SHRI ASHOK KUMAR A. BANTHIA, MUMBAI V. INCOME TAX OFFICER 24(1)(2), MUMBAI

ITA 2194/MUM/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 115 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4302 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 11 month(s) 3 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 13-03-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 09-04-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Unexplained cash credit; Opportunity of cross examination; Accommodation entries; Onus to prove; Set aside
• Section: 143(3); 133(6); 201; 68

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH SMC , MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI C.N. PRASAD, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO S . 2192, 2193, 2194, 2196, 2197 &2198 /MUM/201 8 (A.Y S: 2008 - 09, 2009 - 10, 2010 - 11, 2012 - 13, 2013 - 14 & 2014 - 15) SHRI ASHOK KUMAR A. BANTHIA PROP. OF M/S. A.B. ENTERPRISES 601/2, GIRI RESIDENCY CHS LTD., 88/91, ANDHERI KURLA ROAD, J.B. NAGAR, ANDHERI (E), MUMBAI 400 059 PAN: AABPB 9970 H V. I.T.O 24(1) (2) ROOM NO. 605, 6 TH FLOOR, PIRAMAL CHAMBERS, LALBAUG, MUMBAI 400 012 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : SHRI NEELKANTH KHANDELWAL DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI RAJESH OJHA DATE OF HEARING : 15.02.2019 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 13 .03 .2019 O R D E R PER C. N. PRASAD (JM) 1. THESE APPEALS ARE FILED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR THE ASSE SSMENT YEARS 2008 - 09 TO 2010 - 11 AND 2012 - 13 TO 2014 - 15 AGAINST DIFFERENT ORDERS OF THE LEARNED COMMI SSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) - 36, MUMBAI [HEREINAFTER IN SHORT LD.CIT(A)] DATED 30 & 31. 01.201 8 IN SUSTAINING THE AD DITION MADE U/S. 68 OF THE ACT. 2 ITA NOS. 2192 TO 2194 & 2196 TO 2198/MUM/201 8 SHRI ASHOK KUMAR A. BANTHIA 2. AS THE I SSUE IS COMMON IN ALL THESE APPEALS I.E. ADDITION MADE U/S. 68 OF THE AC T FROM THE VARIOUS CREDITORS , F IRST WE TAKE UP THE APPEAL FOR THE A SSESSMENT YEAR 2008 - 09. BRIEFLY STATED THE FACTS ARE THAT, BASED ON THE INFORMATION RECEIVED FROM THE DGIT (INV.) THAT THE ASSESSEE IS ONE OF THE BENEFICIARIES OF THE ACCOMMODATION ENTRIES PROVIDED BY VARIOUS ENTITIES BEING OPERATED BY PRAVEEN KUMAR JAIN G ROUP [FOR SHORT PKJ GROUP ], THE ASSESSMENTS FOR THE A .YS. 2008 - 09 TO 20 10 - 11 AND 2012 - 13 TO 2013 - 14 WERE REOPENED AND THE ASSESSMENT FOR THE A .Y. 2014 - 15 WAS CO MPLETED U/S. 143(3) OF THE ACT. 3. IN THE COURSE OF THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS THE ASSESSING OFFI CER REQUIRED THE ASSESSEE TO PROVE THE GENUINENESS, IDENTITY AND CREDITWORTHINESS OF THE CREDITORS. ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT, ASSESSEE HAS TAKEN LOANS FROM THE CREDITORS THROUGH ACCOUNT PAYEE CHEQUES AND THE SAID LOANS WERE REPAID THROUGH ACCOUNT PAYEE CHE QUES. ASSESSEE FURNISHED CONFIRMATIONS FROM THE CREDITORS , BANK STATEMENT S OF THE CREDITORS, BANK STATEMENT OF THE ASSESSEE, AND THE AFFIDAVIT OF SHRI PRAVEEN KUMAR JAIN RETRACTING FROM HIS EARLIER STATEMENT THAT HE IS PROVIDING ACCOMMODATION ENTRIES. IT WAS ALSO CONTENDED BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER BY THE ASSESSEE THAT EVEN IN THE COURSE OF SEARCH PROCEEDINGS IN PKJ GROUP NOTHING HAS BEEN UNEARTHED TO PROVE OR EVEN SUGGEST THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS RECEIVED CASH OR CASH HAS BEEN G IVEN TO 3 ITA NOS. 2192 TO 2194 & 2196 TO 2198/MUM/201 8 SHRI ASHOK KUMAR A. BANTHIA PKJ GROUP COMPANIES . LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITS THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS NOT PROVIDED THE ASSESSEE WITH STATEMENTS OF THE PERSONS HE IS RELYING ON NOR AN OPPORTUNITY TO CROSS EXAMINE SUCH PERSONS. REFE RRING TO THE NOTICE ISSUED U/ S. 133(6) WHICH WERE RETURNED UNSERVED IN SOME CASES , LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS GIVEN THE CORRECT ADDRESSES IN SUCH C ASES TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER LATER AS THERE IS CHAN GE IN ADDRESS OF THE CREDITORS. THEREFORE, IT WAS CONTENDED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS PROVED THE GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTION, IDENTITY AND CREDIT WORTHINESS OF THE CREDITORS BY FURNISHING ALL NECESSARY INFORMATION AND NO ADDITION IS WARRANTED. 4. HOWEVER NOT CONVINCED WITH THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE , THE ASSESSING OFFICER BASED ON THE INVESTIGATION REPORT IN THE CASE OF PKJ GROUP CONCLUDED THAT THE ENTITI E S WH ICH OPERATED BY PKJ GROUP ARE NON - EXISTENT. IN THE STATEMENTS RECORDED U/S. 132(4) OF THE ACT THE DIRECTORS/ PROP RIETORS ADMITTE D THAT THEY HAVE MERELY DUMMY DIRECTORS AND USED TO SIGN DIFFERENT PAPERS FOR NOMINAL CONSIDERATIONS GIVEN BY THE PKJ GROUP AND THEY HAVE NOT CARRIED OUT ANY REAL TRANSACTIONS. IN VIEW OF THE STATEMENTS GIVEN BY PKJ GROUP AND THE DIRECTORS /PROPRIETORS OF THE CONCERNS , THE ASSESSING OFFICER TREATED THE CREDITORS AS NON - GENUINE AND ACCORDINGLY ADDITION WAS MADE U/S. 68 OF THE ACT. ON APPEAL LD.CIT(A) SUSTAINED THE ADDITION. 4 ITA NOS. 2192 TO 2194 & 2196 TO 2198/MUM/201 8 SHRI ASHOK KUMAR A. BANTHIA 5. THE L D. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE LOAN S HAVE BEEN RECEIVED THROUGH ACCOUNT PAYEE CHEQUES AND THE SAME WERE REPAID THROUGH ACCOUNT PAYEE CHEQUES, CONFIRMATIONS FROM THE CONCERNED CREDITORS WERE ALSO FURNISHED, THE PAN DETAILS OF THE CRE DITORS, LEDGER COPY OF THE CREDITORS, BANK STATEMENTS OF THE CREDITORS, ASSESSEES BANK STATEMENTS, AUDITED COMPUTATION OF INCOME , BALANCE SHEET OF THE CREDITORS AND ALSO THE AFFIDAVIT OF THE SHRI PRAVEEN KUMAR JAIN RETRACTING HIS STATEMENT EARLIER GIVEN IN THE COURSE OF THE SEARCH BEFORE INVESTIGATION AUTHORITIES. THEREFORE, ALL THESE EV IDENCES PROVE THAT THE LOAN TRANSACTION IS GENUINE. LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITS THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS ESTABLISHED THE IDENTITY, GENUINENESS AND CREDIT WORTHINESS AND THE PRIMA RY ONUS CAST ON THE ASSESSEE HAS BEEN DISCHARGED. