9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (6) TMI 410X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 9; for short]; ii) Rs. 5,40,000/- as unexplained expenditure u/s 69C of the Act; and iii) Rs. 1,55,16,090/- as unexplained expenditure u/s 69C of the Act. 3. In addition to the above, the assessee has also challenged the validity of the assessment order framed u/s 143(3) r.w.s 147 of the Act alleging that the appropriate section is 153 of the Act. 4. The representatives of both the sides were heard at length, the case records carefully perused and with the assistance of the ld. Counsel, we have considered the documentary evidences brought on record in the form of Paper Book in light of Rule 18(6) of ITAT Rules and have also perused the judicial decisions relied upon by both the sides 5. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... wellers 0 83,16,000 Govind Delhi 29.03.2010 Shagun Jewellers Pvt. Ltd. 83,16,000 0 Govind Interest received 29.03.2010 Shagun Jewellers 83,00,000 0 Govind Delhi Total 3,13,16,090 1,55,16,090 8. On the strength of the information received from the ADIT, INV, the Assessing Officer assumed jurisdiction u/s 148 of the Act and accordingly, statutory notices were issued and served upon the assessee. 9. Since the documents were found at the premises of the searched person, they did not belong to the assessee and the transactions recorded in the seized documents were in the books of the searched person and, therefore, information received from the Investigation Wing was a tangible material evidence which ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ew support from the statement of Shri Vinod Kumar Taneja and Shri Chanchal Taneja who are directors of M/s Index Securities and Research Pvt Ltd. 13. According to the Assessing Officer, both the directors did not have any knowledge about the financials of M/s Index Securities and Research Pvt Ltd. The Assessing Officer observed that M/s Index Securities and Research Pvt Ltd is not doing any business activity in reality and is merely a paper entity. 14. As mentioned elsewhere, the assessee has furnished complete details of M/s Index Securities and Research Pvt Ltd. Copy of confirmation of accounts is placed at page 105 of the paper book which is as under: 15. On a perusal of the bank statement of the assessee exhibited at pages 132 to 135 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er and the said company is NBFC company, which is engaged in the business of giving and taking loans. In his statement, Shri Sant Lal also affirmed the loan transaction with the appellant company which was reaffirmed by him during the cross examination. While affirming the loan transaction, Shri Sant Lal Aggarwal categorically denied any cash transaction with the appellant company. 21. There is no dispute that u/s 68 of the Act, the initial onus is upon the assessee to explain the identity, genuineness of the transaction and the capacity of the lender. Evidences discussed hereinabove clearly show that the assessee has successfully established the identity, genuineness of the transaction and capacity of the company M/s Index Securities and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he main person for disbursing cash loan to 60 parties. The alleged cash loans given to the assessee is already exhibited elsewhere at para 7 hereinabove. 26. As mentioned elsewhere, the foundation of the impugned addition is the statement of Shri Devi Das Tikamdas Chattani. Except for that, there is no direct evidence brought on record to show that any cash transactions took place between the assessee and the said person. 27. On the contrary, the statement of Shri Sant Lal Aggarwal which is part of the assessment order and is extracted at pages 17 to 24 of the assessment order shows that Shri Sant Lal Aggarwal, answering to question No. 13, emphatically stated that he does not know who Shri Devi Das Tikamdas Chattani is. Once again, answe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sharam Bapu. Hence, it cannot be ruled out that cash loan were received by the assessee from Santlal Aggarwal. Moreover, the seized material retrieved , clearly indicates that the assessee company has paid Rs. 1,55,16,090/- in cash on account of interest on such cash loan." 29. Considering the facts of the case in hand, in the light of statement of Shri Sant Lal Aggarwal, we do not find any merit in the impugned addition and the same is directed to be deleted. Accordingly, Ground Nos. 4 and 5 are allowed. 30. Ground No. 7 relates to levy of interest u/s 234B of the Act. Levy of interest is mandatory, though consequential. The Assessing Officer is directed to recompute interest as per provisions of law. 31. In the result, the appeal of t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
