Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Detected automatically from the text. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH, MUMBAI
Before: SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, AM
O R D E R Per Shamim Yahya, A. M.: This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) dated 21.07.2016 and pertains to the assessment year 2012- 13. 2. The grounds of appeal
reads as under:
1. On the facts and circumstances of the case, as well as law on the subject, the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in confirming the action of Assessing Officer in making addition of Rs.4,00,000/- u/s. 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on account of alleged unexplained cash credit.
2 M/s. Indiamonds 3. Upon the assessee’s appeal, the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) confirmed the addition.
Against the above order, the assessee is in appeal before the ITAT.
I have heard the ld. Departmental Representative and perused the materials on record. None appeared on behalf of the assessee despite service of notice of hearing. Upon careful consideration, I find that the assessee has completely failed to justify the creditworthiness of the person granting loans to the extent added by the Assessing Officer. It has been clearly brought on record that these persons granting loan do not have justifiable income to grant the loans. Furthermore, there have been cash deposits in their bank account immediately prior to the granting of the loan. These facts cannot be ignored by the Revenue. As held by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Sumati Dayal vs. CIT [1995] 214 ITR 801 (SC), the Revenue has not to put upon the blinkers but has to appreciate the surrounding circumstances. On the facts and circumstances of the case, in my considered opinion, there is no infirmity in the order of the authorities below. Accordingly, I uphold the same.