TMI Blog2019 (12) TMI 1158X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on 68 of the Act was not warranted and therefore the Ld CIT(A) rightly deleted the addition. So, we are inclined to confirm the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and dismiss the ground of appeal raised by the revenue. - I.T.A. No. 305 & 306/Kol/2018 - - - Dated:- 6-12-2019 - Shri A. T. Varkey, JM AND Dr. A. L. Saini, AM For the Appellant P.K. Srihari, CIT, Sr. D/R For the Respondent : Shri Manoj Kataruka, A/R ORDER Per Shri A.T.Varkey, JM These appeals filed by the revenue are directed against the separate but identical orders of the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) 2, Kolkata, (hereinafter the ld. CIT (A) ), passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act ), both dt. 12.12.2017, for the Assessment Years 2012-13 2013-14. 2.The grounds of appeal raised by the revenue for the Assessment Year 2012-13 is as under:- 1. That on the facts and in circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting a sum of ₹ 10,65,32,302/- representing the alleged unsecured loan received by the assessee. 2.That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in appreciating the facts that the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e payables of ₹ 16,20,000/- in original assessment proceedings and also in remand proceedings . 8.That on the facts and in circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition a sum of ₹ 95,65,382/- u/s 14A read with Rule 8D ignoring the essence of CBDT s Circular No. 5/2014 dated 11.02.2014. 9.That the appellant craves for leave to add, delete, amend or modify any ground before or at the time of appellate proceedings. 3.We first take up the Revenue s appeal for the Assessment Year 2012-13 ground nos. 1 2 and for AY 2013-14, ground nos. 1 to 5. Brief facts of the case for AY 2012-13 as noted by the Assessing Officer is that the assessee filed its return of income, declaring loss of ₹ 34,01,458/-. Later the case was selected for scrutiny through CASS. The Assessing Officer notes that during the course of assessment proceedings, the assessee furnished various details as asked for except few books of accounts with supporting bills and vouchers as asked for, on 13/02/2015. The Assessing Officer thereafter notes that, he had issued summons u/s 131 of the Act on 04/03/2015, to the assessee company directing it to presen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rd rival contentions. On careful consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case, perusal of the papers on record, orders of the authorities below as well as case law cited, we note that the assessee had received Inter-Corporate Deposits (ICDs) from various companies. Summarized position of his borrowings during the year AY 2012-13 is given below in Rupees:- Op. Bal as on 01.04.11 Recd. During the year Repaid during the year Interest for the year TDS Cl. Balance as on 31.03.2012 1,67,45,422 19,80,62,238 11,06,89,479 33,70,549 3,37,055 10,71,81,675 7.When the Assessing Officer asked for the details of these ICDs, the assessee had furnished the following details of the lender companies:- a)Loan confirmation containing name, address and PAN of the lender corporate. b)Copy of Income Tax Return Acknowledgement of the lender for the relevant A.Y. c)Copy of Audited Financial Statement for the F.Y. 2011-12 of the lenders. d)Lender's Source of fund certific ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t there was non-compliance on the date of hearing, has treated the entire amount of ₹ 10,65,32,302/- as unexplained cash credit u/s 68 of the Act. He drew our attention to page 13 of the paper book, wherein the remand report filed by the Assessing Officer pursuant to the direction of the ld. CIT(A) is found placed wherein the Assessing Officer in the remand proceedings has stated as follows:- Accordingly, summons u/s 131 was issued to the Directors of the assessee company on 4-03-2015 and the case was fixed for hearing on 16-03-2015. But there was no compliance on the date of hearing. Under the circumstances, the amount of ₹ 10.65.32.302/- was treated as cash credit u/s. 68 since the assessee failed to discharge the primary onus. 11.Taking into consideration the aforesaid facts which happened during the assessment stage as well as the addition made by AO in respect of the loan taken by the assessee, we note the following important facts which is given in the tabular form to appreciate the facts and figures involved on the issue at hand for both the assessment years before us. Assessment Year 2012-2013 Details of Loans taken and repaid ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 209589 20959 10188630 188630 Repaid as on 31.3.12 10 Dufflaghar Investment Pvt. Ltd PAN:AAACD9587C -- 30000000 867946 86795 -- 30781151 Repaid as on 31.3.14 11. Midnight Agencies Pvt. Ltd PAN:AABCM6864G -- 5000000 121918 12192 -- 5109726 Bal. remains 12 Blackberry Goods Pvt. Ltd PAN:AADCB5112A -- 13250000 -- -- -- 13250000 Repaid as on 31.3.15 Total: 16745422 206556671 3370549 337055 