TMI Blog2022 (2) TMI 1199X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... also assessee made similar additions which is relating to unsecured loans and it is pertinent to note that the above said unsecured loans were repaid during the assessment year or in subsequent Assessment Years - Decided in favour of assessee. - ITA NO. 566/MUM/2021 And ITA NO. 567/MUM/2021 And ITA NO. 537/MUM/2021 And ITA NOs. 643/MUM/2021 - - - Dated:- 23-2-2022 - Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'ble Accountant Member And Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Hon'ble Judicial Member For the Assessee : Shri Neelkanth Khandelwal For the Department : Shri Rakesh Garg ORDER PER S. RIFAUR RAHMAN (AM) 1. These appeals are filed by the Revenue against different assessees of same group and different orders of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-47, Mumbai [hereinafter in short Ld.CIT(A) ] for the Assessment Year 2012-13, 2013-14 and 2014-15. 2. Since the issues raised in all the appeals are identical, therefore, for the sake of convenience, these appeals are clubbed, heard and disposed off by this consolidated order. We are taking Appeal in the case of Mangal Buildhome Pvt. Ltd., in ITA.No. 567/Mum/2021 for the A.Y. 2013-14 as the lead case. 3. Bri ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2019 allowed the ground raised by the assessee. 6. Aggrieved revenue is in appeal before us raising following grounds in its appeal: - 1. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition of ₹ 3,60,00,000/- made u/s 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on account of bogus unsecured loans without appreciating that said loans are from companies controlled and managed by Shri Praveen Kumar Jain, who has confessed in his statement recorded on oath that he was engaged in providing accommodation entries and that his later retraction from the statement has been considered as an afterthought and hereby rejected. 2. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the disallowance of ₹ 3,79,232/- made on account of interest paid on bogus unsecured loans from companies controlled and managed by Shri. Praveen Kumar Jain. 3. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld CIT(A) was justified in not upholding the aforementioned addition made by the A.O. even though the modus operandi of obtaining accommodation entries in the form of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t to our notice Page No. 60 of the Assessment Order to highlight the summary of finding made by the department from the various statements recorded from those Dummy Directors / Employees operated under PKJ. He also took us through the various modus operandi operated by PKJ by taking through the Assessment Orders wherein Assessing Officer has brought on record various findings unearthed by the investigation wing. 8. Further, he submitted that PKJ has accepted that he is giving accommodation entries to various parties. Further, he brought to our notice Page No. 5 of the Ld.CIT(A) order wherein he has discussed various issues involved in this appeal and also brought to our notice Ld.CIT(A) finding at Page No. 28 of the order wherein Ld.CIT(A) has discussed various issues in his finding that there is no immediate cash deposits and the onus is shifted to the Assessing Officer once the assessee fulfills and establishes the identity, creditworthiness and genuineness of the transaction and submitted that Ld.CIT(A) has not discussed any financial data but merely gave his finding. He opposed the finding of the Ld.CIT(A) on the issue of onus shifted to the Assessing Officer in this regard ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Jain (supra) who is one of the director of the Mangal Group companies, in her case, the Coordinate Bench has decided the issue as below: The appellant furnished the copies of the account confirmation of the lender companies, acknowledgement of income tax return of lender companies, and their audited financial statement, bank account of lender companies and affidavit of the lender companies confirming the loan transactions. The companies had also filed the return of income in the relevant assessment year. There were no where found immediate deposit of cash before issuance of cheques. The loan was given by account payee cheques through normal banking channels. The interest was also paid and TDS was also deducted thereon. The identity, credit-worthiness and genuineness of the transaction were not seems in genuine. The evidence is required to be rebutted by the AO on basis of some cogent and convincing reason on record. The AO did not conducted any further enquiry. The addition raised by AO u/ 68 of the Act was on the basis of the statement of Shri Praveen Kumar Jain. No material of any kind was found and recovered from the Shri Praveen Kumar Jain which was if any related to the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
