M/S Starlite Lighting Ltd, Nashik V. Additional C.I.T., Nashik

ITA 1371/PUN/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 134 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1187 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 2 month(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 26-08-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 27-10-2014
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 19-06-2012
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: B; RAJESH DAMOR HEERAJ JAIN
• Section: 68

Judgement Text

, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE T RIBUNAL PUNE BENCH A, PUNE . . , , BEFORE SHRI R.K. PANDA, AM AND SHRI VIKAS A WASTHY, JM . / ITA NOS.1370 & 13 71/PN/2012 / ASSESSMENT YEARS : 2006-07 & 2009 -10 M/S. STARLITE LIGHTING LIMITED, 6, MIDC, SATPUR, NASHIK-422007 PAN NO.AACCS4988 E . / APPELLANT V/S ADDL.CIT, RANGE-1, N ASHIK . / RESPONDENT / APPELLANT BY : SHRI C.H. NANIWADE KAR / DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI RAJESH DAMO R HEERAJ JAIN & B / ORDER PER R.K. PANDA, A M : THE ABOVE TWO APPEA LS FILED BY THE ASSESS EE ARE DIRECTED AGAIN ST THE SEPARATE ORDERS DATED 30-04-2012 & 15-05-2012 OF THE CIT(A)-II, NASHIK RELATING TO AS SESSMENT YEARS 2006 -07 & 2009-10 RESPE CTIVELY. FOR THE SAKE OF CON VENIENCE, THESE APPE ALS WERE HEARD TOGET HER AND ARE BEING DISPOSED OF BY THIS COMMON ORD ER. / DATE OF HEARING :24. 08.2015 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEM ENT:26.08.2015 2 ITA NO.1370 & 1371/PN /2012 ITA NO. 1370/PN/2 012 (A.Y. 2006-07) : 2. THE ONLY EFFECT IVE GROUND RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE READS A S UNDER : THE HONBLE CIT(A) ERR ED IN FACTS AND IN LAW IN CONFIRMING THE ADDITION OF RS.95,07,316/ AS UNEXP LAINED CASH CREDITS U/S.6 8 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT. 3. FACTS OF THE C ASE, IN BRIEF, ARE THA T THE ASSESSEE IS A C OMPANY ENGAGED IN THE BUS INESS OF MANUFACTUR ING AND TRADING OF COMPACT FLUORESCENT LAMPS. IT FILED ITS RETURN OF INCOME ON 08- 03-2007 DECLARING TOTAL LOSS AT RS.10,65,24,54 7/- ALONG WITH FB T RETURN U/S.115WD(1) DECLA RING VALUE OF FRING E BENEFIT AT RS.3,3 7,718/- DURING THE YEAR THE ASSESSEE HAS SHOWN A TURNOVER OF RS.7. 82 CRORE WITH LOSS OF RS.3.47 CRORE WHICH HAS FURT HER BEEN ADJUSTED TO THE TOTAL LOSS OF RS.10.65 CR ORES DURING THE YE AR. DURING THE CO URSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDI NGS THE AO NOTED AD DITION OF RS.5,78,07, 869/- TO UNSECURED LOAN. IN CASE OF THE FOLLOWING CREDITORS, THE AO W AS OF THE VIEW THAT THE ASSES SEE FAILED TO PROVE THE GENUINENESS OF THE LOAN TRANSACTIONS : SR.NO. NAME