9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (2) TMI 119X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o. 2. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the assessment order passed by the assessing officer is without jurisdiction and barred by limitation and CIT(A) erred in not holding so. 3. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT(A) has erred in confirming the addition to the extent of Rs. 18,12,34,000/- u/s 68 of the Act on the fact and circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT(A) ought to have deleted the entire addition made by the assessing officer. 4. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the various reasons given by assessing officer for making the additions are erroneous and CIT(A) erred in not holding them erroneous. 5. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the various adverse / remark / inferences made by the CIT()A) are erroneous, 6. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT(A) erred in not holding that the addition made by the AO u/s 68 of the Act is contrary to the CBDT instruction. 7. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the assessment order passed by the assessing officer is liable to be quashed as it is contrary to provisions of section 153D of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er section 153A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, was issued on 17.09.2020 and duly served. In response to the notice u/s 153A of the Act, return of income was filed on 12.12.2020 declaring total income at Rs. 6,61,760/-. With respect to return of income dated 12.12.2020 filed in response to notice u/s 153A of the Act, a statutory notice u/s 143(2) dated 21.12.2020 has been issued through ITBA portal and duly served upon the assessee. Thereafter, notice u/s 142(1) of the Act dated 23.12.2020 along with a detailed questionnaire was issued and served upon the assessee to furnish details, documents as mentioned therein. In response to these notices, the assessee filed submissions from time to time which are placed on record. During the year under consideration, the assessee derived income from Salary and Income from Other Sources. 3. On the analysis of seized material/ digital material and on finding that Sh. Aashish Garg, and his associates are controlling and running paper companies which are solely doing no actual business but are engaged in business of providing accommodation entries in the shape of bogus bills, accommodation entries, share premium etc. to the beneficiary. The Ld. AO ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ds Telecom Pvt. Ltd. has been confirmed by the CIT(A) in his order dated 29.06.2022. Therefore, the same cannot be made once again in the case of the appellant. 17. Further the addition in the hands of the appellant includes addition of Rs. 79,97,000 that was else made in the hands of Modular International Pvt. Ltd. This addition has been confirmed by the CIT(A) in his order dated 26.07.2022 in the hands of Modular international Pvt. Ltd. Therefore, the same cannot be made once again in the case of the appellant. 18. The addition of Rs. 119,28,87,000/- made in the hands of appellant consist of one amount of Rs. 52,14,06,000/- in the hands of M/s Gracious Overseas Pvt. Ltd. The CIT(A) vide his order dated 30.06.2022 has confirmed the addition in the hands of M/s. Gracious Overseas Pvt. Ltd., therefore the same addition cannot be made in the hands of appellant once again. 19. To sum up, an addition of Rs. 101,16,53,000/- is directed to be deleted because the same has been added back in the case of three companies and upheld by the CIT(A) as stated above. Double addition is not permissible in law." 9. It was further submitted that additions regarding balance of Rs. 18,12,34,000 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... "it is evident that for the applicability of provision of Section 68, the first requirement is that any sum is found credited in the books of an assessee' and the assessee offers no explanation about the nature and source thereof. In the present case of the assessee, no sum is found credited in the books of the assessee i.e. Ashish Garg. There is no cash deposit in the bank account of the assessee i.e. Ashish Garg. Therefore, the assessee cannot be expected to explain the nature and source of amounts which are not even found to be credited in the books of the assessee. Therefore, the provisions of section 68 cannot be applied to the case of the assessee Sh. Ashish Garg in respect of cash deposited in the bank accounts of carious companies. As per AO himself, the cash has been deposited in the bank accounts of the companies and, therefore, explanation about the nature and source of the amount deposited in the bank accounts of the companies can be given by those respective companies. As per the department itself, those companies are separate income tax assessee filing their return of income and the department is making assessments in their cases. In view of the above fact ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... T (19801 124 ITR 94 (Pat). 10. The Hon'ble Mumbai bench of ITAT in the case of DCIT Central Circle-5(1) v. Jogia Properties Ltd. 2022 (10) TMI 1047-ITAT Mumbai held as under :- 024. We find that Section 68 of the Act does not talk about any beneficiaries but is added in the hands of each and every person where Assessee fails to prove identity, creditworthiness and genuineness of the transaction to the satisfaction of the learned Assessing Officer. It is deemed income in the hands of the assessee who fails to explain nature and source of the same before the AO. Deeming fiction applies in the hands of the person in whose book's sums are credited. There it ends, such deeming fiction cannot travel to other assessee for satisfying ingredients of section 68 of the Act.- - - - - - - - - - - - - There is no concept of beneficial ownership of income u/s 68 of the act, Importing the same in section 68 is in clear violation of simple provisions of that section. 11. The Hon'ble Ahmedabad bench of ITAT in the case of DCIT Central Circle - 1(4). Ahmedabad v. Basant R. Agarwal 2023 (5) TMI 634 held as under: - 16.3 Coming to the facts of the case to hand, the AO based on t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
