ACIT v. Dayal Steel (P) Ltd. - Taxpublishers.in

SUBSCRIBE FOR FULL CONTENT


The Tax Publishers2024 TaxPub(DT) 782 (Del-Trib) IN THE ITAT DELHI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD, J.M. & DR. B. R. R. KUMAR, A.M. ACIT v. Dayal Steel (P) Ltd. ITA No. 9121/Del/2019 11 January, 2024 Appellant by: Sampath, Adv. & Sh. V. Rajkumar, Adv. Respondent by: Vivek Kumar Upadhyay, Sr. DR ORDER *Dr. B. R. R. Kumar* The present appeal has been filed by the revenue against the order of learned Commissioner-34, Delhi dated 30-7-2019 for the Assessment Year 2012-13. 2. The Revenue has raised the following ground of appeal:- 1. On the facts and in circumstances of the case and in law, the learned Commissioner (Appeals) has erred in deleted the addition made by the Assessing Officer of Rs. 2,25,40,000 under section 68 on account of unsecured loans 3. The brief facts of the case are that return declaring an income of Rs. 11,28,235 was filed on 17-9-2012. The case was selected for scrutiny under CASS. During the year the assessee received unsecured loan from twenty two individuals and three HUF to the tune of Rs. 2,25,40,000. The Assessing Officer issued notice under section 133(6) to all the parties and only five parties have replied. The Assessing Officer held that, the parties do not have creditworthiness to extend unsecured loans to the assessee. Hence, relying on the judgment of the Honble High Court of Delhi in the case of Titan Securities Ltd. in ITA No. 263/2012 the Assessing Officer held that, the assessee failed to establish the creditworthiness of the parties and made addition of Rs. 2,25,40,000 under section 68 of Income Tax Act. 4. Aggrieved, the assessee filed appeal before the learned Commissioner (Appeals), who deleted the addition made by the assessing officer. 5. Aggrieved with the order of the learned Commissioner (Appeals), the Revenue filed before the Tribunal. SUBSCRIBE FOR FULL CONTENT

The Tax Publishers2024 TaxPub(DT) 782 (Del-Trib)

IN THE ITAT DELHI

CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD, J.M. & DR. B. R. R. KUMAR, A.M.

ACIT v. Dayal Steel (P) Ltd.

ITA No. 9121/Del/2019

11 January, 2024

Appellant by: Sampath, Adv. & Sh. V. Rajkumar, Adv.

Respondent by: Vivek Kumar Upadhyay, Sr. DR

ORDER

Dr. B. R. R. Kumar

The present appeal has been filed by the revenue against the order of learned Commissioner-34, Delhi dated 30-7-2019 for the Assessment Year 2012-13.

2. The Revenue has raised the following ground of appeal:-

1. On the facts and in circumstances of the case and in law, the learned Commissioner (Appeals) has erred in deleted the addition made by the Assessing Officer of Rs. 2,25,40,000 under section 68 on account of unsecured loans

3. The brief facts of the case are that return declaring an income of Rs. 11,28,235 was filed on 17-9-2012. The case was selected for scrutiny under CASS. During the year the assessee received unsecured loan from twenty two individuals and three HUF to the tune of Rs. 2,25,40,000. The Assessing Officer issued notice under section 133(6) to all the parties and only five parties have replied. The Assessing Officer held that, the parties do not have creditworthiness to extend unsecured loans to the assessee. Hence, relying on the judgment of the Honble High Court of Delhi in the case of Titan Securities Ltd. in ITA No. 263/2012 the Assessing Officer held that, the assessee failed to establish the creditworthiness of the parties and made addition of Rs. 2,25,40,000 under section 68 of Income Tax Act.

4. Aggrieved, the assessee filed appeal before the learned Commissioner (Appeals), who deleted the addition made by the assessing officer.

5. Aggrieved with the order of the learned Commissioner (Appeals), the Revenue filed before the Tribunal.