Sudama Shaw, Kolkata V. ITO, Ward 53(1), Kolkata, Kolkata

ITA 635/KOL/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 125 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4560 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 3 month(s) 28 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 01-08-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 03-04-2017
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Unexplained cash credit; Gift; Principle of natural justice; Source of fund; Additional evidence; Corroborative evidences; Revised return
• Section: 143(3); 68

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH : KOLKATA [BEFORE HONBLE SHRI ABY. T. VARKEY, JM & SHRI M. BALAGANESH, AM ] I.T.A NO. 635/KOL/201 7 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2011-1 2 SUDAMA SHAW -VS- ITO, WARD-51(3), KOLKAT A [PAN: AQFPS 2231 J ] (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) FOR THE APPELLANT : SHRI ANIKESH BANER JEE, ADVOCATE MRS. SASWATI MITRA (DUTTA), ADVOCATE FOR THE RESPONDENT : SHRI SALLONG YADEN, ADDL . CIT, SR. DR DATE OF HEARING : 12.07.2018 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 01.08.2018 ORDER PER M.BALAGANESH, AM 1. THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE ARISES OUT OF THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS)-15, KOLKATA [IN SHORT THE LD CI T(A)] IN APPEAL NO. 184/CIT(A)- 15/14-15/JCIT-R-51/KOL DATED 27.01.2017 AGAINST TH E ORDER PASSED BY THE JCIT, RANGE-51, KOLKATA [ IN SHORT THE LD AO] UNDER SECT ION 143(3) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (IN SHORT THE ACT) DATED 31.03.2014 FOR TH E ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011-12. 2 ITA NO.635 /KOL/2017 SUDAMA SHAW A.YR.2011-12 2 2. THE GROUND NO.1 RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE WAS STATE D TO BE NOT PRESSED BY THE LD AR AT THE TIME OF HEARING BEFORE US. HENCE THE SAME IS DI SMISSED AS NOT PRESSED. 3. THE GROUND NOS. 2 & 7 RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE GENERAL IN NATURE AND DOES NOT REQUIRE ANY SPECIFIC ADJUDICATION. 4. THE FIRST ISSUE TO BE DECIDED IN THIS APPEAL IS AS TO WHETHER THE LD CITA WAS JUSTIFIED IN UPHOLDING THE ADDITION OF RS 38,77,390/- MADE TO WARDS INTRODUCTION TO CAPITAL AS UNEXPLAINED CASH CREDIT, IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTA NCES OF THE CASE. 4.1. THE BRIEF FACTS OF THIS ISSUE IS THAT THE ASSE SSEE IS AN INDIVIDUAL ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF RUNNING A RESTAURANT AND SALE OF LIQUOR . THE RETURN OF INCOME FOR THE ASST YEAR 2011-12 WAS FILED BY HIM ON 30.9.2011 DECLARIN G TOTAL INCOME OF RS 3,02,043/- AND LATER A REVISED RETURN WAS FILED ON 7.6.2012 DE CLARING TOTAL INCOME OF RS 3,14,518/-. THE ASSESSEE IS THE PROPRIETOR OF M/S SONA RESTAURA NT & HOTEL. AS ON 31.3.2010, THE CAPITAL ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE AS APPEARING IN THE BALANCE SHEET OF HIS PROPRIETORY CONCERN M/S SONA RESTAURANT &HOTEL WAS RS 23,14,361 .91 AND BANK LOANS PAYABLE AT RS 3,63,028/-. THE TOTAL VALUE OF BALANCE SHEET AS ON 31.3.2010 WAS RS 26,77,389.91. THE SAME IS CONSIDERED AT RS 26,77,390/- FOR THE SA KE OF CONVENIENCE. THE ASSESSEE ALSO STARTED ANOTHER PROPRIETORY BUSINESS ENGAGED I N SALE OF LIQUOR UNDER THE NAME AND STYLE OF SONA KUTHI ON 23.4.2010. FROM THE BALA NCE SHEET OF M/S SONA KUTHI AS ON 31.3.2011, THE LD AO OBSERVED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD SHOWN OPENING CAPITAL ACCOUNT AS ON 23.4.2010 OF RS 38,77,390/-. THE LD AO ENQUIRED ABOUT THE SOURCE OF THIS CAPITAL FIGURE OF RS 38,77,390/-. THE ASSESSEE EXPLAINED A S UNDER:- TRANSFER OF TOTAL FUNDS AVAILABLE IN THE BUSINESS O F SONA RESTAURANT & HOTEL RS 26,77,390/- GIFT RECEIVED FROM FATHER MR VANARAS SAH ON 10.4.10 RS 6,00,000/- 3 ITA NO.635 /KOL/2017 SUDAMA SHAW A.YR.2011-12 3 GIFT RECEIVED FROM BROTHER MR NANDLAL SAH ON 12.4.1 0 RS 6,00,000/- ------------------- RS 38,77,390/- ------------------- NO EXPLANATION WAS FURNISHED IN THIS REGARD BY THE ASSESSEE BEFORE THE LD AO AND ACCORDINGLY THE SAID SUM OF RS 38,77,390/- WERE TRE ATED AS UNEXPLAINED CASH CREDIT U/S 68 OF THE ACT AND ADDED TO THE TOTAL INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. 4.2. THE ASSESSEE FILED THE BALANCE SHEET OF SONA R ESTAURANT & HOTEL TO PROVE THE AVAILABILITY OF OWN FUNDS IN THE SUM OF RS 26,77,39 0/-. THE ASSESSEE FILED DECLARATION AND CONFIRMATION OF GIFT FROM HIS FATHER AND BROTHE R FOR HAVING GIFTED RS 6 LACS EACH TO HIM TOGETHER WITH THEIR INCOME TAX PARTICULARS. THE ASSESSEE ALSO FILED COPY OF THEIR INCOME TAX RETURNS TOGETHER WITH THEIR BALANCE SHEE TS TO PROVE THE AVAILABILITY OF SUFFICIENT SOURCES FOR FATHER AND BROTHER TO ADVANC E THE GIFT TO THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE ALSO SUBMITTED THAT AT THE TIME OF ASSESSM ENT PROCEEDINGS, THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS OF M/S SONA RESTAURANT & HOTEL WERE SEIZED BY THE SALES TAX DEPARTMENT AND HENCE THE SAME COULD NOT BE PRODUCED BEFORE THE LD AO FOR HIS EXAMINATION. ALL THESE PARTICULARS WERE SUBJECTED TO REMAND BEFORE THE LD AO. THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED IT WAS RUNNING BUSINESS IN THE NAME AND STYLE OF M/S SONA RESTAURANT WHICH FROM 1.4.2010 WAS CONVERTED INTO PARTNERSHIP FIRM IN THE SAME NAM E OF M/S SONA RESTAURANT. ASSESSEEE CLAIMED TO HAVE UTILIZED HIS OWN CAPITAL IN HIS PROPRIETORSHIP BUSINESS M/S SONA KUTHI. IT WAS ALSO FURTHER MENTIONED THAT BO TH THE FATHER AND BROTHER WERE AGRICULTURISTS AND WERE ENGAGED IN PETTY LENDING AC TIVITY DERIVING INTEREST INCOME. THE LD AO SUBMITTED IN THE REMAND ORDER THAT THOUGH THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED SOME EXPLANATION BUT HE HAS NOT COOPERATED BY FURNISHING THE DESIRED INFORMATION. BY PLACING RELIANCE ON THE REMAND REPORT, THE LD CITA UPHELD THE ACTION OF THE LD AO. AGGRIEVED, THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US. 4 ITA NO.635 /KOL/2017 SUDAMA SHAW A.YR.2011-12 4 4.3. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS. AT THE OU TSET, THERE IS NO DISPUTE THAT THE TOTAL FUNDS OF RS 26,77,390/- WERE INDEED AVAILABLE IN TH E BALANCE SHEET AS ON 31.3.2010 OF M/S SONA RESTAURANT. BUT THE SAME COMPRISES OF OWN CAPITAL OF RS 23,14,362/- AND BANK LOAN LIABILITIES OF RS 3,63,028/-. WE FIND TH AT THE ASSESSEE HAD NOT PROVIDED ANY EVIDENCE TO PROVE WHETHER THE SAID BANK LOANS WERE SETTLED BY HIM. HENCE THE SUM OF RS 3,63,028/- CANNOT BE USED AS AVAILABLE SOURCE FO R INVESTMENT IN NEW PROPRIETORY BUSINESS M/S SONA KUTHI. HOWEVER, WE FIND THAT T HERE IS NO EVIDENCE TO THE CONTRARY TO PROVE THAT THE CLOSING CAPITAL BALANCE OF ASSESS EE IN M/S SONA RESTAURANT AS ON 31.3.2010 IN THE SUM OF RS 23,14,362/- WAS UTILIZED FOR ANY OTHER PURPOSE. HENCE THAT SUM IS VERY MUCH AVAILABLE TO EXPLAIN THE INVESTMEN T IN CAPITAL OF M/S SONA KUTHI. HENCE IT IS EFFECTIVELY A TRANSFER OF CAPITAL ACCOU NT FROM ONE PROPRIETORSHIP BUSINESS TO ANOTHER PROPRIETORSHIP BUSINESS. HENCE IN OUR CONS IDERED OPINION, THE ASSESSEE SHOULD BE GIVEN CREDIT FOR RS 23,14,362/- IN THE ADDITION MADE TOWARDS INTRODUCTION OF CAPITAL OF RS 38,77,390/- AS SOURCE IS EXPLAINED TO THE EXT ENT OF RS 23,14,362/-. 4.3.1. WITH REGARD TO RECEIPT OF GIFTS FROM FATHER AND BROTHER, WE FIND THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD DULY FILED A DECLARATION AND CONFIRMATION OF GI FT FROM THE DONORS EXPLAINING THE CIRCUMSTANCES AND MODE OF GIFT TOGETHER WITH THEIR INCOME TAX PARTICULARS. BOTH THE DONORS ARE DULY ASSESSED TO INCOME TAX AND THEY HAD ALSO FILED THEIR BALANCE SHEETS GIVING THEIR SOURCES OF INCOME . WE FIND IN THE SAI D BALANCE SHEETS FILED , THE GIFT GIVEN TO THE ASSESSEE IS REDUCED FROM THEIR RESPECTIVE CA PITAL ACCOUNT BALANCES. HENCE THE IDENTITY AND CREDITWORTHINESS OF THE DONORS STOOD C LEARLY ESTABLISHED. THERE IS NO EVIDENCE ON RECORD TO THE CONTRARY TO DOUBT THE GEN UINENESS OF THE TRANSACTIONS. WHEN THE SON IS STARTING A NEW BUSINESS, IT IS QUITE NAT URAL FOR THE FAMILY MEMBERS TO COME FORWARD WITH THEIR LITTLE ASSISTANCE BY OFFERING GI FTS, LOANS ETC. WE FIND THAT THE AUTHORITIES BELOW HAD MERELY REJECTED THESE DOCUMEN TS AND EVIDENCES SUBMITTED FROM FATHER AND BROTHER. NO EFFORTS WERE TAKEN BY THE A UTHORITIES TO EXAMINE THE FATHER AND 5 ITA NO.635 /KOL/2017 SUDAMA SHAW A.YR.2011-12 5 THE BROTHER TO CLEAR THEIR DOUBTS, IF ANY. WE FIN D THAT SIMILAR MATTER HAD COME UP FOR CONSIDERATION BEFORE THIS TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF S HANKAR AGARWAL VS ACIT