Kapis Impex LLP, New Delhi V. ACIT, Central Circle- 19, New Delhi

ITA 5910/DEL/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 106 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7784 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 10 month(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 12-07-2022
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 12-09-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Section: 131; 68; 143(3); 153A; 251; 208; 13

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “C” DELHI BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA MOHAN GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No.5910/DEL/2018 Assessment Year 2014-15 M/s. Kapis Impex LLP, 301, Roots Tower, Community Centre Distt. Centre, Laxmi Nagar, New Delhi. v. Asst. CIT, Central Circle-19, New Delhi. TAN/PAN: AARFK7460P (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by: Shri Gautam Jain, Adv. Respondent by: Shri J.S. Minhas, CIT-DR Date of hearing: 21 04 2022 Date of pronouncement: 13 07 2022 O R D E R PER PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA, A.M.: The captioned appeal has been filed at the instance of the assessee against the order of the Co mmissioner of Inco me Tax (Appeals)-XXVII , Ne w Delhi ( ‘CIT( A) ’ in short) dated 25.07.2018 arising fro m the assessment order dated 27.12.2017 passed by the Assessing Officer (AO) under Section 153A r.w. Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) concerning AY 2014-15. 2. The assessee has raised multiple grounds but essentially seeks to challenge addition of Rs.1 crore made under Section 68 of the Act being sum raised fro m M/s. Rathore Promoters and Developers Pvt. Ltd. as unsecured loan. The a mount so received I.T.A. No.5910/Del/2018 2 was treated as un explained cash credit by the Assessing Officer under Section 68 of the Act. 3. Briefl y stated, in the course of search assessment proceedings under Section 153A, the Assessing Officer observed that the assessee has shown unsecured loan of Rs.1 crore fro m entity M/s. R athore Pro moters and Developers Pvt. Ltd. received during the year u nder consideration. An inquiry was carried out by the Assessing Officer b y issuing su mmons under Section 131 of the Act. Howe ver, su mmons issued were not complied with by the lender. The Assessing Offic er thus made an addition of Rs.1 crore under Section 68 of the Act alleging the explanation offered b y the assessee to be unsatisfactory on the contours of Section 68 of the Act. The C IT( A) in first appeal also did not find any merit in the contentions of the assessee on bona fides of the i mpugned credit. 4. Further aggrieved, the assessee preferred appeal before the Tribunal. 5. We have heard the rival submissions. The assessee contends that the copy of inco me ta x return and comp utation of lender M/s. Rathore Pro moters and Developers Pvt. Ltd. together with the financial statement of the lender fro m Assess ment Years 2012-13 to 2016-17 was placed before the Assessing Officer. The confir mati on of the lender was also placed. On being inquired, the ld. counsel submitted that the loan was received through banking channel also stood repaid partly in Assessment Year 2015-16 and remaining a mount in Assess ment Year 2019-20. In elaboration, the assessee submits I.T.A. No.5910/Del/2018 3 that it has repaid Rs.50 lakhs in two installments in Assess ment Year 2015-16 and re maining 50 lakhs have been repaid by 5 RTGS transfers i n Assess ment Ye ar 2019-20 and thus such repa yment shows t he bona fide of the credit assailed. 6. In this factual backdrop, we are of t he view that wher e the loans received are backed by tangible documentar y evidence and receipt through banking channel combined with repayment thereof in subsequent assessment years, the onus establishing bona fide appears discharged. The non compliance of summons issued under Section 131 in such circu mstances ought not to beco me deter min ative factor. The factu m of repa yment also underscores the bona fide in the light of the decision of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT v s. Ayachi Chandrashekhar Narsangji, (2014) 42 taxmann.com 251 (Guj.); CIT vs. Karaj Singh (2011) 15 taxmann.com 70 (P &H ) & Panna Devi Chowdry vs. CIT, 208 ITR 849 (Bom.). Howe ver, in the sa me vein, we n otice that correctness of assertions towards repa yment of loan in the subsequent assessment year has not been ascertained by the Assessing Officer. 7. We accordingly r estore the matter back to the file of the Assessing Officer . The Assessing Officer shall be at liberty to verif y/inquire into the case made out on behalf of the assessee towards repa ymen t of loan. The Assessing Officer shall accept the bona fides of the loan in question where he is satisfied about the discharge of loan in the subsequent assessment year b y wa y of repayment . Th e assessee shall adduce necessary evidence as ma y be considered expedient in this regard. I.T.A. No.5910/Del/2018 4 8. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on 13/07/2022. Sd/- Sd/- [CHANDRA MOHAN GARG] [PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA] JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: /07/2022 Prabhat Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT(A) 4. CIT 5. DR Assistant Registrar