INCOME TAX ACT, 1961

Section 250(6)

Appeal [CIT(A)] - Addition under section 68 on account of unexplained creditors - CIT(A) deleted the addition without recording any findings -

AO noted that assessee received an amount of unsecured loan from M/s. V, AO noted background of the case with regard to bogus accommodation entry provided by various entities and Investigation conducted by Investigation Wing of Department. AO had given an opportunity to assessee to prove creditworthiness of investor and genuineness of transaction and required the assessee to produce Directors of M/s. V. AO after considering the fact that burden was upon assessee to prove the ingredients of section 68, i.e., identity of the creditor, creditworthiness of creditors and genuineness of transaction, found that assessee failed to prove the same, therefore, addition was made against the assessee under section 68. Held: Merely because loan was repaid through banking channel in assessment year by itself may not be a ground to delete the addition because ultimately assessee shall have to prove the ingredients of section 68 to satisfaction of AO. CIT(A) however clearly showed that he did not mention the evidence and material on record in the light of finding of fact arrived at by AO in appellate order. CIT(A) did not give any finding as to what was the implication of making addition in the hands of creditor in preceding assessment year 2012-13. CIT(A) merely mentioned some facts for preceding assessment year 2012-13 and did not give any finding of fact pertaining to assessment year 2013-14 for assessment year under appeal. Therefore, matter was remanded back to CIT(A) to re-decide the appeal of assessee in accordance with Law.

Relied:DCIT v. Sidhvandan Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. 2019 TaxPub(DT) 8348 (Del-Trib)

REFERRED :

FAVOUR : Matter remanded

A.Y. : 2013-14

SUBSCRIBE FOR FULL CONTENT

OR Try Reload the Page