IN ITA NO. 444/KOL/2018 DATED 13.7.2018, WHEREIN IT WAS HELD AS UNDER:- 6.1. THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED COPIES OF DECLARATION OF GIFT FROM BOTH HIS PARENTS. COPIES OF THE INCOME TAX RETURNS, PROFIT AND LOSS ACCOUNT, CAPITAL GAIN AND BALANCE SHEETS OF HIS FATHER AND MOTHER HAVE BEEN FILED. COPY OF CASH BOOK OF AS WELL AS COPY OF BANK STATEMENTS OF SHRI HANUMAN PRASAD AGARWAL (FATHER O F THE ASSESSEE) & SMT. SHANTI DEVI AGARWAL (MOTHER OF THE ASSESSEE) WERE FILED. THE LD. CIT(A) REJECTED THE CONTENTION OF THE ASSES SEE ON THE GROUND THAT THE DONORS DO NOT HAVE CREDITWORTHINESS. THE DONORS IN THIS CASE HAPPEN TO BE THE FATHER AND MOTHER OF THE ASSESSEE. ALL NECESSARY DETAILS WERE FILED I N THIS REGARD. BOTH THE PARENTS ARE INCOME-TAX ASSESSEES. UNDER THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, IN OUR VIEW, NO ADDITION CAN BE MADE IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE. 4.3.2. WE FIND THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD DULY SUBMITTED ALL THE RELEVANT DOCUMENTS WITH SUPPORTING EVIDENCES BEFORE THE LD AO IN THE REMAND PROCEEDINGS WHICH IS EVIDENT FROM THE LETTER DATED 16.5.2016 FILED ON 17.5.2016 AND E NCLOSED IN PAGES 89 AND 90 OF PAPER BOOK BEFORE US. IN THIS SCENARIO, WE HOLD THAT THE LD AO WAS INCORRECT IN STATING THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD NOT COOPERATED IN THE REMAND PROCEEDIN GS BY FURNISHING THE REQUISITE DETAILS AND EVIDENCES. IN VIEW OF THE AFORESAID FI NDINGS IN THE PECULIAR FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWIN G THE JUDICIAL PRECEDENT RELIED UPON HEREINABOVE, WE HAVE NO HESITATION IN DIRECTING THE LD AO TO DELETE THE ADDITION MADE IN THE SUM OF RS 38,77,390/- TOWARDS INTRODUCTION OF C APITAL. ACCORDINGLY, THE GROUND NO. 3 RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. 5. THE SECOND ISSUE TO BE DECIDED IN THIS APPEAL IS AS TO WHETHER THE LD CITA WAS JUSTIFIED IN UPHOLDING THE ADDITIONS OF RS 25,10,68 2/- AND RS 15,40,000/- MADE TOWARDS SECURED LOANS AND UNSECURED LOANS RECEIVED BY THE A SSESSEE AS UNEXPLAINED CASH CREDIT, IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE. 6 ITA NO.635 /KOL/2017 SUDAMA SHAW A.YR.2011-12 6 5.1. THE BRIEF FACTS OF THIS ISSUE IS THAT THE ASSE SSEE IS AN INDIVIDUAL ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF RUNNING A RESTAURANT AND SALE OF LIQUOR . THE LIQUOR BUSINESS IS CARRIED IN THE PROPRIETARY CONCERN STYLED AS M/S SONA KUTHI. IN THE BALANCE SHEET OF M/S SONA KUTHI AS ON 31.3.2011, THE ASSESSEE HAD REFLECTED THE SEC URED LOANS RECEIVED BY HIM FOR THE PURPOSE OF BUSINESS AS UNDER:- STATE BANK OF INDIA 31661639104 RS 8,10,682/ - UNITED BANK (HBL) RS 17,00,000/- -------------------- 25,10,682 IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER, THE LD AO OBSERVED THAT NO SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS OR EVIDENCES WERE FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IN THIS REGARD AND ACCOR DINGLY, HE PROCEEDED TO ADD THE SAME AS UNEXPLAINED CASH CREDIT U/S 68 OF THE ACT. 5.2. THE ASSESSEE BORROWED UNSECURED LOANS OF RS 15 ,40,000/-IN ITS PROPRIETORY CONCERN M/S SONA KUTHI AND REFLECTED THE SAID LOAN LIABILIT IES AS SUCH AS ON 31.3.2011 IN ITS BALANCE SHEET. THE LD AO OBSERVED THAT NO SUPPORTI NG DOCUMENTS OR EVIDENCES WERE FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IN THIS REGARD AND ACCORDINGL Y, HE PROCEEDED TO ADD THE SAME AS UNEXPLAINED CASH CREDIT U/S 68 OF THE ACT. 5.3. THE ASSESSEE PLACED ALL THE RELEVANT DOCUMENTS BEFORE THE LD CITA FOR THE FIRST TIME. THE LD CITA SOUGHT FOR A REMAND REPORT FROM THE LD AO WITH REGARD TO THOSE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES. THE ASSESSEE HAD STATED THAT IT HAD AVAILED BANK LOAN FROM STATE BANK OF INDIA IN THE SUM OF RS 8,10,682/- AS ON 31. 3.2011. IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT IN THE BALANCE SHEET, THE HOUSE BUILDING LOAN AVAILED BY T HE ASSESSEE FROM PNB HOUSING FINANCE LTD WAS WRONGLY REFLECTED AS LOAN FROM UNIT ED BANK OF INDIA. IT WAS CLARIFIED 7 ITA NO.635 /KOL/2017 SUDAMA SHAW A.YR.2011-12 7 THAT NO LOAN WAS EVER AVAILED FROM UNITED BANK OF I NDIA. THE ASSESSEE ALSO PLACED ON RECORD A CERTIFICATE FROM HIS CHARTERED ACCOUNTANT WHO ADMITTED TO HAVING COMMITTED AN ERROR IN NOT MENTIONING PNB HOUSING FINANCE LTD IN PLACE OF UNITED BANK IN THE BALANCE SHEET. THE DETAILS OF HOUSE BUILDING LOAN A VAILED FROM PNB HOUSING FINANCE LTD ARE AS UNDER:- A/C NO. 6660000734 - RS 2,00,000/- A/C NO. 6700000719 - RS 15,00,000/- --------------------- RS 17,00,000/- 5.3.1. THE ASSESSEE ALSO SUBMITTED EVIDENCES IN THI S REGARD IN THE FORM OF LOAN SANCTION LETTERS, LOAN ACCOUNT STATEMENTS BEFORE THE LD CITA AND LATER BEFORE THE LD AO IN THE REMAND PROCEEDINGS. THE ASSESSEE ALSO EXPLAINED T HAT THE TOTAL BALANCE OUTSTANDING OF HOUSING LOANS FROM PNB HOUSING FINANCE LTD AS ON 31 .3.2011 WAS AS UNDER:- A/C NO. 6660000734 - RS 2,01,857/- A/C NO. 6700000719 - RS 14,87,301/- --------------------- RS 16,89,158/- 5.3.2. AS AGAINST THIS, THE LOANS REFLECTED IN THE BALANCE SHEET WAS RS 17,00,000/-. THE DIFFERENCE WAS EXPLAINED AS WRONG APPROPRIATION TOW ARDS INTEREST ON LOAN ACCOUNT, MEANING THEREBY, THAT THE INTEREST ACCOUNT SHOULD B E REDUCED AND CORRESPONDINGLY THE LOAN BALANCE ALSO SHOULD BE REDUCED BY THE DIFFEREN CE AMOUNT OF RS 10,842/-. THIS REPLY WAS NOT APPRECIATED BY THE LD AO IN THE REMAN D PROCEEDINGS. WITH REGARD TO LOAN FROM STATE BANK OF INDIA ALSO IN THE SUM OF RS 8,10 ,682/-, THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THE LOAN ACCOUNT STATEMENT BEFORE THE LD AO WHICH WAS I GNORED BY HIM IN THE REMAND REPORT. THE LD CITA PLACING RELIANCE ON THE REMAND REPORT AND IGNORING THE OBJECTIONS 8 ITA NO.635 /KOL/2017 SUDAMA SHAW A.YR.2011-12 8 OF THE ASSESSEE FILED THEREON, UPHELD THE ACTION OF THE LD AO IN SUSTAINING THE ADDITION IN THE SUM OF RS 25,10,682/-. 