NEESA BIOTECH PVT. LTD,AHMEDABAD vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), AHMEDABAD

None appeared on behalf of the assessee when the matter was taken up for hearing. Neither any adjournment is sought for. No written submission filed on behalf of the assessee. It appears from the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) that on the number of occasions the matter was fixed for hearing serving notice upon the appellant but there was no compliance from the appellant neither any adjournments were sought for. On 10 occasions the matter was fixed for hearing; only twice adjournment has been sought for stating that Authorized Representative was not available. In other occasions neither anyone appeared before the First Appellate Authority nor any adjournment was sought for. It further appears from the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) that attitude of appellant was non-cooperative before the Special Auditor too which was mentioned by the Special Auditor and communicated to the Ld. AO. The Ld. AO experienced the same. In spite of fixing the matter on several occasions none appeared on behalf of the assessee before the Ld. AO which is also noted by the Ld. AO as it appears from the order passed by ITA Nos.149 to 152/Ahd/2019 and IT(SS)A No. 160/A/19 and Neesa Biotech Pvt. Ltd. vs. DCIT Asst.Years –2006-07, 2008-09 to 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2014-15 - 3 - the Ld. AO. Considering the entire aspect of the matter to find it fit to decide the matter ex-parte.

The brief fact leading to the case is this that a search under Section 132 of the Act was carried out in the group of associates of Neesa Group on 08.09.2010. A notice under Section 153C r.w.s. 153A was issued on 06.11.2012 and served upon the assessee requesting him to file the Return of Income within the 30 days from the date of service of the notice for A.Y. 2005- 06 to 2010-11.

The assessee on 10.01.2006 received unsecured loan amounting to Rs. 1 crore by this Cheque No. 158814 from one Zenet Software Ltd. on 10.01.2006. On 12.01.2006 the same amount of Rs. 1 crore was given as unsecured loan to Smt. Neelu Gupta who has made share application of Rs. 1 crore in Neesa Leisure Ltd. on 13.01.2006. It appears to the Ld. AO that same sum of money has been routed from M/s. Zenet Software Ltd. to Smt. Neelu Gupta. The assessee had directed to state the purpose of loan from M/s. Zenet Software Ltd. and its utilization and to submit the confirmation from M/s. Zenet Software Ltd. alongwith its return of income, computation and balance sheet to establish the genuineness, creditworthiness and identity of the creditor. Summons under Section 131were also issued to the M/s. Zenet Software Ltd. on 03.09.2013 to verify the genuineness of the transaction. The assessee has not furnished any confirmation from the party to establish the genuineness of the transaction and therefore, failed to discharge its onus of establishing the genuineness of the transaction of the loan of Rs. 1 crore which has ultimately been treated to be income within the meaning of Section 68 of the Act by the Ld. AO in the absence of any satisfactory explanation regarding the sources of ITA Nos.149 to 152/Ahd/2019 and IT(SS)A No. 160/A/19 and Neesa Biotech Pvt. Ltd. vs. DCIT Asst.Years –2006-07, 2008-09 to 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2014-15 - 4 - credit in the books of accounts, claim to be received from M/s. Zenet Software Ltd.

The addition further confirmed by the First Appellate Authority.

The identical issue involved in the case has already been dealt with by us in IT(SS)A No. 149/Ahd/2019 for A.Y. 2006-07 and in the absence of any changed circumstances the same shall apply mutatis mutandis. Hence, the appeals preferred by the assessee are dismissed.

In the combined results, the appeals preferred by the assessee are dismissed. This Order pronounced in Open Court on 13/07/2022 Sd/- Sd/- (WASEEM AHMED) (Ms. MADHUMITA ROY) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Ahmedabad; Dated 13/07/2022 TRUE COPY TANMAY, Sr. PS आदेश क� ��त�ल�प अ�े�षत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ� / The Appellant 2. ��यथ� / The Respondent.