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITS THAT ON IDENTICAL FACTS THE COORDINATE BENCH OF TH IS TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF M/S. SHREE LAXMI ESTATE PVT LTD., V. ITO IN ITA.NO. 5954/MUM/ 2016 AND M/S. SHREE LAXMI DEVELOPERS V. ITO IN ITA.NO. 2562/MUM/2017 DATED 29.12.2017 , HELD THAT , ONCE THE ASSESSEE HAS DISCHARGED HIS INITIAL BURDEN THE BURDEN SHIFT S TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO PROVE OTHERWISE. LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITS THAT NO FURTHER ENQUIRY HAS BEEN MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER EXCEPT RELYING ON THE STATEMENTS AND TH E INVESTIGATION REPORT TO PROVE THAT THE LOAN TRANSACTIONS WERE NON - GENUINE. LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE 5 ITA NOS. 2192 TO 2194 & 2196 TO 2198/MUM/201 8 SHRI ASHOK KUMAR A. BANTHIA ALSO PLACED RELIANCE ON THE DECISION OF THE COORDINATE BENCH IN THE CASE OF M/S. SHREE LAXMI DEVELOPERS V. JCIT IN ITA.NO. 6090/ MUM/20 17 DATED 07.03. 2018 AND SUBMITTED THAT FOLLOWING THE DECISION OF THE COORDINATE BENCH IN THE CASE OF M/S. SHREE LAXMI DEVELOPERS V. ITO IN ITA.NO. 2562/MUM/2017 DATED 29.12.2017 DELETED THE SIMILAR ADDITION. 6. LD.DR VEHEMENTLY SUPPORTED THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. 7. HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS, PERUSED THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. ASSESSEE DURING THESE ASSESSMENT YEARS RAISED LOANS FROM VARIOUS CREDITORS AS UNDER: - A.Y. AMOUNT (RS.) NAME OF THE CREDITORS 2008 - 09 10,00,000 NATASHA ENTERPRISES 2009 - 10 16,00,000 JASODA EXPORTS 2010 - 11 1,25,000 NAKSHTARA BUSINESS PVT LTD RYAN INTERNATIONAL 5,00,000 RYAN INTERNATIONAL 2012 - 13 5,00,000 NAKSHATRA BUSINESS PVT LTD 2013 - 14 4,00,000 CASPER ENTERPRISES PVT LTD 20,00,000 FALAK TRADING CO PVT LTD 7,50,000 JOSH TRADING CO PVT LTD 2014 - 15 30,00,000 FALAK TRADING CO PVT LTD 8. THE ASSESSING OFFICER BASED ON THE INFORMATION OF THE DGIT (INV.) REQUIRED THE ASSESSEE TO PROVE THE GENUINENESS OF THE LOAN TAKEN FROM THESE CREDITORS AS THESE CREDITORS WERE SHOWN TO BE ONLY AN ENTRY PROVIDER IN THE INVESTIGATION CARRIED OUT BY THE DGIT (INV.) PURSUANT TO SEARCH IN THE CASE OF PKJ GROUP . THE ASSESSEE IN THE COURSE OF THE ASSESSMENT 6 ITA NOS. 2192 TO 2194 & 2196 TO 2198/MUM/201 8 SHRI ASHOK KUMAR A. BANTHIA PROCEEDINGS FILED COPY OF RETURNS, COMPUTATION BALANC E SHEETS, BANK STATEMENTS, AUDITED PROFIT AND LOSS ACCOUNT BALANCE SHEETS, CONFIRMATION OF ACCOUNTS , PAN DETAILS OF THE CREDITORS INCLUDING THE BANK STATEMENTS OF THE ASSESSEE AND ALSO THE AFFIDAVIT OF SHRI PRAVEEN KUMAR JAIN WHO HAS RETRACTED HIS EARLIER STATEMENT GIVEN IN THE COURSE OF THE INVESTIGATION THAT HE IS PROVIDING ONLY ACCOMMODATION ENTRIES. ALL THESE DOCUMENTS ARE DISBELIEVED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND ADDITION WAS MADE U/S. 68 OF THE ACT WHICH WAS SUSTAINED BY THE LD.CIT(A). 