Income-tax Officer, V. Shri Laxminarayan Shriramji Attal, Aurangabad

ITA 1661/PUN/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 119 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4006 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 3 month(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 01-11-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 01-08-2016
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Section: 133(6); 68

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B BENCH, PUN E BEFORE SHRI R.S. SYAL, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JM . / ITA NO.1661/PUN/2016 / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2012-13 THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 3(1), AURANGABAD ....... / APPELLANT / V/S. SHRI LAXMINARAYAN SHRIRAMJI ATTAL, 2A, J.K. TOWERS, ADALAT ROAD , AURANGABAD-431001 PAN : ABEPA5548G / RESPONDENT REVENUE BY : SHRI SUDHENDU DAS ASSESSEE BY : SMT. DEEPA KHARE / DATE OF HEARING : 31.10.2018 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 01.11.2018 / ORDER PER R.S. SYAL, VP : THIS APPEAL BY THE REVENUE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDE R PASSED BY THE LD. CIT (APPEALS)-2, AURANGABAD ON 23.05.2016 IN RELATION TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2012-13. 2. THE ONLY ISSUE RAISED IN THE APPEAL THROUGH DIFFEREN T GROUNDS IS AGAINST DELETION OF ADDITION OF RS.1,71,22,179/-. BRIEFLY STATED THE F ACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE IS AN INDIVIDUAL AND ENGAGED IN TH E PROFESSION OF CHARTERED ACCOUNTANCY. DURING THE COURSE OF SCRUTINY A SSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, THE ASSESSING OFFICER NOTICED THAT THE BALANCE OF UNSECURED LOANS INCREASED DURING THE YEAR BY A SUM OF RS.1,74,57,009/ -. ON BEING 2 ITA NO.1661/PUN/2016 A.Y.2012-13 CALLED UPON TO FURNISH THE DETAILS OF FRESH UNSECURED LOANS , THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT HE WAS PREPARING SEPARATE BALANCE SHEET S FOR PROFESSION AND OTHER INDIVIDUAL AFFAIRS. IT WAS FURTHER EXPLAINED THAT TOTAL UNSECURED LOANS IN BOTH THE BALANCE SHEETS AS AT THE CLOSE OF THE PREC EDING YEAR STOOD AT RS.1,66,52,306/- AS AGAINST THE INSTANT YEARS CLOSING BALAN CE AT RS.1,77,91,839/- THEREBY, REGISTERING A FRESH INCREASE OF RS.11,39,5 33/-. THE ASSESSING OFFICER DID NOT ACCEPT ASSESSEES CONTENTION OF HAVING SEPARATE BALANCE SHEETS. HE LISTED OUT 22 CREDITORS WITH THEIR CLOS ING BALANCES TOTALING TO RS.1,66,52,306/-. TO VERIFY THE GENUINENESS OF T HESE TRANSACTIONS, THE ASSESSING OFFICER DOWNLOADED THEIR E-RETURNS AND ON V ERIFICATION FOUND THAT THE LOAN TO THE ASSESSEE WERE NOT REFLECTED IN THE IR BALANCE SHEETS. HE, THEREFORE, MADE AN ADDITION OF RS.1,71,22,179/- ( RS.1,74,57,00 9/- MINUS RS.3,34,830/-). THE LD. CIT (APPEALS) GOT CONVINCED WITH THE ASSESSEES CONTENTIONS AND DELETED THE ADDITION, AGAINST WHICH THE RE VENUE HAS APPROACHED THE TRIBUNAL. 3. HAVING HEARD BOTH THE SIDES AND PERUSED THE RELEVANT MATERIAL ON RECORD, IT IS OBSERVED THAT THE ASSESSEE CATEGORICALLY S TATED BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER THAT HE WAS MAINTAINING SEPARATE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT I.E. FOR PROFESSION AND OTHER AFFAIRS AND THE AMOUNT OF SUNDRY CRE DITORS APPEARING IN BOTH THE ACCOUNT STATEMENTS OF THE PRECEDING YEAR STO OD AT RS.1.66 CRORE. THE ASSESSING OFFICER SIMPLY BRUSHED ASIDE THIS CONTENTION WITHOUT FINDING ANYTHING CONTRARY TO IT. THE LD. CIT(A) VERIFIED THIS FACT AND GOT CONVINCED WITH THE ASSESSEE. THE LD. DR COULD NOT POINT OUT THAT T HE FINDINGS RECORDED BY THE CIT(APPEALS) IN THIS REGARD IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSE E ARE IN ANY MANNER FRIVOLOUS OR NOT BASED ON ANY EVIDENCE. ONCE THE OPENING BALANCE OF UNSECURED LOANS IS FOUND AT RS.1.66 CRORE, THIS CANNOT FOR M THE SUBJECT MATTER OF ADDITION U/S 68 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (H EREINAFTER ALSO 3 ITA NO.1661/PUN/2016 A.Y.2012-13 CALLED `THE ACT) IN THE EXTANT YEAR. THUS, THE ASSESSE E RAISED FRESH LOANS DURING THE YEAR ONLY FOR SUM OF RS.11,39,533/-. IT IS STILL FUR THER NOTED THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER ISSUED NOTICES U/S. 133(6) OF THE ACT T O ONLY FOUR PERSONS FOR CONFIRMATION. ALL THE FOUR PERSONS FURNISHED CONFIR MATIONS. THE ASSESSING OFFICER DID NOT CALL THOSE PERSONS FOR FURTHER VER IFICATION. THE ASSESSEE SUPPLIED PAN OF EACH AND EVERY CREDITOR ALONG W ITH CONFIRMATION STATEMENTS AND RESPECTIVE BANK STATEMENTS FROM WHICH S UCH LOANS WERE ADVANCED. THE ASSESSING OFFICER DID NOT FIND ANYTHING AMISS IN SUCH DOCUMENTS. IN SUCH CIRCUMSTANCES, WE FIND NO FAULT IN THE V IEW CANVASSED BY THE LD. FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY IN DELETING THE ADDITION. T HE IMPUGNED ORDER IS, THEREFORE, UPHELD. 4. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON 1ST DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2018. SD/- SD/- (VIKAS AWASTHY) (R.S.SYAL) /JUDICIAL MEMBER / VICE PRESIDENT / PUNE; / DATED : 1 ST NOVEMBER, 2018 SB / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT. 2. / THE RESPONDENT. 3. THE CIT(APPEALS)-2, AURANGABAD. 4. THE PR. CIT-2, AURANGABAD. 5. , , , / DR, ITAT, B BENCH, PUNE. 6. ! / GUARD FILE. // TRUE COPY // / BY ORDER, / PRIVATE SECRETARY , / ITAT, PUNE.*