9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (8) TMI 684X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... umstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in directing the AO to verify whether out of the total amount added u/s. 68 of the J.T. Act of Rs. 4,63,15,623/-, the opening balance was of Rs. 3,14,81,000/- and if so, then the addition of this amount of Rs. 3,14,81,000/- cannot be made u/s. 68 during the year under consideration, as the CIT(A) is not empowered to set aside the case in the guise of issuing directions. 2. In giving the directions being contested in Ground No. 1, the Ld. CIT(A) has very conveniently omitted to consider the fact that the receipts/ credits during the year were Rs. 2,55,17,879/- and the sum of Rs. 2,55,17,879/- was liable to be added u/s. 68 of the I.T. Act on the facts of the case for A.Y. 2014-15, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... these parties, however, only ledger confirmations of the parties were submitted. In order to confirm and verify the said transactions, notices u/s.133(6) were sent by the AO at the addresses given by the assessee. Out of the notices so issued by the AO, the notices sent to M/s. ISIS Trade Com Pvt. Ltd., M/s. Antelope Mercantile Pvt. Ltd. and M/s. Limegreen Trade Com Pvt. Ltd. were returned unserved. Further, no reply was received from the other 3 parties i.e. M/s. Kothari Financial Services, M/s. Tricom IT Services Pvt. Ltd. and M/s. Tricom India Ltd. confirming the transactions with the assessee. The AO further observed that M/s. ISIS Trade Com Pvt. Ltd., M/s. Antelope Mercantile Pvt. Ltd. and M/s. Limegreen Trade Com Pvt. Ltd, operated f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t. Ltd. and M/s. Tricom India Pvt. Ltd. despite the receipt of notices u/s.133(6) did not respond to the AO whereas in the case of remaining 3 parties, notices were returned unserved. It is further the fact of the case noted by the AO in the assessment order that M/s. ISIS Trade Com Pvt. Ltd., M/s. Antelope Mercantile Pvt. Ltd and M/s. Limegreen Trade Com Pvt. Ltd. had one common address at G-2, Neelkamal Building, Roshan Nagar, Borivali (West), Mumbai. Such facts as have been noted by the AO and non-verifiability regarding the very identity of the creditor parties led the AO to invoke the provisions of section 68 and thereby make the addition of unsecured loans taken by the assessee and is accordingly found to be justifiable. However, it i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ,623/-. The opening balance was of Rs. 3,14,81,000/- and therefore to the extent of the amount of Rs. 3,14.81,000/- was not the loan taken during the year under consideration, then the addition of this amount of Rs. 3.14,81,000/- cannot be made u/s.68 during the year under consideration. The AO may verify such facts from the assessee's case and if the facts are found to be correct as per the submission of the assessee, there cannot be addition to the extent of Rs. 3,14,81,000/- out of the total addition of Rs. 4,63,15,623/-. It is hereby mentioned that after verification of the facts, if it is found that unsecured loans worth Rs. 3,14,81,000/- out of the addition made of Rs. 4,63,15,623/- are found to be pertaining to the earlier years, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