9. ASSESSEE CONTENDS BEFORE ME THAT THE INITIAL BURDEN OF PROVING THE IDENTITY, GENUINENESS AND CREDITWORTHINESS OF THE CREDITORS HAS BEEN DISCHARGED BY THE ASSESSEE BY PROVIDING COMPLETE DETAILS REGARDING THE SAID LOAN TRANSACTIONS. IT WAS FU RTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE LOAN WAS RECEIVED AND REPAID ONLY THROUGH ACCOUNT PAYEE CHEQUES , CONFIRMATIONS FILED, BANK STATEMENTS FILED PROFIT AND LOSS ACCOUNT AND BALANCE SHEETS OF CREDITORS FILED, PAN DETAILS OF CREDITORS FILED AND T HEREFORE, THE LOANS CANN OT BE TREATED AS NON - GENUINE BASED ONLY ON THE REPORT OF THE DGIT (INV.) WITHOUT PROVIDING THE STATEMENTS RELIED ON BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND WITHOUT PROVIDING ANY CROSS EXAMINATION TO THE ASSESSEE. I NOTICE IN THE CASE OF THE M/S. SHREE LAXMI ESTATE P VT LTD., V. ITO AND M/S. SHREE LAXMI DEVELOPERS V. ITO (SUPRA) IDENTICAL ISSUE CAME UP BEFORE THE COORDINATE BENCH AND THE COORDINATE BENCH CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSIONS AS WELL AS 7 ITA NOS. 2192 TO 2194 & 2196 TO 2198/MUM/201 8 SHRI ASHOK KUMAR A. BANTHIA THE MATERIALS PLACED BEFORE THE LOWER AUTHORITIES CONCLUDED THAT WHEN ONCE THE ASSESSEE FURNISHED ALL THE DETAILS IN RESPECT OF THE LOAN TRA NSACTION ASSESSEE HAS DISCHARGED ITS INITIAL BURDEN AND THE BURDEN SHIFTS TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO PROVE OTHERWISE. IT WAS ALSO HELD THAT ASSESSING OFFICER MADE ADDITION ONLY ON THE BASIS OF THE INFORMATION RECEIVED FROM THE INVESTIGATION WING BUT NOT BASED ON ANY EVIDENCE TO DIS PROVE THE LOAN TRANSACTION FROM THE CREDITORS, WHILE HOLDING SO IT HAS BEEN OBSERVE D AS UNDER: - 4. THE FIRST ISSUE THAT CAME UP FOR OUR CONSIDERATION IS ADDITION MADE BY THE AO TOWARDS UNSECURED LOAN U/S 68 OF THE ACT. THE AO M ADE ADDITION TOWARDS UNSECURED LOANS ALONGWITH INTEREST THEREON RECEIVED FROM JOSH TRADING COMPANY PVT LTD AND VIRAJ MERCANTILE PVT LTD ON THE GROUND THAT THESE ARE BOGUS ACCOMMODATION ENTRIES RECEIVED FROM GROUP COMPANIES OF SHRI PRAVINKUMAR JAIN. ACCORDI NG TO THE AO, THE ASSESSEE IS THE BENEFICIARY OF ACCOMMODATION ENTRIES PROVIDED BY SHRI PRAVINKUMAR JAIN FROM HIS BOGUS COMPANIES. THE AO FURTHER OBSERVED THAT THOUGH THE ASSESSEE HAS FURNISHED DETAILS OF IDENTITY, FAILED TO PROVE GENUINENESS OF TRANSACTIO NS AND CREDITWORTHINESS OF THE PARTIES IN THE BACKDROP OF CLEAR FINDINGS OF INVESTIGATION WING THAT SHRI PRAVINKUMAR JAIN HAS ADMITTED THAT HE WAS INDULGING IN PROVIDING ACCOMMODATION ENTRIES. THIS FACT HAS BEEN FURTHER CONFIRMED BY SHRI DINESH CHOUDHARY, BROKER INVOLVED IN ARRANGING ACCOMMODATION ENTRIES WITH SHRI PRAVINKUMAR JAIN, WHO STATED THAT SHRI PRAVINKUMAR JAIN IS INDULGING IN PROVIDING ACCOMMODATION ENTRIES, THEREFORE, THE AO OPINED THAT UNSECURED LOANS STATED TO BE RECEIVED FROM THOSE COMPANIES A RE UNEXPLAINED CREDIT AND HENCE MADE ADDITION U/S 68 OF THE ACT. IT IS THE CONTENTION OF THE ASSESSEE THAT LOANS RECEIVED FROM JOSH TRADING COMPANY PVT LTD AND VIRAJ MERCANTILE PVT LTD ARE SUPPORTED BY VALID DOCUMENTS. THE ASSESSEE FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT I T HAS FURNISHED CONFIRMATION LETTERS ALONGWITH COPIES OF THEIR BANK STATEMENT AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF IT RETURNS SHOWING THE ABOVE TRANSACTIONS. THE ASSESSEE FURTHER CONTENDED THAT IN RESPONSE TO NOTICES U/S 133(6) ISSUED BY AO, THE ABOVE PARTIES REPLIED AL ONGWITH DOCUMENTS MENTIONED IN THE NOTICE, THEREFORE, THERE IS NO REASON FOR THE AO TO DOUBT THE TRANSACTIONS ONLY ON THE BASIS OF INFORMATION RECEIVED FROM INVESTIGATION WING THAT TOO, WITHOUT PROVIDING ANY OPPORTUNITY OF CROSS EXAMINATION OF THE PARTIES. IN THIS REGARD, HE RELIED UPON PLETHORA OF JUDGEMENTS INCLUDING THE JUDGEMENT OF HONBLE BOMBAY HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS GAGANDEEP INFRASTRUCTURE PVT LTD 349 ITR 680 (BOM) AND HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF LOVELY EXPORTS PVT LTD VS CIT 216 CTR 295(SC). 5. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES, PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD AND GONE THROUGH THE ORDERS OF AUTHORITIES BELOW. THE AO MADE ADDITION TOWARDS UNSECURED LOANS RECEIVED FROM JOSH TRADING COMPANY PVT LTD AND VIRAJ MERCANTILE PVT LT D ON THE BASIS OF INFORMATION RECEIVED FROM INVESTIGATION WING WHICH REVEALED THAT THE ASSESSEE IS THE BENEFICIARY OF BOGUS ACCOMMODATION ENTRIES PROVIDED BY SHRI PRAVEENKUMAR JAIN THROUGH HIS BOGUS COMPANIES. THE 8 ITA NOS. 2192 TO 2194 & 2196 TO 2198/MUM/201 8 SHRI ASHOK KUMAR A. BANTHIA AO HAS MADE ADDITIONS U/S 68 OF THE INCOME - TAX ACT, 1961 ON THE GROUND THAT THOUGH THE ASSESSEE HAS FURNISHED NECESSARY EVIDENCES TO PROVE IDENTITY OF THE PARTIES, BUT FAILED TO ESTABLISH GENUINENESS OF TRANSACTIONS AND CREDITWORTHINESS OF PARTIES IN THE BACKDROP OF CLEAR FINDINGS OF INVESTIGATION WING THAT THOSE COMPANIES ARE HAWALA COMPANIES INVOLVED IN PROVIDING ACCOMMODATION ENTRIES. THE AO HAS BROUGHT OUT FACTS IN THE LIGHT OF STATEMENT OF SHRI PRAVINKUMAR JAIN DEPOSED BEFORE THE INVESTIGATION WING TO MAKE ADDITION. EXCEPT THIS, THERE IS NO CO NTRARY EVIDENCE IN THE POSSESSION OF THE AO TO DISPROVE THE LOAN TRANSACTIONS FROM JOSH TRADING COMPANY PVT LTD AND VIRAJ MERCANTILE PVT LTD. ON THE OTHER HAND, THE ASSESSEE HAS FURISHED VARIOUS DETAILS INCLUDING CONFIRMATION LETTERS FROM THE PARTIES, THEI R BANK STATEMENTS ALONGWITH THEIR FINANCIAL STATEMENTS TO PROVE IDENTITY, GENUINENESS OF TRANSACTIONS AND CREDITWORTHINESS OF THE PARTIES. THE ASSESSEE ALSO FURNISHED EVIDENCES TO PROVE THAT THE PARTIES HAVE RESPONDED TO THE NOTICES ISSUED U/S 133(6) BY AO BY FILING VARIOUS DETAILS. THE ASSESSEE ALSO FILED BANK STATEMENTS TO PROVE THAT THE SAID UNSECURED LOANS HAVE BEEN REPAID IN THE SUBSEQUENT FINANCIAL YEARS. THEREFORE, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THERE IS NO REASON FOR THE AO TO DOUBT THE GENUINENESS OF TRAN SACTIONS DESPITE FURNISHING NECESSARY EVIDENCES INCLUDING THEIR FINANCIAL STATEMENTS, BANK STATEMENTS AND IT RETURNS. 