ADDITION DURING THE YEAR 1 ANITA KAPUR RS.17,15,165/ 2 ARCHANA SHAH RS.15,13,779/ 3 DALAL ENTERPRISES HUF RS.12,03,837/ 4 FLYING HORSE SOLUTION RS.26,22,814/ 5 GUNJAN SHAH RS.1,97,923/ 6 KARNIK PARIKH HUF RS.27,30,302/ 7 M M GANDHI HUF RS.7,89,829/ 8 SHOBHANA SETH RS.6,13,775/ 9 SURESH K. SHAH HUF RS.29,60,884/ TOTAL RS.1,43,48,308/ 4. THE AO OBSERV ED THAT IN RESPECT OF THE ABOVE UNSECURE D LOANS, CREDITED IN THE BOO KS OF THE ASSESSEE, IT HAS FAILED TO EXP LAIN THE TRANSACTIONS IN REGAR D TO THEIR NATURE, SOU RCES, CREDIT WORTHINE SS, DATE OF TRANSACTIONS ETC. ACCORDINGLY, UNSECUR ED LOANS OF RS.1,43,4 8,308/- 3 ITA NO.1370 & 1371/PN /2012 WERE ADDED TO THE INCOME OF THE ASSES SEE UNDER THE PROVI SIONS OF SECTION 68 OF THE I.T. ACT, 1961. 5. BEFORE CIT(A) THE ASSESSEE SUBMIT TED THAT SEPARATE DO CUMENTS LIKE CONFIRMATIONS, P AN, AND BANK STATEM ENT EXTRACTS FOR MOS T OF THE LOAN ACCOUNTS WERE S UBMITTED FOR VERIFICAT ION AND WERE ACCEPTE D BY THE AO. IT WAS SUBMITT ED THAT IN 9 CASES ON WHICH ADDITION H AS BEEN MADE U/S.68 THE REQ UIRED INFORMATION CO ULD NOT BE OBTAINED IN TIME DUE TO VARIOUS REASO NS, VIZ., THE PARTY WA S NOT AVAILABLE AT THE RELEVANT TIME, PARTY BEING NO N COOPERATIVE ETC. I T WAS ARGUED THAT D URING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEED INGS THE AO WAS UR GED ON SEVERAL OCCA SIONS TO SUMMON THE PARTIES FOR VERIFICATION OF TH E UNSECURED LOANS O BTAINED FROM THEM WHICH HE FAILED TO DO A ND MADE THE ADD ITION OF RS.1,43,48,308. IT WAS ARGUED THAT THE ASSESSEE IS ABLE T O OBTAIN CONFIRMATIONS FROM 7 PARTIES AND ONLY P ARTIES NAMELY SMT. ARCHANA SHAH AND SHRI SURES H K. SHAH HAVE NOT R ESPONDED INSPITE OF R EPEATED REMINDERS. 6. BASED ON THE ARGUMENTS ADVANCED BY THE ASSESSEE AN D DETAILS FURNISHED, THE LD.CI T(A) CALLED FOR A REM AND REPORT FROM THE AO. THE AO SUBMITTED THAT O UT OF THE 9 PERSONS T O WHOM LOANS/SUMM ONS WERE ISSUED ONLY THE BELO W MENTIONED 4 PERS ONS SENT THEIR CONFIR MATIONS, THE DETAILS OF WHICH A RE AS UNDER : SR.NO. NAME AMOUNT 1 SHRI KARNIK KANTILAL PAR IKH (HUF) RS.21,76,198/ 2 SHRI M. M. GANDHI (HUF) RS.5,50,000/ 3 SMT. SHOBHANA SETH RS.3,99,629/ 4 SMT. ANITA KAPUR RS.17,15,165/ TOTAL RS.48,40,992/ 4 ITA NO.1370 & 1371/PN /2012 7. THE AO REPOR TED THAT FROM THE A BOVE AS WELL AS THE DETAILS FURNISHED BY THE AS SESSEE, THERE IS A D IFFERENCE OF RS.10,0 1,079/- WHICH THE ASSESSEE C OULD NOT RECONCILE. THE OTHER 5 CREDITORS DID NOT RESPOND TO THE SUMM ONS, THE TOTAL OF WHIC H COMES TO RS.84,99 ,237/-. THE AO FURTHER STATE D THAT THE 3 CREDITO RS WHOSE CONFIRMATIO NS WERE FILED DID NOT RESPOND TO THE LETTERS. THEY ARE FLYING HORSE SO LUTIONS- RS.9,61,644/-, GUN JAN SHAH-RS.1,97,92 3/- AND DALAL ENT ERPRISES (HUF)-RS.3,86,038/- . NO CONFIRMATIONS W ERE FILED FOR THE REMA INING 2 LOAN CREDITORS. 