, ""
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL "C" BENCH, MUMBAI
BEFORE HON'BLE S/SHRI H.L. KARWA, PRESIDENT AND B.R.BASKARAN (AM)
.. , .. ,
./I.T.A. Nos.3879 & 3909/Mum/2011
( / Assessment Years :2003-04 & 2002-03)
Dy.Commissioner of Income / M/s Pooja Equireasearch
Tax-Central Circle-45, Vs. Pvt.Ltd.,
Room No.659, 6th Floor, A/25, Abhinav Apartment,
Aayakar Bhavan, Mathuradas Road,
M K Road, Kandivali,(W),
Mumbai-400020 Mumbai-400067
( /Appellant) .. ( / Respondent)
. / . / PAN/GIRNo. :AAACP6499F
/ Revenue by : Shri Premand J
/Assessee by Shri M Subramanian
/ Date of Hearing
: 1.1.2015
/Date of Pronouncement : 16.01.2015
/ O R D E R
Per B.R.BASKARAN, Accountant Member:
Both the appeals filed at the instance of revenue are directed
against the separate orders passed by Ld CIT(A)-36, Mumbai and they
relate to the assessment year 2002-03 and 2003-04. The revenue is
aggrieved by the decision of Ld CIT(A) in deleting the additions made by
the assessing officer u/s 68 of the Act.
2 3879&3909/ Mum/2011
2. We heard the parties and perused the record. In assessment year
2002-03, the assessing officer has assessed the credit balance of
Rs.70,83,180/- appearing in the name of M/s Nageshwar Investments Pvt
Ltd u/s 68 of the Act. In assessment year 2003-04, the assessing officer
has assessed following cash credits as income of the assessee u/s 68 of
the Act:-
Share Application money from M/s D Kumar
Trading Company Private Limited 10,00,000
Unsecured Loan from M/s R keshavlal Traders
Private Limited 75,00,000
The assessment of both the years have been re-opened by the assessing
officer, consequent to the information received at the time of search
conducted in the case of M/s SKS Ispat Group. In connection with the
above said search proceedings, the directors of the companies, from
whom the assessee had received loans/share application money, were
examined and in the statements taken from them on oath u/s 131 of the
Act, it appears that they have admitted that they have given
accommodation entries. Under these background, the assessing officer
rejected the documents filed by the assessee and accordingly assessed the
above amounts as unexplained Cash Credits in the respective years u/s 68
of the Act.
3. However, a perusal of the orders passed by Ld CIT(A) would show
that the Ld CIT(A) has failed to consider and address the ground on which
the impugned assessments have been made. We notice that the Ld
CIT(A) has deleted the assessments of cash credits in both the years on
the reasoning that the assessee has discharged the burden placed upon it
u/s 68 of the Act by proving the identity and credit worthiness of the
creditor and the genuineness of the transactions. We may notice that the
assessing officer has made the impugned additions only doubting about
3 3879&3909/ Mum/2011
the genuineness of the transactions on the basis of facts, which surfaced
during the course of search proceedings conducted in the hands of M/s
SKS Ispat Group and also on the basis of statement taken from the
directors of the parties from whom the assessee had received funds. We
notice that the Ld CIT(A) has failed to address those vital issue, on which
the impugned additions have been made. Thus, the question of
genuineness of transactions remain unaswered in both the years.
4. Under these set of facts, we are not able to sustain the orders of Ld
CIT(A) in both the years, since the first appellate authority has failed to
address the ground on which the impugned additions have been made.
Hence, in our view, the additions made in both the years require fresh
adjudication by Ld CIT(A) by duly addressing the ground on which the
impugned additions have been made. Accordingly, we set aside the orders
passed by Ld CIT(A) in both the years and restore them to his file with the
direction to examine them afresh. The Ld CIT(A) is directed to consider
and address the grounds on which the assessing officer had made the
additions. After affording adequate opportunity of being heard, the Ld
CIT(A) may take appropriate decision in accordance with the law.
5. In the result, both the appeals filed by the revenue are treated as
allowed for statistical purposes.
The above order was pronounced in the open court on 16th
Jan,2015.
16 th Jan 2015
sd sd
(.. / H.L. KARWA) (.. ,/ B.R. BASKARAN)
/ PRESIDENT /Accountant Member
Mumbai: 16th Jan, 2015.
4 3879&3909/ Mum/2011
. ../ SRL , Sr. PS
/Copy of the Order forwarded to :
1. / The Appellant
2. / The Respondent.
3. () / The CIT(A)- concerned
4. / CIT concerned
5. , , /
DR, ITAT, Mumbai concerned
6. / Guard file.
/ BY ORDER,
true copy
(Asstt. Registrar)
, /ITAT, Mumbai
|