123871674 107340305 Assessment Year 2013-2014 Details of ICD / unsecured loans Sl. No Party Na ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 74 NA 10 Midnight Agencies Pvt. Ltd PAN:AABCM6864G 5109726 -- 459875 45987 -- 5523614 NA 11. Motorex Finance Pvt. Ltd PAN:AACCM1042R 3237674 -- 291391 29139 -- 3499926 NA 12 Rudra Goods Pvt. Ltd PAN:AAECR0974R -- 3800000 22932 2293 -- 3820639 Repaid as on 31.3.19 13 Royalpet Traders Pvt. Ltd -- 5000000 4932 -- -- 5004932 Repaid as on 31.3.14 Total: 93901675 23950000 9505037 949146 18210192 108197374 Details of Advances Repai ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y of the ledger accounts for the period 01-04-2011 to 31 03-2019. (Pg.66-86 of the Paper Book) x)Copy of the return filing acknowledgement, computation of income audited accounts for AY 2012-13 of loan creditor party namely Maharaja Vanijya Pvt. Ltd., along with copy of relevant bank statement reflecting the loan along with confirmation of accounts for AY 2012-13 and copy of the ledger accounts for the period 01-04-2011 to 31-03-2019. (Pg.87-109 of the Paper Book) xi)Copy of the return filing acknowledgement audited accounts for AY 2012-13 of loan creditor party namely Kokila Exports Pvt. Ltd., along with copy of relevant bank statement reflecting the loan along with confirmation of accounts for AY 2012-13 and copy of the ledger accounts for the period 01-04-2011 to 3103-2014. (Pg. 110-131 of the Paper Book) xii)Copy of the return filing acknowledgement audited accounts for AY 2012-13 of loan creditor party namely Hexagon Commerce Pvt. Ltd., along with copy of relevant bank statement reflecting the loan along with confirmation of accounts for AY 2012-13 and copy of the ledger accounts for the period 01-04-2011 to 3103-2019 and letter filed before the AO ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... creditor party namely Blackberry Goods Pvt. Ltd., along with copy of relevant bank statement reflecting the loan along with confirmation of accounts for AY 2012-13 and copy of the ledger accounts for the period 01-04-2011 to 3103-2015 and letter filed before the AO by the party submitting the details. (Pg.313-331 of the Paper Book) 13. We note that for the Assessment Year 2013-14, we note that the following documents have been filed by the assessee before the Assessing Officer to substantiate the identity, creditworthiness and genuineness of the transactions between the assessee and the 13 (thirteen) lender companies:- i)Copy of the return filing acknowledgement along with computation of income and audited accounts of the assessee for AY 2013-14 .(Pg. 19-31 of the Paper Book) ii)Copy of the notice dated 02-02-2015 and 30-06-2015 issued by the AO during assessment proceedings. (Pg. 32-33 of the Paper Book) iii)Copy of the reply dated 13-02-2015, Nil, 23-03-2015, 30-07-2015 and 31-072015 filed by the assessee before the Assessing Officer (Pg. 34-43 of the Paper Book) i v)Copy of the summons dated 24-11-2015 18-02-2016 issued to the assessee (Pg. 44-45 of t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ls of trade payable of ₹ 16,20,000/- for AY 2012-13. (Pg. 195 of the Paper Book) xiv)Copy of the return filing acknowledgement along with audited accounts of Ashish Finance Pvt. Ltd. for AY 2013-14 along with copy of the relevant bank statement highlighting the advance of ₹ 1,30,00,000/- paid by the party along with ledger accounts for the period 1-04-2012 to 31-03-2014 . (Pg. 196-220 of the Paper Book ) xv)Copy of the invoice dated 15-03-2013 of ₹ 16,20,000/- against trade payable in the name of Dhoot Infrastructure Projects Ltd. against sale of equity shares along with copy of the ledger accounts for the period 01-04-2012 to 31-03-2013. (Pg. 221-222 of the Paper Book) 14.From the perusal of the aforesaid documents filed and the impugned order of Ld. CIT(A) for AY 2012-13 (lead case) We note that the ld. CIT(A) during the First Appellate proceedings, had called for remand reports [twice] from the Assessing Officer. The ld. CIT(A) has clearly given a finding that though the remand reports were furnished, the Assessing Officer has not been able to point out any defect in neither the details filed by the assessee in respect of unsecured loan nor has ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that address. The ld. CIT(A) has found that the averments made by the Assessing Officer is factually incorrect. According to the ld. CIT(A), he has gone through the assessment record and as per the acknowledgment slip placed and available on record, summons dt. 04/03/2015, issued to the Director of the assessee company was served upon the assessee on 09/03/2015 for appearing on 16/03/2015. The ld. CIT(A) also has taken note that the fresh loans taken during the Assessment Year under consideration comes to ₹ 2,065.57 Lakhs and the Assessing Officer has made an addition of ₹ 1,065.32 Lakhs, which itself shows that the Assessing Officer has not applied his mind while framing the assessment order and taking into consideration the documents filed at para 10 11 gave relief to the assessee. 16.Taking note of the aforesaid documents the Ld. CIT(A) was of the opinion that assessee had discharged its onus to prove the identity, creditworthiness and genuineness of the lender companies and had deleted the addition made u/s. 68 of the Act. Before we adjudicate as to whether the Ld. CIT(A) s action is right or erroneous, let us look at section 68 of the Act and the judicial p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ble Court has further stressed the presence of word may in section 68. Relevant observations at pages 369 and 370 of this report are reproduced hereunder:- Merely because summons issued to some of the creditors could not be served or they failed to attend before the Assessing Officer, cannot be a ground to treat the loans taken by the assessee from those creditors as non-genuine in view of the principles laid down by the Supreme Court in the case of Orissa Corporation [1986] 159 ITR 78. In the said decision the Supreme Court has observed that when the assessee furnishes names and addresses of the alleged creditors and the GIR numbers, the burden shifts to the Department to establish the Revenue's case and in order to sustain the addition the Revenue has to pursue the enquiry and to establish the lack of creditworthiness and mere non-compliance of summons issued by the Assessing Officer under section 131, by the alleged creditors will not be sufficient to draw and adverse inference against the assessee. in the case of six creditors who appeared before the Assessing Officer and whose statements were recorded by the Assessing Officer, they have admitted having advanced loan ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... iry under section 68 need not necessarily be kept confined by the Assessing Officer within the transactions, which took place between the assessee and his creditor, but that the same may be extended to the transactions, which have taken place between the creditor and his subcreditor. Thus, while the Assessing Officer is under section 68, free to look into the source(s) of the creditor and/or of the sub-creditor, the burden on the assessee under section 68 is definitely limited. This limit has been imposed by section 106 of the Evidence Act which reads as follows: Burden of proving fact especially within knowledge.-When any fact is especially within the knowledge of any person, the burden) of proving that fact is upon him. ******** What, thus, transpires from the above discussion is that white section 106 of the Evidence Act limits the onus of the assessee to the extent of his proving the source from which he has received the cash credit, section 68 gives ample freedom to the Assessing Officer to make inquiry not only into the source(s)of the creditor but also of his (creditor's) sub-creditors and prove, as a result, of such inquiry, that the money received by the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e creditor, by way of cheque in the form of loan and in such a case, if the creditor fails to satisfy as to how he had actually received the said amount and happened to keep the same in the bank, the said amount cannot be treated as income of the assessee from undisclosed source. In other words, the genuineness as well as the creditworthiness of a creditor have to be adjudged vis-a-vis the transactions, which he has with the assessee. The reason why we have formed the opinion that it is not the business of the assessee to find out the actual source or sources from where the creditor has accumulated the amount, which he advances, as loan, to the assessee is that so far as an assessee is concerned, he has to prove the genuineness of the transaction and the creditworthiness of the creditor vis-a-vis the transactions which had taken place between the assessee and the creditor and not between the creditor and the sub-creditors, for, it is not even required under the law for the assessee to try to find out as to what sources from where the creditor had received the amount, his special knowledge under section 106 of the Evidence Act may very well remain confined only to the transactions, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... from the hands of the sub-creditors, had actually been received by the sub-creditors from the assessee. In the absence of any such evidence on record, the Assessing Officer could not have treated the said amounts as income derived by the appellant from undisclosed sources. The learned Tribunal seriously fell into error in treating the said amounts as income derived by the appellant from. undisclosed sources merely on the failure of the sub-creditors to prove their creditworthiness. 