TMI Blog2022 (8) TMI 1439X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he same, it is duty of assessee to help him and provide whatever is asked. This position of shifting of onus from assessee to Assessing Officer Assessing Officer to assessee is tricky one, which depends on the facts of the case. We note that assessee has proved creditworthiness and genuineness, however assessee failed to prove identity of these parties from whom unsecured loan had been received, therefore we are of the view that one more opportunity should be given to the assessee to plead his case before the Assessing Officer to prove identity of these parties. Hence, we set aside the order of the CIT(A) and remand the matter back to the file of Assessing Officer for limited purpose to examine the identity of the parties, and to decide the matter in accordance to law after giving opportunity of being heard to the assessee. Appeal of the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes. - SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JM AND DR. A.L. SAINI, AM For the Assessee : Ms. Shruti Shah, C.A. For the Respondent : Shri H.P. Meena CIT-DR ORDER PER DR. A. L. SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: Captioned appeal filed by the Revenue, pertaining to assessment year 2014- 15, is direc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uld be added to the total income for the year under consideration u/s 68 of the Act. In response, the assessee submitted details and documents in respect of these parties. 4. It was noted by assessing officer that these companies are running from rented one room and occasionally change their addresses. Some of these parties have closed down their activities after squaring up their unsecured loan transactions. Moreover, on verification of the details filed by the assessee, it was noted by assessing officer that these parties have extended unsecured loan almost equal to their turnover. The turnover of Redeem exports Pvt. Ltd. is Rs. 35,83,30,074/-, cost of raw material is Rs. 36,34,27,887/- where as it has extended unsecured loan of Rs. 12,04,35,153/- to the assessee. Moreover, currently this company has no business activity. Likewise, the turnover of Kashish Diam Pvt. Ltd. is Rs. 72,13,76,594/-, cost of raw material is Rs. 70,11,57,785/- where as it has extended unsecured loan of Rs. 8,54,43,448/- to the assessee. Thus, assessing officer noted that identity, creditworthiness as well as the genuineness of the transactions stands disproved. The assessee too could not establish the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... urden is on the assessee to explain the deposit satisfactorily, mere furnishing of some particulars not enough, payment by cheque not conclusive. The Assessing Officer relied on the decision in the case of ITO Vs. Dlza Holdings (P) Ltd, 255 ITR 573 (Kerala), and in the case of Shankar Ghosh Vs. ITO 11985] 23 TTJ (Cal.) 20, wherein it was held that assessee had failed to prove the capacity of the person from whom he had allegedly taken loan. Loan amount was rightly held as assessee's own undisclosed income. In view of the foregoing discussion of facts, the assessing officer held that assessee failed to prove three ingredients of section 68 namely, identity, creditworthiness and genuineness and hence a sum of Rs. 20,87,54,237/- being credited in the books but not being supported by explanation of the assessee, was treated as income of the assessee, as per the provisions of section 68 of the Act. 6. Aggrieved by the order of Assessing Officer, the assessee carried the matter in appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) who has deleted the addition made by the Assessing Officer. Aggrieved, the Revenue is in appeal before us. 7. Learned DR for the Revenue submits that assessee could not es ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d. We note that assessee has heavily relied on the judgment of Hon`ble Supreme Court in the case of Orisa Corpn. Pvt. Limited 159 ITR 78 and stated that it was the duty of assessing officer to verify the genuineness of transactions by enforcing the provisions of section 131 of the Act. We note that assessing officer conducted the field inquiry and issued notices under section 131 of the Act on the address provided by the assessee, however these notices were returned back, as the parties were not existed on the given address. In these circumstances, now burden shifts on the assessee to produce these parties before the assessing officer, however assessee failed to do so, therefore we note that identity of these parties have not been proved. Therefore, we find merit in the submission of ld DR to the effect that these parties are on paper and fictitious as they do not exist on the address supplied by the assessee, therefore identity of these parties has not been proved by the assessee. 10. Learned Counsel argued that assessee submitted copy of the bank accounts, copy of income tax return and copy of audited accounts and also contended that in ROC records, these companies are active, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