8. BASED ON THE A RGUMENTS ADVANCED BY THE ASSESSEE THE L D.CIT(A) DELETED AN AMOUNT OF RS.48,40,992/-. HE, HOWEVER, SUSTAI NED THE DIFFERENCE IN THE ABOVE MENTIONED 4 PARTIES AMOUNT ING TO RS.10,01,079/- AND THE AMOUNT OF LOAN OBTAINED FROM THE 5 PARTIES AMOUNTING TO RS.84, 99,237/- IN WHOSE C ASES THERE WAS NO RE SPONSE TO THE LETTER OF THE AO. THE RELEVANT OBSER VATION OF THE CIT(A) AT PARA 7 AND 8 OF THE ORDER RE ADS AS UNDER : 7. I HAVE CAREFULLY G ONE THROUGH THE ASSESSM ENT ORDER, SUBMISSION O F THE APPELLANT AND THE R EMAND REPORT OF THE AO , I HAVE ALSO GONE THROU GH THE CONFIRMATIONS OF SH RI. KARNIK KANTILAL PARIK H (HUF), SHRI M. M GAN DHI (HUF), SMT, SHOBHANA S ETH AND SMT. ANITA KAP UR FILED BEFORE DURING T HE COURSE OF REMAND REPOR T PROCEEDINGS. A PERUSA L OF THE SAME REVEALS TH AT THESE CREDITORS HAVE GI VEN COMPLETE DETAILS O F THE A/CS ALONGWITH TH EIR PAN. THE CREDITORS HAV E CONFIRMED HAVING GIVE N LOANS THROUGH A/C PAY EE CHEQUES. THE LOANS WE RE ARRANGED THROUGH FI NANCE BROKER SHRI. KET AN MEHTA OF M/S. K S M SE CURITIES AND FINANCE LT D., MUMBAI. IN VIEW OF THE CONFIRMATIONS SENT DIR ECTLY BY THESE 4 CREDI TORS, GENUINENESS OF C ASH CREDITS IS ACCEPTABLE. A S REGARDS OTHER CREDITO RS, ON PERUSAL OF THE XE ROX COPIES OF THE CONFIRMA TIONS FILED BY THE APPE LLANT IN THE CASE OF DA LAL ENTERPRISES (HUF), GU NJAN SHAH, SURESH K. SHAH (HUF), FLYING HO RSE SOLUTION AND ARCHANA SH AH, IT WAS REVEALED THAT THERE WERE CUTTINGS IN T HE BALANCES (DALAL ENTE RPRISES (HUF) AND FLYING HORSE SOLUTIO N). CONFIRMATION OF DALAL E NTERPRISES (HUF) DID NO T MENTION PAN. IN THE C ASE OF GUNJAN SHAH NO ADD RESS WAS MENTIONED, IN THE CASE OF FLYING HOR SE SOLUTION WHILE THE CO NFIRMATION LETTER HAS SHOWN A BALANCE OF RS. 9,61,644/, THE APPELLAN T HAS SHOWN A CLOSING B ALANCE OF RS. 8,86,096/ AS ON 31/03/2006. ADDRES SES OF SURESH K. SHAH (H UF) AND ARCHANA SHAH A RE SAME. SIMILARLY ADDRESS ES REFLECTED IN THE CON FIRMATIONS LETTERS OF DA LAL ENTERPRISES (HUF) AND FLYING HORSE SOLUTION A RE SAME. THE APPELLANT HAS 5 ITA NO.1370 & 1371/PN /2012 NOT FURNISHED ANY OTHER EVIDENCE IN SUPPORT OF GENUINENESS OF THESE CA SH CREDITS EXCEPT XEROX CO PIES OF THE CONFIRMATIO NS WHICH TOO ARE FULL OF DISCREPANCIES AS MENTI ONED ABOVE. WHILE LETT ERS SENT TO SURESH K. S HAH AND ARCHANA SHAH BY TH E AO U/S.133(6) OF THE ACT DURING REMAND REPO RT PROCEEDINGS RETURNED U NDELIVERED WITH A REMA RK 'NOT KNOWN', OTHERS DID NOT RESPOND TO THE SU MMONS/LETTERS OF THE AO. THE APPELLANT DID NOT PRODUCE ANY EVIDENCE TO REBUT THE PRESUMPTION DRAWN AGAINST HIM U/S. 68 OF THE ACT BY PRODUCI NG THE PARTIES IN WHO SE NAMES THE AMOUNTS IN QUESTION HAD BEEN CRED ITED BY THE APPELLANT IN ITS BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS. T HE APPELLANT FAILED TO FUR NISH ANY COGENT EVIDE NCE. BURDEN WAS ON T HE APPELLANT TO PROVE THE SOURCE OF RECEIPT. ONUS WAS ON THE APPELLANT TO DISCHARGE THAT CASH CREDITOR WAS A PERSO N OF MEANS. A PROP ER IDENTIFICATION OF THE CRE DITOR ALONG WITH ITS FINA NCIAL STANDING TO ADVAN CE LOANS WAS REQUIRED TO B E FURNISHED BY THE APPE LLANT, WHICH HE FAILED TO DO SO IN THE CASE OF ABOVE REFERRED 5 CREDITORS. T HE APPELLANT HAS FAILED TO ESTABLISH THE GENUIN ENESS OF THE TRANSA CTIONS AS WELL AS THE CREDITWORTHINESS OF THE CREDITORS WITH REGARD TO THE TRANSACTIONS THAT HA VE TAKEN PLACE BETWEEN IT AND THE CREDITORS THROU GH ONE KSN SECURITIES A ND FINANCE LTD., MUMBAI. T HE VERY FACT THAT ALL THE TRANSACTIONS WERE ENTER ED INTO BETWEEN THE PART IES THROUGH ACCOUNT P AYEE CHEQUES WILT NOT BE SUFFICE TO PROVE THE G ENUINENESS OF THE TRA NSACTIONS. SIMILARLY M ERE MENTION OF THE PAN BY THE CREDITORS THAT TOO IN FEW CASES ONLY WILL N OT SUFFICE. THE APPELLANT H AD ADMITTEDLY FILED ONL Y THE XEROX COPIES OF T HE CONFIRMATIONS OF THE CRE DITORS BEFORE THE AO AN D ALSO DURING THE APPELL ATE PROCEEDINGS. IT IS THEREF ORE, APPARENT THAT THE A PPELLANT HAS NOT BEEN A BLE TO PROVE EITHER THE IDEN TITY OR THE EXISTENCE OF T HE ABOVE 5 PERSONS. 8. IN VIEW OF THE AB OVE, I AM OF THE CONSIDE RED VIEW THAT THE APPELL ANT HAS FAILED TO PROVE THE GENUINENESS OF THESE CA SH CREDITS AS A WHOLE. N O EVIDENCES WERE FURNISH ED TO PROVE IDENTIFICATIO N AND CREDIT WORTHINESS OF THESE CREDITORS. M/S. K S M SECURITIES AND FINA NCE LTD WHICH IS STATED TO HAVE ARRANGED THESE LO ANS ALSO DID NOT RESPON D TO APPELLANT'S LETTERS AS STATED ORALLY BY AR DUR ING THE APPELLATE PROCEE DINGS. UNDER THE FACTS A ND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CA SE, THE FOLLOWING CASH C REDITS HAVE NOT BEEN FO UND TO BE GENUINE. SR.NO. NAME AMOUNT 1 DALAL ENTERPRISE S, (HUF) RS. 12,03,837 2 GUNIAN SHAH RS. 1,97, 923 3 SURESH K.SHAH ( HUF) RS.29,60,88 4 4 FLYING HORSE SO LUTION RS. 26,22,81 4 5 ARCHANA S HAH RS.15,13, 779 TOTAL RS. 84,99,237 THE AO WAS THEREFORE, JUSTIFIED IN TREATING THE SAME AS UNEXPLAINED C ASH CREDITS AND MAKING TH E ADDITION U/S 68 OF THE ACT. ADDITIONS OF RS. 84,99,237/ AS MENTIO NED ABOVE AND RS.10 ,08,079/ ON ACCOUNT OF DIFFERENCE IN THE AMOU NTS OF 3 CREDITORS NAM ELY SHRI. KARNIK KANTIL AL PARIKH (HUF), SHRI. M. M. GANDHI (HUF). SMT . SHOBHANA SETH (TOTAL RS. 95,07,316/) U/S 68 OF TH E IT ACT ARE CONFIRMED. THE APPELLANT GETS A REL IEF OF RS.48,40,992/ (1,43, 48,308 RS. 95,07,316) . 6 ITA NO.1370 & 1371/PN /2012 9. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE APPELLANT I S PARTLY ALLOWED. 9. AGGRIEVED WITH SUCH ORDER OF THE CI T(A) THE ASSESSEE IS I N APPEAL BEFORE US. 10. THE LD. COUNS EL FOR THE ASSESSEE ST RONGLY CHALLENGED THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A). HE SUBM ITTED THAT THE ASSESS EE HAS TAKEN THE LOA NS FROM THE LOAN CREDITORS BY ACCOUNT PAYEE CHEQ UE AND HAS ALSO RETU RNED THE LOANS BY ACCOUNT P AYEE CHEQUE. THUS , THE ENTIRE TRANSAC TIONS ARE THROUGH BANKING C HANNELS. THE PA RTIES HAD SUBMITTE D THEIR CONFIRMATIONS ALONG WITH THEIR PAN NUM BERS AND THEIR BANK DETAILS. THEREFORE, THERE IS N O JUSTIFICATION ON TH E PART OF THE CIT(A) IN NOT ACCEPTING THE AMOUN T OF RS.95,07,316/-. 11. THE LD. DEPAR TMENTAL REPRESENTAT IVE ON THE OTHER HAN D HEAVILY RELIED ON THE ORDE R OF THE CIT(A). HE SUBMITTED THAT DESPITE OPPORTUNITIES GIVEN B Y THE AO THE ASSESSE E WAS UNABLE TO PROD UCE THE PARTIES TO SUBSTANTIA TE THE HUGE LOANS G IVEN BY THEM, THERE FORE, THE LD.CIT(A) WAS FUL LY JUSTIFIED IN SU STAINING THE ADDI TION OF RS.95,07,316/-. 12. THE LD. COUNS EL FOR THE ASSESSEE IN HIS REJOINDER SUBMI TTED THAT DESPITE REQUEST BY TH E ASSESSEE TO SUMMO N THE LOAN CREDITORS THE AO DID NOT SUMMON T HE PARTIES. RELYIN G ON VARIOUS DECIS IONS HE SUBMITTED THAT UNDE R SUCH CIRCUMSTANCE S THE ADDITION MADE U/S.68 CANNOT BE SUSTAINE D. HOWEVER, IN A N ALTERNATE SUBMIS SION HE SUBMITTED THAT GIVEN AN OPPORTUNITY THE A SSESSEE WILL PRODUCE THE LOAN CREDITORS TO SUBSTANT IATE THEIR CREDIT WORTH INESS. 13. WE HAVE HEAR D THE RIVAL ARGUMEN TS MADE BY BOTH TH E SIDES, PERUSED THE ORDERS O F THE AO THE CIT(A) AND THE PAPER BOOK FILED ON 7 ITA NO.1370 & 1371/PN /2012 BEHALF OF THE ASSESSE E. WE HAVE ALSO CON SIDERED THE VARIOUS D ECISIONS CITED BEFORE US. W E FIND THE AO DURIN G THE COURSE OF ASS ESSMENT PROCEEDINGS ASKED THE ASSESSEE TO SUBSTANTIATE THE L OAN OF RS.1,43,48,308/- TAK EN FROM THE 9 PARTIE S. SINCE THE ASSESS EE FAILED TO SUBSTANTIATE THE LOAN OBTAINED FROM THE 9 PARTIES ALON G WITH DOCUMENTARY EVIDEN CES TO HIS SATISFACTIO N, THE AO MADE ADD ITION OF RS. 1,43,48,308/- U /S.68 OF THE I.T. ACT. WE FIND THE ASSESS EE BEFORE THE CIT(A) FILED CERTA IN DETAILS BASED ON W HICH THE LD.CIT(A) CA LLED FOR A REMAND REPORT FROM THE AO. WE FIND DU RING THE REMAND PROC EEDINGS THE AO ISSUED LETTERS TO THE 7 PERSONS WH OSE CONFIRMATIONS WE RE FILED. WE FIND ONLY 4 P ERSONS OUT OF THE 7 PERSONS HAD SEN T THEIR CONFIRMATIONS. FROM THE CONFIRMATIONS F ILED BY THE LOAN CRED ITORS AS WELL AS BALANCE OU TSTANDING IN THE BO OKS OF ASSESSEE, TH ERE IS A DIFFERENCE OF RS.10,08 ,079/-, THE DETAILS OF WHICH ARE AS UNDER : SR.NO. NAME AMOUNT SHOWN BY THE ASSESSEE AMOUNT AS PER LOAN CONFIRMATIONS DIFFEREN CE 1 SHRI KARNIK KANTILAL PARIKH (HUF) RS.27,30,302/ RS.21,76,198/ RS.5,54,104/ 2 SHRI M. M. GANDHI (HUF) RS.7,89,829/ RS.5,50,000/ RS.2,39,829/ 3 SMT. SHOBHANA SETH RS.6,13,775/ RS.3,99,629/ RS.2,14,146/ 4 SMT. ANITA KAPUR RS.17,15,165/ RS.17,15,165/ TOTAL RS.48,40,992/ 10,08,079/ THEREFORE, THE LD.C IT(A) WHILE ACCEPTI NG LOAN TO THE T UNE OF RS.48,40,992/- IN R ESPECT OF 4 PERSONS SUSTAINED THE ADD ITION OF RS.10,08,079/- WHIC H IS THE DIFFERENCE B ETWEEN THE FIGURES S HOWN BY THE ASSESSEE AND THE FIGURES AS PER THE LO AN CONFIRMATION LETTE RS FILED BEFORE THE AO BY THE ABOVE 4 PARTIES. THE REFORE, THE ORDER OF TH E CIT(A) SUSTAINING THE DIFFERE NCE OF RS.10,08,079/ - IS UPHELD. 8 ITA NO.1370 & 1371/PN /2012 14. NOW COMING T O THE BALANCE AMOU NT OF RS.84,99,237/ - TAKEN FROM THE 5 PARTIES, IT IS A FACT THAT DESPITE LETTERS ISSUED BY THE AO, THE ABOVE LOAN CREDITORS DID NOT RESPOND TO SU CH LETTERS DURING THE REMAND PROCEEDINGS. IT IS T HE SETTLED POSITION O F LAW THAT FOR ACCEP TING ANY CASH CREDIT, THE ONU S IS ALWAYS ON THE A SSESSEE TO SUBSTANTI ATE WITH EVIDENCE REGARDING THE IDENTIFY AND CR EDIT WORTHINESS OF THE LOAN CREDITOR AND THE GEN UINENESS OF THE TRAN SACTION. IN THE INSTA NT CASE, ALTHOUGH THE ASSESS EE HAS FILED CERTAIN CONFIRMATIONS, HOWE VER, THE FACT REMAINS THAT THE CREDIT WORTHINESS OF THOSE LOAN CREDITORS HAS NOT YET BEEN PROVED. MERELY BECAUSE THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED CERTAIN CONFIRMATION LETTERS FROM THE ABOVE PART IES THE SAME CANNOT ABSOLVE THE ASSESSEE FROM TH E ONUS CAST ON IT. H OWEVER, SINCE THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE MAD E A PLEA THAT GIVEN A N OPPORTUNITY THE AS SESSEE IS IN A POSITION TO P RODUCE THE LOAN CR EDITORS BEFORE THE AO WITH DOCUMENTARY EVIDEN CE TO HIS SATISFAC TION REGARDING THE CREDIT WORTHINESS OF THE LOA N CREDITORS, THEREFORE , WE IN THE INTEREST O F JUSTICE, DEEM IT PROPER TO RES TORE THE ISSUE TO THE FILE OF THE AO WITH A DIRECTION TO GIVE ONE MORE O PPORTUNITY TO SUBST ANTIATE WITH EVIDENC E TO HIS SATISFACTION REGARDIN G THE CREDIT WORTHIN ESS OF THE LOAN CRED ITORS FOR THE LOAN OF RS.84,99 ,237/-. THE ASSESSE E IS DIRECTED TO PROD UCE THE PARTIES BEFORE THE AO FOR HIS EXAMINATION . IT WAS MADE CLEAR THAT NO NOTICE U/S.133(6) OR SUMMON U/S.131 IS REQUIRED TO BE ISSUED BY THE AO AND IT IS THE RES PONSIBILITY OF THE ASS ESSEE TO PRODUCE THE PARTIES BEFORE THE AO TO WH ICH THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS AGREED. WE HOLD AND DIRECT A CCORDINGLY. THE GROU ND RAISED BY THE ASS ESSEE IS ACCORDINGLY PARTLY ALL OWED FOR STATISTICAL P URPOSES. 9 ITA NO.1370 & 1371/PN /2012 ITA NO.1371/PN/20 12 (A.Y. 2009-10) : 15. AFTER HEARING BOTH THE SIDES, WE F IND THE AO MADE AD DITION OF RS.27,67,599/- U/S. 68 OF THE I.T. ACT IN RESPECT OF THE LOANS OBTAINED BY THE ASSESSEE FROM THE FOLLOWING PARTIES : SR.NO. NAME AMOUNT 1 ARCHANA SHAH RS.1,72,697/ 2 FLYING HORSE SOLUTION RS.3,63,451/ 3 GUNJAN SHAH RS.18,000/ 4 LEENA DALAL RS.5,00,487/ 5 NEETA DALAL RS,10,156/ 6 RITA R. SHAH RS.2,60,000/ 7 STAR ENTERPRISES RS,1,40,209/ 8 SURESH K. SHAH (HUF) RS.2,86,883/ 9 VARSHA DALAL RS,10,15,716/ TOTAL RS.27,67,599/ 16. WE FIND IN AP PEAL THE LD.CIT(A) U PHELD THE ACTION OF THE AO SINCE THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO PRODUCE A NY EVIDENCE TO REB UT THE PRESUMPTION DRAWN AGAINST THE ASSES SEE U/S.68 OF THE ACT BY PRODUCING THE PARTIE S IN WHOSE NAMES T HE AMOUNTS IN QUES TION HAD BEEN CREDITED BY TH E ASSESSEE IN ITS B OOKS OF ACCOUNT. I T IS THE SUBMISSION OF THE LD. COUNSEL FOR TH E ASSESSEE GIVEN O NE MORE OPPORTUNITY THE ASSE SSEE WILL PRODUCE THE LOAN CREDITORS BEFORE THE AO TO PROVE THE IDENTITY AND CREDIT WORTHINE SS OF THE LOAN CREDIT ORS AND THE GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTIONS. C ONSIDERING THE TOTALI TY OF THE FACTS OF THE CASE AND IN VIEW OF OUR FINDIN G AT PARA 14 OF THIS O RDER FOR A.Y. 2006-07, WE RES TORE THE ISSUE TO THE FILE OF THE AO WITH A DIRECTION TO GIVE ONE MORE O PPORTUNITY TO THE A SESSEE TO SUBSTANTI ATE WITH DOCUMENTARY EVIDEN CE TO HIS SATISFACTIO N REGARDING THE IDEN TITY AND CREDIT WORTHINESS OF THE LOAN CREDITORS AND THE GENUINENES S OF THE TRANSACTION. THE A SSESSEE IS ALSO DIR ECTED TO PRODUCE T HE LOAN CREDITORS BEFORE THE A O AND NO NOTICE U/S .133(6) OR SUMMONS U/S.131 IS REQUIRED TO WHICH THE LD. COUNSEL FOR T HE ASSESSEE HAS ALSO AGREED. 10 ITA NO.1370 & 1371/PN /2012 ACCORDINGLY, THE GROU ND RAISED BY THE ASSE SSEE IS ALLOWED FOR ST ATISTICAL PURPOSES. 17. IN THE RESULT , ITA NO.1370/PN/ 2012 IS PARTLY ALLO WED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES AND ITA NO.137 1/PN/2012 IS ALLO WED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 26 -08-2015. SD/- SD/- ( VIKAS AWASTHY ) ( R.K. PANDA ) / JUDICIAL MEMBER / ACCOUNTANT MEM BER PUNE ; DATED : 26 TH AUGUST, 2015. / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. / THE RESPONDENT 3. ( ) , / THE CIT(A)-II, NASHI K 4 . / THE CIT, NASHIK 5 . 6. , , / DR, ITAT, A PUNE; / GUARD FILE. / BY ORDER , //TRUE C //TRUE COPY// / SR. PRIVATE SECRETA RY , / ITAT, PUNE