ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. PREMIUM INFORMATICS PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1235/DEL/2015Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 January 2019AY 2011-124 pages

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

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The CIT(A) rightly deleted the addition as the identity, genuineness, and creditworthiness of the loan transaction were sufficiently established. The Assessing Officer had access to all relevant records of both parties.

What were the facts?

The Assessing Officer made an addition of Rs. 3,00,00,000/- on account of an unexplained loan. The assessee had provided loan confirmations, ledger accounts, and bank statements reflecting the transaction.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition for unexplained loan when the assessee allegedly failed to furnish bank statements during assessment, despite other evidence being available.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 153A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, [ DELHI BENCH “F”, NEW DELHI ]

Before: SMT. BEENA A. PILLAIDR. B.R.R. KUMAR

For Appellant: Smt. Sulekha Verma, CIT(DR)
For Respondent: Shri Ajay Wadhwa, Adv

O R D E R PER DR.B.R.R. KUMAR, AM:

The present appeal has been filed by the Revenue against the order of the Ld. CIT(A)-23, New Delhi dt. 21/01/2015 wherein Revenue has raised only one effective ground which reads as under:

“ On the facts and circumstances of the case the Ld. CIT (A) has erred in law in deleting the addition of Rs.3,00,00,000/- made by AO on account of unexplained loan since credit worthiness and genuineness of loan transaction was not proved as the assessee failed to furnish copy of bank statement reflecting the loan transaction during the course of assessment proceedings.”

2.

Brief facts of the case are that the Assessing Officer has made addition of Rs. 3,02,40,000/- which consists of Rs. 2,40,000/- received as loan from Mr. Jaswant Singh and Rs. 3,00,00,000/- from J.S. Petrochemicals Pvt. Ltd. The Ld. CIT(A) has deleted the addition based on the fact that a) The assessment of both the parties has been completed by the same Assessing Officer under section 153A b) The record available before the Assessing Officer shows sufficient information about the identity, genuinity and credit worthiness of these transactions. c) The bank statement have been duly submitted reflecting the payment received from the lender company which was also assessed by the same Assessing Officer under section 153A.

3.

While the Revenue has accepted the decision of the Ld. CIT(A) for deletion of Rs. 2,40,000/-, an appeal has been filed against the deletion of Rs. 3,00,00,000/-. The only grievance of the Revenue is that while the assessee failed to furnish copy of bank statement reflecting the loan transaction during the course of assessment proceedings, the Ld. CIT(A) deleted the addition made by the Assessing Officer. We find that the basic requirements like confirmation, ledger account in the books of the Assessee Company, Income Tax return of the lender, bank statement of the lender reflecting the payments to the assessee company, bank statement of the assessee reflecting the receipt of such payment and also keeping in view the fact that all the cases are being scrutinized by the same Assessing Officer under section 153A who has the records of all the parties, and in the absence of any other evidence on record to suggest any suspicious nature of these amounts , we hereby hold that the Ld. CIT(A) has rightly deleted the addition made by the Assessing Officer.

4.

As a result the appeal of the Revenue is hereby dismissed.

The order pronounced on the open court on 22/01/2019.

More judgments on Section 153A

All 18,957 judgments and leading authorities on Section 153A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →