M/s Amar Ujala Publications, Agra V. The Dy. CIT, Agra

CO 17/AGR/2010

• Counselvise Citation: [2010] 122 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5034 (ITAT-AGRA)
• Duration Of Justice: 7 month(s) 19 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Cross Objection
• Pronouncement Date: 17-09-2010
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 16-09-2010
• Assessment Year: 1999-2000
• Appeal Filed On: 29-01-2010
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Unexplained cash credit
• Section: 68

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AGRA BENCH : AGRA BEFORE SHRI R.K. GUPTA, J. M. AND SHRI P.K. BANSAL, A.M. PAN NO. AABFA 8332 Q I.T.A.NO . 434/AGR/2009 A. Y. 1999-2000 DY. CIT, M/S. DAILY AMAR UJALA, CIRCLE 1, VS. BYE PASS ROAD, AGRA AGRA APPELLANT RESPONDENT C.O.NO. 17/AGR/2010 A. Y. 1999-2000 M/S. DAILY AMAR UJALA, DY. CIT, BYE PASS ROAD, VS. CIRCLE 1, AGRA AGRA CROSS OBJECTOR RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY : SHRI SAMPOORNANAD, JR. DR RESPONDENT BY : SHRI SAHIB P. SATSANGEE, C. A. O R D E R PER R.K.GUPTA, J.M. THIS IS AN APPEAL OF THE DEPARTMENT AND CROSS OBJE CTION BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF LD. CIT (A)-I, AGRA, RELATING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 1999-2000. 2. CROSS OBJECTION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE WAS WITHDRAWN DURING THE APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS. THEREFORE, THE SAME IS DISMI SSED AS WITHDRAWN. - 2 - 2 3. IN APPEAL OF THE DEPARTMENT, THE ONLY ISSUE IS AGAI NST DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS. 2,17,754/- MADE BY THE ASSESSIN G OFFICER, UNDER SECTION 68 OF THE ACT. 4. THE LD. SENIOR DR HAD PLACED RELIANCE ON THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 5. ON THE OTHER HAND, THE LD.COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS PLACED RELIANCE ON THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A). IT WAS FUR THER SUBMITTED THAT THE ISSUE IS SQUARELY COVERED BY THE DECISION OF THE AG RA BENCH IN THE CASE OF AGRA CHEMICALS AND IN THE CASE OF DINESH KUMAR JAIN , WHERE ON THE SIMILAR FACTS, THE ADDITIONS WERE MADE UNDER SECTIO N 68 AND THEY WERE DELETED BY THE TRIBUNAL. COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE T RIBUNAL WAS ALSO FILED BY THE LD. AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE. 6. THE BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT DURING THE ASS ESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, THE ASSESSING OFFICER NOTICED THAT M/S . GANGA RAM AGARWAL GROUP WAS INVOLVED IN MONEYLENDING BUSINESS. IT WAS NOTICED THAT VARIOUS ENTITIES BELONGING TO THE SAME GROUP HAD PR OVIDED CHEQUES DENOTING LOANS TO VARIOUS PERSONS IN LIEU OF CASH R ECEIPTS FROM THEM. WHEN THE SAID DEBTORS WERE NO LONGER IN NEED OF THE LOAN, THE ENTRIES WERE REVERSED BY SHOWING RETURN OF LOAN BY CHEQUE B Y THE CONCERNED DEBTORS AND RETURN OF CASH BY SELF WITHDRAWAL. IN T HE PRESENT CASE, THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOUND THAT THE ASSESSEE IS ONE OF THE SUCH DEBTORS, WHO HAD SHOWN RECEIPT OF RS. 22,17,754/- AS LOANS FROM VARIOUS CONCERNS OF - 3 - 3 M/S. GANGA RAM GROUP. CONFIRMATORY LETTERS OF THE T HREE CREDITORS, COPY OF THE ACCOUNT IN THE BOOKS OF THE CREDITORS AND LE TTER DATED 11.12.206 FROM ALL THE CREDITORS GIVING THEREIN COMPLETE DETA ILS OF THE SOURCES OF THE IMPUGNED LOAN WERE FILED BY THE ASSESSEE. HOWEVER, THE ASSESSING OFFICER REJECTED ARGUMENTS OF THE ASSESSEE AND TREA