6. THE AO HAS MADE ADDITION U/S 68 OF THE ACT, ON THE GROUND THAT THE UNSECURED LOANS ARE BOGUS ACCOMMODATION ENTRIES PROVIDED BY SHRI PRA VINKUMAR JAIN THROUGH HIS HAWALA COMPANIES. THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 68 DEAL WITH CASES WHERE ANY SUM FOUND CREDITED IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE IN ANY FINANCIAL YEAR AND THE ASSESSEE OFFERS NO EXPLANATION ABOUT THE NATURE AND SOURCE THEREOF O R THE EXPLANATION OFFERED BY HIM IS NOT, IN THE OPINION OF THE AO, SATISFACTORY, THEN SUM SO CREDITED MAY BE CHARGED TO INCOME - TAX AS THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE OF THAT PREVIOUS YEAR. A PLAIN READING OF SECTION 68 MAKES IT CLEAR THAT THE INITIAL BURDEN OF PROOF LIES ON THE ASSESSEE. IT IS WELL SETTLED LEGAL POSITION THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS TO DISCHARGE 3 MAIN INGREDIENTS IN ORDER TO DISCHARGE THE INITIAL BURDEN OF PROOF, I.E. THE IDENTITY OF THE CREDITOR, THE GENUINENESS OF TRANSACTION AND CREDITWORTHINESS OF THE CREDITORS. ONCE THE ASSESSEE DISCHARGES INITIAL BURDEN PLACED UPON HIM, THEN THE BURDEN TODIS PROVE THE SAID CLAIM SHIFTS UPON THE AO. IN THIS CASE, THE ASSESSEE HAS DISCHARGED HIS ONUS CAST U/S 68 BY FILING IDENTITY OF THE CREDITORS, GENUINENESS OF T RANSACTIONS AND CREDITWORTHINESS OF THE PARTIES WHICH IS EVIDENT FROM THE FACT THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS FURNISHED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF THE CREDITORS WHEREIN THE SAID TRANSACTION HAS BEEN DISCLOSED IN THE RELEVANT FINANCIAL YEARS. WE FURTHER NOTICE THAT THE ASSESSEE ALSO FILED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF THE CREDITORS WHICH ARE ENCLOSED IN PAPER BOOK FILED. ON PERUSAL OF THE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE, WE FIND THAT BOTH THE COMPANIES ARE ACTIVE IN THE WEBSITE OF MINISTRY OF CORPORATE AFFAIRS. THI S FACT HAS BEEN FURTHER SUPPORTED BY THE LETTER OF AO WHEREIN THE AO HAS ACCEPTED THAT BOTH COMPANIES, VIZ. JOSH TRADING COMPANY PVT LTD AND VIRAJ MERCANTILE PVT LTD ARE ACTIVE IN MCA WEBSITE. WE FURTHER NOTICE THAT BOTH THE COMPANIES HAVE FILED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR THE YEAR ENDING 31 - 03 - 2006. THEREFORE, WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED VIEW THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS DISCHARGED ITS INITIAL BURDEN CAST U/S 68 BY FILING IDENTITY, GENUINENESS OF TRANSACTION AND CREDITWORTHINESS OF THE PARTIES. ONCE, THE ASSESSEE HAS D ISCHARGED ITS INITIAL BURDEN, THE BURDEN SHIFTS TO THE AO TO PROVE OTHERWISE. IN THIS CASE, THE AO MADE ADDITION ONLY ON THE BASIS OF INFORMATION RECEIVED FROM INVESTIGATION WING, BUT NOT BASED ON ANY EVIDENCE TO DISPROVE THE LOAN TRANSACTION FROM ABOVE CO MPANIES ARE INGENUINE. THEREFORE, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THERE IS NO REASON FOR THE AO TO TREAT LOANS FROM ABOVE 2 COMPANIES AS UNEXPLAINED CREDITS U/S 68 OF THE ACT. 9 ITA NOS. 2192 TO 2194 & 2196 TO 2198/MUM/201 8 SHRI ASHOK KUMAR A. BANTHIA .. . 