20.Further, in the case of CIT v. S. Kamaljeet Singh [2005] 147 Taxman 18(All.) their lordships, on the issue of discharge of assessee's onus in relation to a cash credit appearing in his books of account, has observed and held as under:- 4. The Tribunal has recorded a finding that the assessee has discharged the onus which was on him to explain the nature and source of cash credit in question. The assessee discharged the onus by placing (i) confirmation letters of the cash creditors; (ii) their affidavits; (iii) their full addresses and GIR numbers and permanent account numbers. It has found that the assessee's burden stood discharged and so, no addition to his total income on account ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... al learned counsel for the appellant submits that Income-tax Officer did not consider the material evidence showing the creditworthiness and also other documents, viz., confirmatory statements of the persons, of having advanced cash amount as against the supply of bidis. These evidence were duly considered by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals). Therefore, the failure of the person to turn up pursuant to the summons issued to any witness is immaterial when the material documents made available, should have been accepted and indeed in subsequent year the same explanation was accepted by the Income-tax Officer. He further contended that when the Tribunal has relied on the entire judgment of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), therefore, it was not proper to take up some portion of the judgment of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) and to ignore the other portion of the same. The judicial propriety and fairness demands that the entire judgment both favourable and unfavourable should have been considered. By not doing so the Tribunal committed grave error in law in upsetting the judgment in the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals). 9.In this connection ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... material facts and record its finding on all contentions raised by the assessee and the Commissioner, in the light of the evidence and the relevant law. It is also ruled in the said judgment at page 465 that if the Tribunal does not discharge the duty in the manner as above then it shall be assumed the judgment of the Tribunal suffers from manifest infirmity. 12.Taking inspiration from the Supreme Court observations we are constrained to hold in this matter that the Tribunal has not adjudicated upon the case of the assessee in the light of the evidence as found by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals). We also found no single word has been spared to up set the fact finding of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) that there are materials to show the cash credit was received from various persons and supply as against cash credit also made. 13.Hence, the judgment and order of the Tribunal is not sustainable. Accordingly, the same is set aside. We restore the judgment and order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals). The appeal is allowed. 23.When a question as to the creditworthiness of a creditor is to be adjudicated and if the creditor is an Income Tax assess ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ring Md. Nizamuddin, learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the appellant and after going through the materials on record, we find that all such application money were received by the assessee by way of account payee cheques and the assessee also disclosed the complete list of shareholders with their complete addresses and GIR Numbers for the relevant assessment years in which share application was contributed. It further appears that all the payments were made by the applicants by account payee cheques. It appears from the Assessing Officers order that his grievance was that the assessee was not willing to produce the parties who had allegedly advanced the fund. In our opinion, both the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) and the Tribunal below were justified in holding that after disclosure of the full particulars indicated above, the initial onus of the assessee was shifted and it was the duty of the Assessing Officer to enquire whether those particulars were correct or not and if the Assessing Officer was of the view that the particulars supplied were insufficient to detect the real share applicants, to ask for further particulars. The Assessing Officer has not ad ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Ltd., the Ld. AR drew our attention to pages 66 to 78 of the paper book and the Balance sheet, from where we note that this company gave loan of a sum of ₹ 30,00,000/- to the appellant company. The loan was made by account payee cheque. This company duly filed its return of income before ITO Ward 4(2), Kolkata and was having PAN AACCM1042R. This company was having a paid up capital with free reserves and surplus of ₹ 39,90,81,160/- as on 31/03/2012. The copy of the bank statement of the Company is duly available in the paper book. On examination of the bank statement it is taken note that there is no deposit of cash. The details of source of funds from which this company had made the loans are also available from a perusal of the bank statement filed in the paper book. On the loan the appellant company paid interest after deducting TDS as per ledger available at pages 78 to 84 of the paper book. (iii)In