MAHADEV DAIRY PVT. LTD.,NOIDA vs. ITO, WARD- 16(1), NEW DELHI

This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2014-15, arises against the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-6 [in short, the “CIT(A)”], Delhi’s order dated 30.09.2019 passed in case No. CIT(A) Delhi-6/10163/2019-20 involving proceedings under section 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’).

Case called twice. None appears at the assessee’s behest. We accordingly proceeded ex-parte against the assessee.

Learned Departmental Representative vehemently submits during the course of hearing that both the lower authorities have rightly invoked section 68 unexplained cash credits addition of Rs.28 lakhs representing unsecured loans from Sh. Kuldeep Nagar. Our attention is further invited to the Assessing Officer’s assessment discussion dated 07.12.2016 that the assessee has failed to prove the genuineness/creditworthiness of the said credits coming to its books in the relevant previous year. And also, that Sh. Kuldeep Nagar’s bank account has witnessed cash deposits followed by the corresponding loans given to the assessee.

We have given our thoughtful consideration to the assessee’s foregoing sole substantive grievance as well as both the lower authorities’ respective discussions making the impugned addition. We find no reason to disagree with the assesee’s instant sole substantive grievance as the impugned unsecured loan has come from none other than its promoters as evident from CIT(A)’s lower appellate discussion in paragraph 4.2 and the fact that he is also assessed in the same jurisdiction. It is further noticed that both