DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 25(1), MUMBAI V. M/S.TIRUPATI DEVELOPERS, MUMBAI

ITA 569/MUM/2018

AI Insights

The case involves the Revenue's appeal against the CIT(A)'s decision to delete the additions made under section 68 of the Income Tax Act, which pertained to alleged bogus unsecured loans amounting to Rs.3.1 Crores for A.Y.2009-10, Rs.2.29 Crores for A.Y.2010-11, and Rs.95 lakhs for A.Y.2011-12. The Tribunal had to decide whether the assessee had sufficiently discharged the onus under section 68 to prove the nature and source of the credits, particularly when the lender entities were found to be non-existent. The Judicial Member initially reversed the CIT(A)'s decision, and after a difference of opinion, the Third Member confirmed this reversal, leading to the final decision in favor of the Revenue.

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 40335 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 year(s) 9 month(s) 29 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 29-11-2024
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: E
• Next Hearing Date: 29-11-2024
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 31-01-2018
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: R.R. MAKWANA
• Assessee Lawyers: VISHWAS MEHENDALE
• Keywords: Difference of opinion; Bogus loan; Bogus
• Section: 68; 133(6)

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘E’ BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE: SHRI NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.612/Mum/2018 (Assessment Year :2009-10) ITA No.568/Mum/2018 (Assessment Year :2010-11) & ITA No.569/Mum/2018 (Assessment Year :2011-12) Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax-25(1) Mumbai Vs. M/s. Tirupati Developers 52-C-Wing, 2nd Floor, Raj Industrial Complex PR, Military Road Marol, Andheri(E) Mumbai-400 059 PAN/GIR No.AAEFT9672M (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Assessee by Shri Vishwas Mehendale Revenue by Shri R.R.Makwana Date of Hearing 29/11/2024 Date of Pronouncement 29/11/2024 आदेश / O R D E R PER AMIT SHUKLA (J.M): In the aforesaid case there was a difference of opinion between the ld. Judicial Member and ld. Accountant Member in the aforementioned appeal filed by the Revenue. Accordingly, u/s.255(4) of the Act, the Hon’ble President had appointed ld. Third Member to decide the issue. The questions for which the matter was referred were as under:- ITA No.612/Mum/2018 and Others M/s. Tirupati Developers 2 \"1)Whether meticulous paper work to prove the transaction in question by bringing on record PAN, bank statement, copy of ledger account are sufficient to justify the alleged transactions of bogus unsecured loans in the absence of explaining the nature and source of credit, particularly when lender's entities in question are found to be not existing, is enough to discharge the onus under section 68 of the Act.? 2) Whether when the notice issued under section 133(6) of the Act received back with the report that no such entities are in existence and the assessee has failed to discharge the onus to produce the lender parties before the AO as required under section 68 of the Act, the subsequent repayment by the assessee qua the alleged bogus loans is enough to grant the relief to the assessee? 3) Whether, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the assessee can be considered to have discharged the onus placed upon him u/s. 68 of the Act to prove the cash credit ?\" 2. In all these appeals, the substantive issue involved was addition u/s.68 for the addition of Rs.3.1 Crores for the A.Y.2009-10; Rs.2.29 Crores for A.Y.2010-11; and Rs.95 lakhs for A.Y.2011-12. The ld. CIT(A) had deleted the addition for all the years against which Revenue had come in appeal before the Tribunal. The ld. Judicial Member had reversed the finding of the ld. CIT(A) citing various reasons and allowed Revenue’s grounds. However, ld. Accountant Member in his separate order had remitted the matter back to the file of the ld. AO after giving certain directions. The ld. Third Member vide order dated 10/11/2024 has confirmed the finding and order of the ld. Judicial Member’s allowing the Revenue’s appeal in ITA Nos. 612/Mum/2018, 568/Mum/2018 and 569/Mum/2018. Once the order of the ld. Judicial Member has been confirmed by the ld. Third Member, accordingly the ITA No.612/Mum/2018 and Others M/s. Tirupati Developers 3 observation and the finding of the ld. Judicial Member is held to be majority judgment and consequently, the grounds raised by the Revenue in all the three years are allowed and the order of the ld. CIT(A) is reversed. Addition thus made by the ld. AO is confirmed. 3. In the result all the three appeals of the Revenue are allowed. Order pronounced on 29th November, 2024. Sd/- (NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA) Sd/- (AMIT SHUKLA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Mumbai; Dated 29/11/2024 KARUNA, sr.ps Copy of the Order forwarded to : BY ORDER, (Asstt. Registrar) ITAT, Mumbai 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent. 3. CIT 4. DR, ITAT, Mumbai 5. Guard file. //True Copy// "