| The Tax Publishers2022 TaxPub(DT) 5730 (Ahd-Trib) INCOME TAX ACT,1961
Section 68
Assessee had furnished details of lenders (name, address, PAN number, confirmation, proof that all transactions were carried through banking channels, etc.) and the correctness of details so furnished had not been disputed by AO. Also, assessee placed on record supporting documents to prove that amount was repaid back to the lender in the subsequent year through banking channels, which gave a strong support as to the genuineness of transaction/ parties. AO solely relied upon statement of Praveen Kumar Jain without brining anything further on record to show that details/information furnished by assessee was incorrect/inaccurate. Therefore, addition was not sustainable.
|
Income from undisclosed sources - Addition under section 68 - Receipt of unsecured loan alleged as bogus -
AO was in receipt of information from Director General (Investigation), Mumbai that a search was conducted in the case of Praveen Kumar Jain Group on 1-10-2013, where it was revealed that he was engaged in the business of providing accommodation entries in the form of bogus unsecured loans, bogus share application money etc. On analysing the information, it was found that assessee was also one of the beneficiaries who have taken accommodation entries of Rupees One Crore during assessment year 2009-10 from the bogus companies operated by said Group. Thus, AO made addition in assessee's hands under section 68. Held: Assessee had furnished details of lenders (name, address, PAN number, confirmation, proof that all transactions were carried through banking channels, etc.) and the correctness of details so furnished had not been disputed by AO. Also, assessee placed on record supporting documents to prove that amount was repaid back to the lender in the subsequent year through banking channels, which gave a strong support as to the genuineness of transaction/ parties. AO solely relied upon statement of Praveen Kumar Jain without brining anything further on record to show that details/information furnished by assessee was incorrect/inaccurate. Therefore, addition was not sustainable.
REFERRED :
FAVOUR : In assessee's favour.
A.Y. : 2009-10
IN THE ITAT, AHMEDABAD BENCH
WASEEM AHMED, A.M. & SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL, J.M.
Hit Iron & Steel (P) Ltd. v. ITO
ITA No. 379/AHD/2018
29 August, 2022
Assessee by: S.N. Soparkar, Authorized Representative
Revenue by: V.K. Singh, Senior Departmental Representative
Siddhartha Nautiyal, J.M.
This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the learned Commissioner (Appeals)-2, Ahmedabad in Appeal No. CIT (A)-2/369/ITO, W.D. 2(1) (3)/2016-17 vide Order dated 27-12-2017 passed for the assessment year 2009-10.
2. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:-
 SUBSCRIBE FOR FULL CONTENT
|