11. IN THIS VIEW OF THE MATTER AND CONSIDERING THE RATIO OF THE CASE LAWS DISCUSSED ABOVE, WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED VIEW THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS DISCHARGED IDENTITY, GENUINENESS OF TRANSACTIONS AND CREDITWORTHINESS OF THE PARTIES. THEREFORE, THERE IS NO REAS ON FOR THE AO TO MAKE ADDITION TOWARDS LOAN U/S 68 OF THE ACT. HENCE, WE DIRECT THE AO TO DELETE ADDITION MADE TOWARDS LOANS ALONGWITH INTEREST U/S 68 OF THE ACT. 10. SIMILAR VIEW HAS BEEN TAKEN BY THE COORDINATE BENCH IN THE CASE OF M/S. SHREE LAXMI DEVELOPERS V. JCIT IN ITA.NO. 6090/MUM/2017 DATED 07.03.2018 WHEREIN IT HAS BEEN HELD AS UNDER: - 8. THE NEXT ISSUE RELATES TO THE ADDITION OF LOAN OF .10.00 LAKHS TAKEN FROM M/S. FALAK TRADING COMPANY P. LTD, A COMPANY BELONGING TO PRAV EEN KUMAR JAIN WHO HAS CONFESSED THAT HE HAD PROVIDED ONLY ACCOMMODATION ENTRIES. A PERUSAL OF THE RECORD WOULD SHOW THAT THE AO HAD ISSUED NOTICES U/S. 133(6) OF THE ACT TO THE ABOVE SAID COMPANY AND IT HAS ALSO FURNISHED ALL THE DETAILS, VIZ., CONFIRMAT ION, COPIES OF FINANCIAL STATEMENTS, COPIES OF INCOME TAX RETURNS FILED BY IT ETC. AND THUS HAS CONFIRMED THE LOAN TRANSACTIONS. THUS, WE NOTICE THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS ALSO FURNISHED THE RELEVANT DETAILS TO PROVE THE CASH CREDITS AND THE SAME HAS ALSO BEEN CONFIRMED BY THE LENDER ALSO IN RESPONSE TO THE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE AO U/S. 133(6) OF THE ACT. 9. THE ASSESSEE HAD TAKEN LOAN FROM TWO OF PRAVEEN KUMAR JAINS GROUP COMPANIES VIZ., M/S. JOSH TRADING CO P LTD AND M/S VIRAJ MERCANTILE LTD IN THE YEAR RELEVANT TO AY 2012 - 13. THE AO HAD ASSESSED THE LOAN AMOUNTS ON IDENTICAL REASONING. WE NOTICE THAT THE COORDINATE BENCH OF ITAT HAS DELETED THE ADDITIONS VIDE ITS ORDER DATED 239.12.2017 PASSED IN ITA.NO. 5954/MUM/2016, WITH THE FOLLOWING OBSER VATIONS: - SINCE THE FACTS SURROUNDING THE PRESENT ISSUE BEING IDENTICAL WITH THAT EXAMINED BY THE COORDINATE BENCH IN A.Y. 2012 - 13, CONSISTENT WITH THE VIEW TAKEN THEREIN, WE SET ASIDE THE ORDER PASSED BY LD.CIT(A) ON THIS ISSUE AND DIRECT THE AO TO D ELETE THE ADDITION OF .10.00 LAKHS. 11. IN THE CASE ON HAND ALSO THE ASSESSEE HAS DISCHARGED ITS INITIAL BURDEN BY PROVIDING ALL THE NECESSARY DETAILS IN RESPECT OF THE LOAN TRANSACTION S AND THUS THE ASSESSEE HAS DISCHARGED IDENTITY, GENUINENESS 10 ITA NOS. 2192 TO 2194 & 2196 TO 2198/MUM/201 8 SHRI ASHOK KUMAR A. BANTHIA OF THE TRANSACTIONS AND CREDITWORTHINESS OF THE PARTIES. THUS , I HOLD THAT THERE IS NO VALID REASON FOR THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO TREAT THE LOAN TRANSACTIONS HAS NOT PROVED BY THE ASSESSEE. HENCE , I DIRECT THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO DELETE THE ADDITION MADE U/S. 6 8 OF THE ACT IN ALL THESE ASSESSMENT YEARS. 12. IN THE RESULT, APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE ARE ALLOWED AS INDICATED ABOVE. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THE 13 TH MARCH , 2019 SD / - (C.N. PRASAD) JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI / DATED 13 / 0 3 / 201 9 GIRIDHAR , S R. PS COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT. 3. THE CIT(A), MUMBAI. 4. CIT 5. DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. GUARD FILE. //TRUE COPY// BY ORDER (ASSTT. REGISTRAR) ITAT, MUM