ACIT-24(1), Mumbai V. M/S DO IT COMPUTERS (JV), Mumbai

ITA 1967/MUM/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2021] 107 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9191 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 4 month(s) 4 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 09-08-2021
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 04-04-2019
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: BHARAT ANDHLELD
• Assessee Lawyers: ANANT PAI LD
• Keywords: Unexplained cash credit
• Section: 143(3); 13; 68

Judgement Text

1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL D BENCH, MUMBAI , , BEFORE HONBLE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VP AND HONBLE SHRI MANOJ KUM AR AGGARWAL, AM (HEARING THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCING MODE) ./ I.T.A. NO. 1967 /M UM/ 2019 ( / ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2012 - 13 ) ACIT 24(1), R. NO. 604, PIRAMAL CHAMBERS, JEEJEEBHOY LANE, LALBAUG PAREL, MUMBAI - 400 012 / VS. M/S DO I T COMPUTERS (JV) 201, MADHU INDL. PARK AVADH NARAYAN TIWARI MARG, MOGRAPADA, ANDHERI(E), MUMBAI - 400 069 ./ ./ PAN/GIR NO. A A FFD - 5828 - A ( / APPELLANT ) : ( / RESPONDENT ) REVENUE BY : SHRI BHARAT ANDHLE, LD. SR. D R ASS ESSEE BY : SHRI ANANT PAI - LD. A R / DATE OF HEARING : 09 /08 /2021 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 09/08/2021 / O R D E R MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) 1. AFORESAID APPEAL BY REVENUE FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR (AY) 20 12 - 13 ARISES OUT OF THE ORDER OF L EARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME - TAX (APPEALS) - 36 , MUMBAI [CIT(A)], DATED 30/01 /20 19 IN THE MATTER OF ASSESSMENT FRAMED BY LEARNED ASSESSING OFFICER (AO) U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 147 ON 04/03/2016. THE ONLY ISSUE UNDER THE APPEAL IS ADDITION OF UNSECURED LOANS OF RS.180 LACS. 2 2 . HAVING HEARD RIVAL SUBMISSIONS, OUR ADJUDICATION TO THE APPEAL WOULD BE AS GIVEN IN SUCCEEDING PARAGRAPHS. 3. PURSUANT TO RECEIPT OF CERTAIN INFORMATION FROM INVESTIGATION, THE ASSESSMENT WAS REOPENED BY LD . AO ON THE ALLEGATION THAT THE ASSESSEE OBTAINED BOGUS UNSECURED LOANS FROM FOLLOWING PARTIES BELONGING TO SHRI PRAVIN KUMAR JAIN GROUP: - NAME OF THE LENDER PAN AMOUNT CASPER ENTERPRISES P. LTD AMC07955M 35,00,000 CASPER ENTERPRISES P. LTD AAAC079 55M 10 ,00,000 JOSH TRADING CO. P. LTD AACCJ4233H 25,00,000 SUMUKH COMMERCIAL P. LTD AACCC7400M 40,00,000 TAJ IMPEX ADPPJ3459C 10,00,000 TAJ IMPEX ADPPJ3459C 10,00,000 VANGUARD JEWELS LTD AAACV3480A 50,00,000 TOTAL 1,80,00,000 BASE D ON INVESTIGATION FINDINGS, THE ABOVE LOANS WERE ADDED IN ASSESSEES HAND A S UNEXPLAINED CASH CREDIT U/S 68 OF THE ACT . 