5.4. WITH REGARD TO THE UNSECURED LOANS OF RS 15,40 ,000/- ARE CONCERNED, THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THE NAMES AND ADDRESSES OF THE PERSONS (A LL ARE FAMILY MEMBERS) FROM WHOM MONIES WERE RECEIVED TOGETHER WITH THEIR PAN, BALAN CE SHEETS, LOAN CONFIRMATION AND INCOME TAX RETURN DETAILS. THE SAME WERE SUBJECTED TO REMAND PROCEEDINGS BY THE LD CITA. ALL THESE DOCUMENTS ARE ENCLOSED IN PAGES 37 TO 70 OF THE PAPER BOOK FILED BEFORE US. THE LD AO ANALYSED THE DETAILS SUBMITTE D BY THE ASSESSEE FOR EACH AND EVERY LOAN CREDITOR AND OBSERVED THAT THEY DID NOT POSSES S ENOUGH CREDITWORTHINESS EVENTHOUGH THEY HAD CONFIRMED HAVING GIVEN LOAN TO THE ASSESSEE AND THE FACT OF GIVING LOAN TO ASSESSEE IS ALSO REFLECTED IN THEIR RESPECT IVE BALANCE SHEETS. ACCORDINGLY , HE SUPPORTED THE ASSESSMENT ORDER IN MAKING THE ADDITI ON OF RS 15,40,000/-. THE LD CITA PLACING RELIANCE ON THE REMAND REPORT AND IGNORING THE OBJECTIONS OF THE ASSESSEE FILED THEREON, UPHELD THE ACTION OF THE LD AO IN SUSTAINI NG THE ADDITION IN THE SUM OF RS 15,40,000/-. 5.5. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSE D THE MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD. WE FIND THAT WITH REGARD TO ADDITION TOWARDS SECURE D LOANS OF RS 25,10,682/-, THE ASSESSEE HAD AVAILED LOANS AS UNDER:- STATE BANK OF INDIA - RS 8,10,682/- PNB HOUSING FINANCE LTD - RS 17,00,000/- THIS FACT IS EVIDENT FROM THE LOAN SANCTION LETTERS ISSUED BY THEM TO THE ASSESSEE AND THE LOAN ACCOUNT STATEMENTS. THE MISTAKE COMMITTED BY THE ASSESSEE IN THE BALANCE SHEET BY WRONGLY SHOWING THE NAME OF UNITED BANK OF INDIA HAD BEEN DULY ADDRESSED BY A 9 ITA NO.635 /KOL/2017 SUDAMA SHAW A.YR.2011-12 9 CERTIFICATE FROM A CHARTERED ACCOUNTANT, STATING IT TO BE TYPOGRAPHICAL ERROR. THE DISCREPANCY IN LOAN AMOUNTS VIS A VIS INTEREST PORT ION THEREON IS ALSO DULY ADDRESSED EXCEPT TO THE EXTENT OF RS 10,842/-. IN THESE FAC TS AND CIRCUMSTANCES, THE LOANS AVAILED FROM STATE BANK OF INDIA AND PNB HOUSING FINANCE LT D AND REFLECTED IN THE BALANCE SHEET AS ON 31.3.2011 CANNOT BE DOUBTED WITH. WE FI ND THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD DULY SUBMITTED ALL THE RELEVANT DOCUMENTS WITH SUPPORTIN G EVIDENCES BEFORE THE LD AO IN THE REMAND PROCEEDINGS WHICH IS EVIDENT FROM THE LETTER DATED 16.5.2016 FILED ON 17.5.2016 AND ENCLOSED IN PAGES 89 AND 90 OF PAPER BOOK BEFOR E US. IN THIS SCENARIO, WE HOLD THAT THE LD AO WAS INCORRECT IN STATING THAT THE ASSESSE E HAD NOT COOPERATED IN THE REMAND PROCEEDINGS BY FURNISHING THE REQUISITE DETAILS AND EVIDENCES. HENCE THERE IS NO CASE MADE OUT BY THE REVENUE FOR DISBELIEVING THE LOAN T AKEN FROM BANK AND PNB HOUSING FINANCE LTD. ACCORDINGLY, THE ADDITION OF RS 25,10 ,682/- IS HEREBY DIRECTED TO BE DELETED. ACCORDINGLY, THE GROUND NO. 4 RAISED BY TH E ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. 