SUNIL GOPAL PATIL,RAVER vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER WARD 2(5),, JALGAON

Briefly, the facts of the case are that the assessee is an individual engaged in the business of boring work of well. The assessee, along with certain other persons, made certain investment in some property. The AO required the assessee to prove the source of investment. The instant dispute is only in respect of loans stated to have been received by the assessee from Shri Sudhir Gopal Patil amounting to Rs.9 lakhs and Rs.6 lakhs, and from Shri Shiram Gambhir Chaudhari of Rs.9 lakhs. The AO recorded statements of both the persons, who admitted to have given loans to the assessee out of their agricultural income. The AO made the addition u/s 68 of the Act on the ground that the assessee could not prove the creditworthiness and genuineness of the transaction. The CIT(A) upheld the addition. Aggrieved thereby, the assessee has come up in appeal before the Tribunal.

I have heard the learned DR and gone through the relevant material on record. There is no appearance from the side of the assessee despite notice. As such, I am proceeding to dispose of the appeal ex parte qua the assessee but on merits. It is seen that the assessee claimed to have received loan of Rs.15 lakhs (Rs.9 lakhs on 14.05.2015 and Rs.6 lakhs on 03.11.2015 from Shri Sudhir Gopal Patil). The statement of Shri Sudhir Gopal Patil was recorded during the course of assessment proceedings, in which he submitted that his agricultural income was about Rs.20 lakhs to 25 lakhs. The AO enquired about his expenses which were stated to be around Rs.11 lakhs for the year. On a specific query, he admitted to have given advance to the assessee, who was his real brother. In view of the fact that the elder brother gave loan to his younger brother i.e. assessee for sum of Rs.15 lakhs in two installments and he also explained the source of such loan, being, his agricultural income, I am satisfied that the ld. CIT(A) was not justified in sustaining the addition to that extent. 5. As regards Rs.9 lakhs received from Shri Shriram Gambhir Chaudhari, it is again seen that he admitted in his statement to have given loan to the assessee by means of cheque. He stated his agricultural income to be around Rs.17 lakhs to Rs.18 lakhs and his average expenses for the family at Rs.5 lakhs to Rs.6 lakhs. He is brother-in-law of the assessee. In view of the above factual scenario, I am satisfied that the assessee discharged the onus cast upon him to prove the genuineness of the transaction and creditworthiness of the creditor. I overturn the impugned order on this score and ordered to delete the addition. 6. In the result, the appeal is allowed. Order pronounced in the Open Court on 29th August, 2022.

Sd/- (R.S.SYAL) VICE PRESIDENT पुणे Pune; ददिधांक Dated : 29th August, 2022 GCVSR आदेश की प्रतिलिपि अग्रेपिि/Copy of the Order is forwarded to: अपीऱधर्थी / The Appellant; 1. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent; 2. 3. The concerned CIT(A) 4. The concerned Pr. CIT विभागीय प्रविविवि, आयकर अपीलीय अविकरण, पुणे / 5. DR „SMC‟, ITAT, Pune 6. गार्ड फाईल / Guard file आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, // True Copy // Senior Private Secretary आयकर अपीलीय अविकरण ,पुणे / ITAT, Pune