4. THE LD. CIT(A) DELETED THE ADDITION BY FINDING THAT THE AFORESAID AMOU NTS WERE SUBJECT MATTER OF SETTLEMENT BEFORE INCOME TAX SETTL EMENT COMMISSION (ITSC) AND THEREFORE, SUSTAINING THIS ADDITION WOULD AMOUNT TO DOUBLE TAXATION. THE RELEVANT OBSERVATIONS WERE AS UNDER: - 4.1.4 AS A CONSEQUENCE OF THE SEARCH ACTION ON PRAVIN KUMAR JAIN GROUP, SH. PARAS MEHTA BROTHER OF THE JV MEMBER - COMPUTERS ENGINEERS - PROPRIETOR SH. CHETAN MEHTA ACCEPTED IN HIS APPLICATION BEFORE THE HON'BLE SETTLEMENT COMMISSION, THAT HE HAD ARRANGED TO PROVIDE FINANCE TO HIS FAMILY MEMBERS / ENTITIES CONTROLLED BY THE FAMILY. THE APPELLANT SUBMITTED THAT THE VARI OUS AMOUNTS MENTIONED BY THE AO IN HIS ORDER HAVE BEEN CONSIDERED IN THE PEAK WORKING OFFERED BEFORE THE HON. SETTLEMENT COMMISSION AND TAX ON THE INCOME SO DERIVED HAS BEEN PAID ALONGWITH THE APPLICATION. IT IS ONLY AFTER THE DEPARTMENT SATISFIES ITSELF R EGARDING THE ADEQUATE TAX PAYMENT THAT THE APPLICATION IS ACCEPTED. THE APPLICATION HAS BEEN THEREAFTER ACCEPTED BY THE HON. SETTLEMENT COMMISSION VIDE ITS ORDER DT. 30.9.2016. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE THE APPELLANT PLEADED THAT THE LOANS 3 TAKEN BY THE APPELLAN T SHOULD NOT BE TREATED AS CASH CREDIT U/S 68 AS THAT WOULD AMOUNT TO DOUBLE TAXATION. 4.1.5 AFTER CONSIDERING ALL THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AS ENUMERATED ABOVE I HAVE COME TO THE UNDERSTANDING THAT ONCE THE LOANS HAVE BEEN CLAIMED BY A FAMIL Y MEMBER WHO WAS RESPONSIBLE FOR SOURCING THE SAME AND THE DUE TAXES HAVE BEEN DECLARED AND PAID BEFORE THE HON'BLE SETTLEMENT COMMISSION, IN SUCH A SCENARIO REVISITING THE APPELLANT WITH THE SAME SET OF LOANS AS CASH CREDIT WOULD NOT ONLY BE UNFAIR AND IL LOGICAL BUT WOULD, ALSO TANTAMOUNT TO DOUBLE TAXATION. HENCE, IN VIEW OF THE SAME THE AO IS DIRECTED TO DELETE THE ADDITIONS MADE U/S 68 AFTER GOING THROUGH THE CORRECT FIGURES CLAIMED BY THE APPELLANT. THE GROUND OF APPEAL NOS. 1 TO 8 ARE HEREBY ALLOWED. AGGRIEVED, THE REVENUE IS IN FURTHER APPEAL BEFORE US. 5. THE LD.AR HAS DRAWN OUR ATTENTION TO THE DECLARATION MADE BEFORE ITSC AND D EMONSTRATED THAT THESE AMOUNTS WERE SUBJECT MATTER OF SETTLEMENT BEFORE ITSC AND THEREFORE, THE ADDITIONS WOULD NOT BE JUS TIFIED, AS RIGHTLY HELD IN THE IMPUGNED ORDER. THIS FACT REMAINED UNCONTROVERTED BEFORE US. SINCE THE ISSUE HAS ALREADY BEEN SETTLED BEFORE ITSC, WE DO NOT FIND ANY INFIRMITY IN THE IMPUGNED ORDER. 6. THE APPEAL STAND DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON 09 TH AUGUST, 2021. SD/ - SD/ - (MAHAVIR SINGH) (MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL) / VICE PRESIDENT / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI; DATED : 09/08/2021 SR.PS, DHA NANJAY / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. / THE RESPONDENT 3. ( ) / THE CIT(A) 4. / CIT CONCERNED 5. , , / DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. / GUARD FILE 4 / BY ORDER, / (DY./ASSTT.REGISTRAR) , / ITAT, MUMBAI.