5.6. WITH REGARD TO UNSECURED LOANS RECEIVED IN THE SUM OF RS 15,40,000/-, THE ASSESSEE HAD PRODUCED THE NAMES AND ADDRESSES OF THE LOAN CR EDITORS TOGETHER WITH THEIR PAN, BALANCE SHEETS, INCOME TAX RETURN AND LOAN CONFIRMA TION. MERELY BECAUSE THE LOAN CREDITORS HAD SHOWN LESSER INCOME IN THEIR INCOME T AX RETURNS , THAT DOES NOT AUTOMATICALLY MEAN THAT THE CONCERNED LOAN CREDITOR S DID NOT HAVE SUFFICIENT SOURCES TO ADVANCE LOAN TO THE ASSESSEE. THE LOAN ADVANCED TO THE ASSESSEE IS DULY REFLECTED IN THEIR BALANCE SHEETS. WE FIND THAT THE ASSESSEE HA D DULY SUBMITTED ALL THE RELEVANT DOCUMENTS WITH SUPPORTING EVIDENCES BEFORE THE LD A O IN THE REMAND PROCEEDINGS WHICH IS EVIDENT FROM THE LETTER DATED 16.5.2016 FI LED ON 17.5.2016 AND ENCLOSED IN PAGES 89 AND 90 OF PAPER BOOK BEFORE US. IN THIS SC ENARIO, WE HOLD THAT THE LD AO WAS INCORRECT IN STATING THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD NOT COOP ERATED IN THE REMAND PROCEEDINGS BY FURNISHING THE REQUISITE DETAILS AND EVIDENCES. HE NCE IN THIS SCENARIO, THE LOANS RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE FROM THOSE LOAN CREDITORS IN THE SUM OF RS 15,40,000/- WHICH ARE DULY CONFIRMED BY THEM AND REFLECTED IN THEIR R ESPECTIVE BALANCE SHEETS, CANNOT BE 10 ITA NO.635 /KOL/2017 SUDAMA SHAW A.YR.2011-12 10 ADDED AS UNEXPLAINED CREDIT IN THE HANDS OF THE ASS ESSEE. ACCORDINGLY, THE ADDITION OF RS 15,40,000/- IS HEREBY DIRECTED TO BE DELETED. AC CORDINGLY, THE GROUND NO. 5 RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. 6. THE GROUND NO. 6 RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IS WITH REGARD TO VIOLATION OF PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE BY THE LD CITA BY NOT CONSIDERING T HE VARIOUS SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE MADE BEFORE HIM, WHICH HAVE ALREADY BEEN A DDRESSED WHILE ADJUDICATING THE RESPECTIVE GROUNDS. HENCE THE ADJUDICATION OF GROU ND NO. 6 BECOMES INFRUCTUOUS. 7. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALL OWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 0 1.08.2018 SD/- SD/- [A.T. VARKEY] [ M.BALAGANESH ] JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED : 01.08.2018 SB, SR. PS COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. SUDAMA SHAW, HOLDING NO. 103, 53 PALLY, N.N. BAG CHI ROAD, KOLKATA-700120. 2. ITO, WARD-51(3), KOLKATA, DS 2 & 3, 2 ND FLOOR, UTTARAPAN COMPLEX MANIKTALA CIVIC CENTRE, KOLKATA-700054. 3. C.I.T(A)- 4. C.I.T.- KOLKATA. 5. CIT(DR), KOLKATA BENCHES, KOLKATA. TRUE COPY BY ORDER SENIOR PRIVAT E SECRETARY HEAD OF OFFICE/D.D.O., ITAT, KOLKATA BENCHE S