TED THE LOAN AS UNEXPLAINED CASH CREDIT UNDER SECTION 68. BEFORE TH E LD. CIT(A), DETAILED WRITTEN SUBMISSION DATED 29.8.2005 WAS FILED. THE D ETAIL OF LOANS TAKEN FROM THREE CREDITORS I.E. M/S. DEBI SAHAI SHRI RAM AGARWAL, HUF AT RS. 5,31,850/- , FROM SHRI RAM AGARWAL & CO., RS. 6,54, 616/- AND FROM M/S. KRISHNA TRADERS AT RS. 10,31,288/- TOTALING TO RS. 22,17,754/- WERE FILED. ALL THESE PERSONS ARE ASSESSED TO TAX AND THE INCOM E DETAILS WERE GIVEN. SOURCE OF THE FUNDS IN THE HANDS OF THESE CREDITORS WERE ALSO FILED. COPY OF ACCOUNT IN THE BOOKS OF THE CREDITOR FILED BEFOR E THE ASSESSING OFFICER WERE FILED BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) ALSO. RELIANCE WAS PLACED ON THE DECISION OF HON'BLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF ORISSA CORP ORATION, 159 ITR 78, AND IN CASE OF NEMICHAND KOTHARI 264 AND ALSO ON TH E DECISION OF HON'BLE ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF RAJESH DAL MILL, COPY OF THE SAME WAS ALSO FILED. RELIANCE WAS ALSO PLACED ON TH E DECISION AGRA BENCH. AFTER CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSI NG THE MATERIAL ON RECORD, THE LD. CIT(A) FOUND THAT ONUS LAY UPON ASS ESSEE HAS BEEN DULY DISCHARGED. ALL THE REQUIRED DETAILS IN RESPECT TO LOAN WERE FILED. - 4 - 4 THEREFORE, THE LD. CIT(A) DELETING THE ADDITION AS IN HIS VIEW THE ASSESSEE HAS EXPLAINED THE GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTION. 7. AFTER CONSIDERING THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICE R AND LD. CIT(A), WE SEE NO REASON TO INTERFERE WITH THE FIND ING OF THE LD. CIT(A). THE LD. CIT(A) HAS GIVEN A FINDING OF FACT THAT ONU S LAY UPON THE ASSESSEE HAS BEEN DULY DISCHARGED. BY MERELY PRESUMING THAT THE CREDITOR BELONGS TO GANGA RAM AGARWAL, WHO WAS INDULGING IN MONEYLEN DING BUSINESS BY GIVING FICTITIOUS ENTRIES, IN OUR CONSIDERED VIEW, IS NOT JUSTIFIED FOR REJECTING THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE. ALL THE CREDI TORS ARE ASSESSED TO TAX. THEY HAVE CONFIRMED THE LOAN TRANSACTIONS ENTERED W ITH THE ASSESSEE. THE SOURCE OF LOAN WAS ALSO EXPLAINED BY FILING NECESSA RY DETAILS. IF THE ASSESSING OFFICER WAS NOT SATISFIED, HE COULD HAVE CALLED FOR THE RESPECTIVE CREDITOR BY ISSUING SUMMONS UNDER SECTIO N 131, WHICH HE FAILED TO DO SO. THE RATIO OF THE DECISION OF THE A PEX COURT IN THE CASE OF ORISSA CORPORATION (SUPRA) AND THE RATIO OF THE DEC ISION IN THE CASE OF NEMICHAND KOTHARI SUPPORTS THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE . THE TRIBUNAL IN CASE OF ADITYA AGARWAL DECIDED IN I.T.A.NO. 262/AGR /2006 VIDE ORDER DATED 15.2.2007, SIMILAR ISSUE HAS BEEN DECIDED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE. THE LD. CIT(A) HAS TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION THIS DE CISION. THE FINDING OF LD. CIT(A) REMAINED UNCONTROVERTED AS NOTHING HAS B EEN FILED TO ESTABLISH OTHERWISE. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTA NCES AND IN VIEW OF THE REASONING GIVEN BY THE LD. CIT(A), WE CONFIRM H IS ORDER. - 5 - 5 8. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE DEPARTMENT AS WEL L AS CROSS OBJECTION OF THE ASSESSEE ARE DISMISSED. THE ORDER IS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 17 TH SEPTEMBER, 2010. SD/- SD/- ( P.K. BANSAL ) ( R.K. GUPTA ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER AGRA DATED : 17 TH SEPTEMBER,2010. CPU* 1617 COPY FORWARDED TO :- THE APPELLANT THE RESPONDENT THE CIT THE CIT(A) CONCERNED. THE D.R, ITAT AGRA. GUARD FILE BY ORDER, AR, I.T.A.T., AGRA.