor Gajanand Ramlal Agrawal, bank statements and bank reconciliation statements clearly shows the alleged transactions and from all four corners, we c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
