TMI Blog2019 (11) TMI 931X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ss to say, the assessee shall be given reasonable opportunity of hearing and the assessee is directed to cooperate with the AO for early disposal of the case. This ground is allowed for statistical purposes. - ITA No.180/RAN/2019 - - - Dated:- 18-11-2019 - Shri C.M. Garg, JM And Shri L.P. Sahu, AM For the Assessee : Shri Devesh Poddar, Advocate For the Revenue : Shri P.K.Mondal, Addl.CIT(DR) ORDER PER BENCH: This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order passed by the CIT(A), Ranchi, dated 26.02.2019 for the assessment year 2015-2016 on the following grounds :- 1. For that Ld. CIT(A) was not justified in confirming the addition of ₹ 1,00,36,986/- being the principal amount received as unsecured loan (plus interest due thereon) from M/s Matribhumi Fincap India Limited on the ground that the same is a shell company and is having criminal/ prosecution case U/s 220(1) (2) of Companies Act before Chief Judicial Magistrate Shillong. This is no ground of confirming an addition U/s 68 in hands of receiving company. 2. For that co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ncap (India) Ltd.. In this regard, the assessee was asked to prove the ingredients of Section 68 of the Act and show cause notice was issued to the assessee as to why this amount should not be treated as income of the assessee. In this regard submission as also made by the assessee which was not found to be satisfactory by the AO. Ld. AO checked on MCA website and from other sources and found that the profit A.Y.2015-2016 was ₹ 5,38,000/- and for A.Y.2014-2015 profit was ₹ 88,000/-, respectively and he also noticed that lender company has incurred expenses towards employee benefit expenses of ₹ 72,000/- for A.Y.2014-2015 and ₹ 1,08,000/- for A.Y.2015-2016 per annum, respectively. Accordingly, the AO noticed that only one or two employees were employed in the company to manage the affairs of the lender company and calculated that it was a shell company for only for the purpose to provide accommodation entries and to convert black money into white money by way of unsecured loans and share application money and share premium etc. He also noticed that this company was also prosecuted u/s.220(1) 220(2) of the Companies Act by Chief Judicial Mag ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d company is declared a shell company and is having criminal case against it. This is absolutely no ground for confirming the addition in hands of the appellant wherein repayment of loan is disclosed and accepted. From the ledger attached at Page No. 15 of the Paper Book 1 it can be seen that as on June 2017 the entire loan account of the assessee with that of M/s Matribhumi Fincap India Ltd was squared off/ settled and there was no any dues. It will also be pertinent to mention that in AY 2016-2017 further unsecured loan was received from this company which stands accepted incourse of assessment proceedings completed U/s 143(3) vide order dated 26/12/2018 copy of which is annexed. Therefore firstly we contend to say that where for one year the loan amount received has been accepted, the same cannot be disallowed or doubted in another year facts being the same. Principal of consistency shall be followed as held by Hon'ble Apexx Court in case of Union of India v Azadi Bachao Andolan (2003) 263 ITR 706 (SC). Further Reliance is placed on the decision of Hon'ble Jharkhand High Court in the case of CIT Vs Sidhi Vinayak Metcon Ltd (Dated 05/ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assessee was duly discharged and further due compliance was made to notice U/s 133(6) which stands accepted by Ld AO who did not conduct any further enquiry. Section 6S nowhere states that an addition is to be made in hands of assessee wherein the lender company has been declared shell company or whatsoever be the legal proceedings against that company. 2. Ld. CIT(A) was not justified in confirming ₹ 74,173/- sundry creditor in name of M/s Eastern Trading Agency. ₹ 15,456/- was the opening balance for the year under consideration which cannot be added in this year. Moreover the above company is our regular supplier which can be seen from the ledger account wherein transactions are recorded and as a matter of fact the same was repaid in the subsequent year. 3. Ld. CIT(A) was not justified in confirming the addition of ₹ 14,032/- sundry creditor in name of M/s Annupurna Trading. Complete details was filed for the same showing the day to day transaction with the supplier. Moreover it was also pointed out that in the subsequent year the same was repaid and as on 31/03/2018 the balance was NIL. Ld. CIT(A) failed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Sales Marketing Ltd. which is placed in the paper book that all the assets and liabilities shall be taken over by the first parties and he further submitted that M/s Pasa Sales and Marketing was engaged in same line of business. M/s Pasa Sales and Marketing Ltd. was merged into M/s Pasa Resources Pvt. Ltd. w.e.f. 01.04.2014, therefore, the receivables were appearing in the balance sheet of M/s Pasa Sales and Marketing Ltd., therefore, these receivables payments were made just to continue the bank account of M/s Pasa Sales and Marketing Ltd. and all the transactions of this account are incorporated in the financial statements of M/s Pasa Resources Pvt. Ltd. Before going into the merits of the case, we calculated as to why the assessee has still not changed the name in the HDFC bank till date of hearing and still he is doing transactions through this bank account. This transaction needs to be examined by the AO. We also noted that the loan amount of ₹ 1 crores taken in two instalments as stated supra has also been credited in this bank account. These facts need to be examined at the level of AO. Therefore, we think it appropriate to send back the disputed issue to the file o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
