P.R. CONSTRUCTIONS,MUZAFFARNAGAR vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-3(2)1, MUZAFFARNAGAR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 985/DEL/2021Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 October 2022AY 2014-153 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the additions made on account of loans were not justified. The CIT(A)'s reasoning that the lender's bank account had higher credits than the loan amount was considered insufficient to deem the loan bogus, especially given the evidence provided by the assessee.

What were the facts?

The assessee's returned income was Rs. 11,41,330, but the assessed income was Rs. 28,52,890 after additions of Rs. 15,00,000 on account of loans from two parties. The assessee provided extensive documentation to prove the identity, genuineness, and creditworthiness of the loan parties.

What were the issues?

Whether the additions made on account of loans were justified despite the assessee providing sufficient evidence of identity, genuineness, and creditworthiness of the lenders. Whether the CIT(A) erred in disallowing the loans based on the lender's bank account credit exceeding the loan amount.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 263(1)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHIBENCH ‘F’, NEW DELHI

Before: Dr. B. R. R. KumarSh. Yogesh Kumar US

Hearing: 02.08.2022Pronounced: 18.10.2022

Per Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Accountant Member:

1.

The present appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order of NFAC, Delhi dated 31.07.2021.

2.

The pertinent facts relevant for the adjudication of the case are as under:-

The returned income of the Assessee - Rs. 1141330/-. The assessed income u/s 143(3) -Rs. 1352890/- The assessed income u/s 143(3)/263(1) -Rs. 2852890/- The additions made -Rs. 15,00,000/- 3. The additions have been made on account of loan parties namely:-

-M/s. A.K. Agarwal and sons –Rs. 10,00,000/-

-M/s. S. C. Agarwal and sons –Rs. 5,00,000/- The assessee has filed details such as PAN, amount, mobile number, complete address, confirmation, ITR, computation of income, bank statement, copies of the query letters issued by the department, replies to the notice issued u/s 133(6) to prove identity, genuineness and creditworthiness. It was also submitted before the revenue authorities about the source of the cash that has been received as repayment from various people namely Gaurav Goyal, Richa Agarwal, Ajay Kumar Agarwal. The Assessee has also paid 12% interest in the year under consideration as well as in the subsequent year after duly deducting the TDS. The addition has been solely made on the basis of low returned income disregarding the sufficiency of the sources and its genuineness. The ld CIT(A) held that the bank statements of the loan parties were not furnished by the appellant and at the same time held that, on analysis of the bank accounts of Shir S.C. Agarwal and Sons showed credit of Rs. 52,61,000/- which is not in consonance with the returned income of the lender whereas the amount received by the Assessee form SC Agarwal was only Rs. 5,00,000/-. The total credit in the lenders account for more than the amount received by the Assessee cannot be a reason to construe the loan as bogus/ ungenuine. Having gone through the entire evidences submitted by the Assessee as mentioned above at the beginning of this para, in the absence of any contra findings brought by the Revenue, we hold that no addition on account of the loans received by the Assessee is called for.

Order Pronounced in the Open Court on 18/10/2022.

More judgments on Section 263(1)

All 52 judgments and leading authorities on Section 263(1) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →