TMI Blog2021 (11) TMI 745X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ted that these loans were procured from the market as per the requirement - onus to prove the genuineness of the same is on the assessee. Therefore, with respect to these 11 parties, we remit the matter back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) with a direction to the assessee to file requisite documentary evidences to establish the genuineness of the same. Advances u/s. 69 - Assessee made advances towards purchase of land to various parties which were added by Ld. AO as unexplained investments - HELD THAT:- The investments made by the assessee are part of regular books of accounts and therefore, the same could not be held to be unexplained investment u/s. 69. The ground raised by the revenue stand dismissed. Amount paid for land - HELD THAT ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of learned Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals)-12, Mumbai [CIT(A)] dated 27/03/2019 in the matter of assessment framed by Ld. Assessing Officer (AO) u/s. 144 on 26/03/2013. The grounds urged by the revenue read as under:- 1. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT(A) was justified in restricting the addition u/s. 68 of ₹ 1,58,47,780/- out of unsecured loans in the assessment order passed u/s. 144 dated 26/03/2013 to ₹ 27,00,000/- as source of loan remained unsubstantiated therefore creditworthiness remained unproved? 2. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT(A) was justified in deleting the addition u/s. 69 of ₹ 1,31,95,563/- in respect of advances, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Unsecured Loans u/s. 68 ₹ 158.47 Lacs 2. Advances u/s. 69 ₹ 131.95 Lacs 3. Sundry Creditors ₹ 68.50 Lacs 4. Estimated stock in process ₹ 6.74 acs 5. Amount paid for land u/s. 69B ₹ 195 Lacs 4. During appellate proceedings, the assessee submitted additional evidences which were subjected to remand proceedings. After considering assessee's submissions and in the light of remand report, Ld. CIT(A) del ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... deleted, inter-alia, in terms of the decision of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Gagandeep Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. [ 80 Taxmann.com 272]. 6.4. Aggrieved, the assessee as well as revenue is in further appeal before us. 6.5. We find that the loans of ₹ 131.47 Lacs were from directors and group entities and the assessee had filed requisite documents to substantiate these transactions during remand proceedings. It has been noted by Ld. CIT(A) that the Ld. AO has also accepted these transactions in the remand proceedings. It is fact that the assessee has discharged the primary onus as required u/s. 68. Therefore, the additions have rightly been deleted by Ld. CIT(A) and no interference is required to that extent ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... books of accounts and therefore, the same could not be held to be unexplained investment u/s. 69. The ground raised by the revenue stand dismissed. 8. Amount paid for land. 8.1. The assessee made payment of ₹ 50 Lacs to one Shri Sanjay Sonawane for purchase of land which was through banking channels and reflected in the regular books of accounts. However, during survey action on Shri Sanjay Sonawane, certain loose papers were found which indicated that the assessee made payment of ₹ 195 Lacs in cash towards purchase of land and therefore, the amount of ₹ 195 Lacs was added u/s. 69B. The assessee denied having paid any cash and assailed the additions made by Ld. AO merely on the basis of loose paper found from a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
