9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (8) TMI 420X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e 7(2)(1), Mumbai (in short, 'the A.O.') passed under section 143(3)of the Act date of order 24/03/2015. 2. The assessee has taken the following grounds of appeal:- "Ground No. 1. AGAINST ADDITION OF Rs. 7,93,74,917/- AS UNPROVED LOANS (a) The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [hereinafter referred to as "((A)"] has erred in confirming addition in respect of Unsecured Loans outstanding as on 31 March 2012, which included those loans which were not taken during the year under appeal also, without considering all the facts available on the record in proper perspective. (b) The appellant respectfully submits that all the parties who have given unsecured loans are genuine, capable to give th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s the balance stood during the impugned assessment year. The assessment order was passed by the addition of the loan amount of Rs. 7,93,74,917/- and also the interest disallowed amount of Rs. 56,08,404/- for rejection of the interest of secured loan from the bank. Being aggrieved, the assessee filed an appeal before the ld. CIT(A) along with all the facts. But the Ld.CIT(A) without considering the same dismissed the appeal of the assessee. Being aggrieved, the assessee filed an appeal before us. 4. The assessee himself appeared and first explained about his distress and suffering in business during this impugned assessment year. The assessee argued and filed a written submission which is kept in the record, (in short APB). The assessee inv ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 000 75,000 15 Guatam Shah 3,00,000 3,00,000 16 Guniben Shah - 3,00,000 - 3,00,000 2,15,64,417 6,13,20,500 35,10,000 7,93,74,917 5. The ld. DR fully relied on the order of the revenue authorities. 6. We heard the rival submission and considered the documents available in record. The assessee argued that related to serial numbers 1 to 3 of the abovementioned chart, i.e. M/s Shailee Capital Services Pvt Limited, Mr. Rajesh Mehta and Mrs. Indumati Vasa + B.S. Vasa, all the loans are from earlier years and was only the balance is carried over to this year. So, the addition in impugned assessment year is uncalled for. Therefore, it is directed to the ld. AO that the additions amount of R. 2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 6. PEL Limited 25,00,000 7. One Up Advisory Pvt Ltd (Stake) 10,00,000 8. Pranamghar India Pvt Ltd 3,82,04,417 9. Metal Tube Pvt Ltd 25,00,000 10. Neelkanth Iyer 75,000 11. Guatam Shah 3,00,000 12. Guniben Shah 3,00,000 We consider the submission of the assessee and remand the matter back to the file of the ld.AO for further verification of loan creditors. The ld. DR had not made any strong objection against the setting aside matter to the ld. AO. Accordingly, the impugned appeal order is set aside. The matter is remanded back to the file of the ld. AO. 7. With regard tothe interest of the bank, the issue is also unverified before any of the revenue authorities below. So, the interest amount from the bank to receive am ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
