ANMOL ALLIANCE,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 34(1)(1) , MUMBAI

Appellant by : None Respondent by : Shri. Prashant Barate, Sr-DR Date of Hearing 20.06.2024 Date of Pronouncement 28.06.2024 आदेश / O R D E R PER OMKARESHWAR CHIDARA:-

1. On the facts and circumstances of the case in law, the Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC has erred in not admitting the additional evidences which were submitted by the appellant despite the M/s. Anmol Alliance, fact that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from submitting those evidences before the Assessing Officer 2. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC has erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 4,30,82,183/- as unexplained cash credit under section 68 representing the increase in the unsecured loans during the year under consideration.

3. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC has erred in confirming the addition of interest on unsecured loans of Rs. 6,01,139/- as unexplained expenditure under section 69C.

2. On 20th June, 2024, the case was posted for hearing and on that day there is neither any adjournment letter nor any one appeared on behalf of the assessee. Hence, we are constrained to decide this appeal as ex-parte. Coming to the merits of the case, we observe that the Assessing Officer passed the assessment order dated 19.12.2019 u/s 144 of the Income Tax Act, in the absence of satisfactory compliance and non-establishing the genuineness of source of loan amount of Rs. 4,30,82,183/- and the corresponding interest of Rs. 6,01,139/- treated as unexplained cash credit u/s 68 of the Income Tax Act and being disallowance u/s 69C of the Income Tax Act respectively and added the same in the income of assessee.

3. On appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) affirmed the aforesaid order mainly on the reason that the assessee failed the establish the genuiness of loan amount actually not being utilised for business purposes and failing to establish the genuiness of interest paid on loan wholly and M/s. Anmol Alliance, necessarily for business purposes. We have given a thoughtful consideration to the order passed by the authorities given below. As the authorities given below made categorical findings qua additions under challenge. Even otherwise, we do not find materials/are reason to contradict the findings of Ld. CIT(A) in affirming the above additions, which are under challenge before us. Hence, in the impugned order no interference is called for as impugned order doesn’t suffer from perversity, impropriety and or illegality.

Order Pronounced in Open Court on 28.06.2024

Sd/- Sd/- (NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY) (OMKARESHWAR CHIDARA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Place: Mumbai Date 28.06.2024 Shubham P. Lohar आदेश की प्रतितलति अग्रेतिि/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलार्थी / The Appellant 2. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent. 3. आयकर आयुक्त / CIT 4. विभागीय प्रविविवि, आयकर अपीलीय अविकरण DR, ITAT, Mumbai 5. गार्ड फाईल / Guard file.