Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH, AHMEDABAD
Before: SHRI PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA & SHRI MAHAVIR PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMEBR
आदेश/O R D E R
PER PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA - AM:
The captioned appeal has been filed at the instance of the Assessee against the order of the CIT(A)-5, Vadodara (‘CIT(A)’ in short), dated 11.04.2016 arising in the assessment order dated 27.01.2015 passed by the Assessing Officer (AO) under s. 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) concerning AY 2012-13.
ITA No. 2161/Ahd/16 [Shri Deepakbhai B. Gajera vs. ITO] A.Y. 2012-13 - 2 -
The grounds of appeal raised by the assessee read as under:
“1. The assessment order passed by the Learned Assessing Officer is against the Law and Facts of the case. 2. The Ld. CIT(A) has grossly erred in law and on facts in confirming the addition of Rs.5,00,000/- made by Assessing Officer as an unexplained cash credit u/s 68 of the Act considering that your appellant failed to prove the credit worthiness/ capacity of the depositor and further erred in disallowing the interest of Rs.52,549/- on such Unsecured Loan. Both the lower authorities have not appreciated evidences and submissions made by appellant. The Ld. CIT(A) ought to have deleted addition made by Assessing Officer.”
When the matter was called for hearing, the learned AR for the assessee submitted at the outset that the assessee had obtained loan of Rs.5 Lakhs from lender Smt. Kavita Bharat Sanghani. The learned AR pointed out that the aforesaid loan is supported by the loan confirmation, the return of income of the lender as well as her bank statements. The learned AR submitted that the assessee has duly paid interest on the aforesaid loan till date and loan also stands repaid in the subsequent FY on 12.10.2012. The repayment is also supported by the bank statement. The learned AR thus submitted that in the circumstances, there was no justification for Revenue to doubt the bonafides of the transactions and hold the issue against the assessee.
The learned DR, on the other hand, relied upon the orders of the lower authorities.
We have carefully considered the rival submissions. At the outset, we notice that there is a marginal delay of 22 days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal. The delay is condoned on the basis of reasoning provided by the assessee for such small delay. On merits, we find that the loan obtained is backed by documentary evidences and is also repaid alongwith interest. The overwhelming fact of the repayment transgresses all doubtful consideration as may be perceived
ITA No. 2161/Ahd/16 [Shri Deepakbhai B. Gajera vs. ITO] A.Y. 2012-13 - 3 -
by the Revenue. Thus, we set aside the order of the CIT(A) and direct the AO to delete the addition made on this score.
In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed.
This Order pronounced in Open Court on 29/01/2019
Sd/- Sd/- (MAHAVIR PRASAD) (PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Ahmedabad: Dated 29/01/2019 True Copy S. K. SINHA आदेश क� ��त�ल�प अ�े�षत / Copy of Order Forwarded to:- 1. राज�व / Revenue 2. आवेदक / Assessee 3. संबं�धत आयकर आयु�त / Concerned CIT 4. आयकर आयु�त- अपील / CIT (A) 5. �वभागीय ��त�न�ध, आयकर अपील�य अ�धकरण, अहमदाबाद / DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad 6. गाड� फाइल / Guard file. By order/आदेश से,
उप/सहायक पंजीकार आयकर अपील�य अ�धकरण, अहमदाबाद ।