respect of M/s. Maharaja Vanijya Pvt. Ltd., the Ld. AR drew our attention to pages 87 to 109 of the paper book and the Balance sheet, from where we note that this company gave loan of a sum of ₹ 50,00,000/- to the appellant company. The loan was made by accoun ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ken during the year. vi)In respect of M/s. K.B. Switchgear Pvt. Ltd., the Ld. AR drew our attention to page 158 to 190 of the paper book and the Balance sheet, from where we note that this company gave loan of a sum of ₹ 3,00,00,000/- to the appellant company. The loan was made by account payee cheque. This company duly filed its return of income before ITO, Ward 4(4), Kolkata, and was having PAN AABCK2162K. This company was having a paid up capital with free reserves and surplus of ₹ 57,80,13,067/- as on 31/03/2012. The copy of the bank statement of the Company is duly available in the paper book. On examination of the bank statement it is taken note that there is no deposit of cash. The details of source of funds from which this company had made the loans are also available from a perusal of the bank statement filed in the paper book. On the loan the appellant company paid interest after deducting TDS and the loan was repaid as on 31.3.2019 as per ledger available at pages 182 to 189 of the paper book. The company had also submitted reply to the AO of the appellant company and copy of the reply is available at page 190 of the paper book. vi) In respect of M/s. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ompany. The loan was made by account payee cheque. This company duly filed its return of income before DCIT, Central Circle -5, Kolkata, and was having PAN AADCS9429B. This company was having a paid up capital with free reserves and surplus of ₹ 46,70,00,522/- as on 31/03/2012. The copy of the bank statement of the Company is duly available in the paper book. On examination of the bank statement it is taken note that there is no deposit of cash. The details of source of funds from which this company had made the loans are also available from a perusal of the bank statement filed in the paper book. On the loan the appellant company paid interest after deducting TDS and the loan was repaid as on 31.3.2012 as per ledger available at page 264 of the paper book. x)In respect of M/s. Dufflaghur Investments Ltd., the Ld. AR drew our attention to pages 265 to 286 of the paper book and the Balance sheet, from where we note that this company gave loan of a sum of ₹ 3,00,00,000/- to the appellant company. The loan was made by account payee cheque. This company duly filed its return of income and was having PAN AAACD9587C. This company was having a paid up capital with free res ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oan the appellant company paid interest after deducting TDS and the loan was repaid as on 31.3.2015 as per ledger available at pages 326 to 330 of the paper book. The company had also submitted reply to the AO of the appellant company and copy of the reply is available at page 331 of the paper book. Assessment Year: 2013-2014 Fresh Loans received from 5 parties (Departmental Ground nos. 1-3) i)In respect of M/s. Amritphal Tradelink Pvt. Ltd., the Ld. AR drew our attention to pages 61 to 75 of the paper book and the Balance sheet, from where we note that this company gave loan of a sum of ₹ 16,50,000/- to the appellant company. The loan was made by account payee cheque. This company duly filed its return of income before ITO, Ward 4(3), Kolkata and was having PAN AAICA1299E. This company was having a paid up capital with free reserves and surplus of ₹ 2,21,59,012/- as on 31/03/2013. The copy of the bank statement of the Company is duly available in the paper book. On examination of the bank statement it is taken note that there is no deposit of cash. The details of source of funds from which this company had made the loans are also available from a perusa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lance sheet, from where we note that this company gave loan of a sum of ₹ 15,00,000/- to the appellant company. The loan was made by account payee cheque. This company duly filed its return of income before ITO, Ward, 4(2), Kolkata and was having PAN AAFCM4480Q. This company was having a paid up capital with free reserves and surplus of ₹ 1,06,30,838/- as on 31/03/2013. The copy of the bank statement of the Company is duly available in the paper book. On examination of the bank statement it is taken note that there is no deposit of cash. The details of source of funds from which this company had made the loans are also available from a perusal of the bank statement filed in the paper book. On the loan the appellant company paid interest after deducting TDS and the loan was repaid as on 31.3.2014 as per ledger available at pages 150 to 153 of the paper book. v)In respect of M/s. Rudra Goods Pvt. Ltd., the Ld. AR drew our attention to pages 155 to 170 of the paper book and the Balance sheet, from where we note that this company gave loan of a sum of ₹ 38,00,000/- to the appellant company. The loan was made by account payee cheque. This company duly filed its ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... it is taken note that there is no deposit of cash. The details of source of funds from which this company had made the loans are also available from a perusal of the bank statement filed in the paper book. On the advances the appellant company paid interest after deducting TDS and the advance was repaid as on 31.3.2014 as per ledger available at pages 219-220 of the paper book. 26.From the details as aforesaid of the lenders, the facts which emerges from the paper book filed before us as well as before the lower authorities, it is vivid that all the lender companies are (i) income tax assessee s, (ii) they are filing their return of income, (iii) confirmations are available on record, (iv) the loans were made by account payee cheques, (v) the details of the bank accounts belonging to the lenders and their bank statements, (vi) in none of the transactions the AO found deposit in cash before issuing cheques to the assessee , (vii) the lenders are having substantial creditworthiness which is represented by a capital and reserve as noted above. 27.As noted from the judicial precedents cited above, where any sum is found credited in the books of an assessee then there is a duty ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... O to draw adverse view which action cannot be countenanced. In the absence of any investigation, much less gathering of evidence by the Assessing Officer, we hold that an addition cannot be sustained merely based on inferences drawn by circumstance. Applying the propositions laid down in these case laws to the facts of this case, we are inclined to uphold the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) giving relief to the assessee for AY 2012-13 to the tune of ₹ 10,65,32,302/- and for AY 2013-14 ₹ 1,42,95,699/- ₹ 1,30,00,000/-. 29.We find that this Bench of the Tribunal, under similar circumstances in the case of ITO vs. M/s.Wiz-Tech Solutions Pvt. Ltd. in ITA No. 1162/Kol/2015; Assessment Year 2012-13; order dt. 14/06/2018, wherein such addition was made under section 68 of the Act (share capital and premium) was deleted after discussing the issue of section 68 at length and considering a plethora of judgments. For the sake of brevity the same are not discussed. The case laws relied by the Tribunal will apply mutatis mutandis to this case also and we rely upon them. To sum up section 68 of the Act provides that if any sum found credited in th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lanation about the nature and source of such credit and also failed to produce any documents etc. about genuinity, identity and creditworthiness of such transaction/related party(s). Therefore, the said sum of ₹ 16,20,000/- is added u/s. 68 of the Act. 32.Aggrieved, assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A), who deleted the addition by observing as under: The AR of the appellant has submitted that this ground relates to addition of sum Rs .16,20,000/- received by the appellant as 'advance under section 68 of the Act as unexplained cash credit. It is submitted that in course of the assessment proceedings and in response to notice issued u/s 142(1) the assessee submitted a letter dated 31.07.2015. In point number 1 of this letter the assessee explained that it had received sum of ₹ 16,20,000/- from Dhoot Infrastructure Projects Limited , 904-907, Time. Tower, M.G.Road, Sector-28, Gurgoan, Haryana.(PAN AACCD2118H) towards sale of shares to them. Copies of purchase and sale invoices were also furnished by the assessee. The nature of such Trade Payable was also explained to the AO. The assessee furnished the complete details including name, address, PA ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cy in any of the documents submitted before him. The AO vide this office letter dated 22.08.2017 and 26.09.2017 was asked for remand report in the matter and it was sent vide his letter dated 13.09.2017 and 11.10.2017. The AO in his remand report has mentioned that the assessee appeared and submitted perfunctory details like group summary of trade payable received and party wise details, which did not contain address of the parties. The AR during the appellate proceeding filed copy of letter submitted before the AO during the assessment proceeding and the same along with enclosures were also sent at the time of asking for remand report from the AO. While going through the details enclosed with above referred letter, it is clear that the letter itself contained name and address of the party with PAN and copy of invoice. These document were also sent the AO at the time of asking remand report in the matter. The AO instead of issuing' the summon u/s 131 to the lender for verification of identity, financial capacity and genuineness of the transaction, issued summon to the directors of the company who has already filed all the relevant details like list of the party, conformation ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
