Suryalaxmi Enterprises P Ltd., CHENNAI V. ITO Corporate Ward 6(3), CHENNAI

ITA 805/CHNY/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2021] 107 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3366 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 6 month(s) 17 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 13-10-2021
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Next Hearing Date: 12-10-2021
• Assessment Year: 2015-2016
• Appeal Filed On: 26-03-2019
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Set aside
• Section: 68; 143(3); 13

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL C BENCH, CHENNAI , , BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VICE PRESIDENTAND SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ./ ITA NO.: 805/CHNY/2019 [ [ /ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2015-16 M/S. SURYALAXMI ENTERPRISES P LTD., NO.3/11, SESHACHALA GRAMINI GARDEN STREET, THIRUVOTTIYUR, CHENNAI 600 019. PAN : AAACV 2495B V. THE ITO, CORPORATE WARD-6(3) CHENNAI - 34. ( /APPELLANT) ( /RESPONDENT) / APPELLANT BY : SHRI S. SRIDHAR, ADVOCATE /RESPONDENT BY : SHRI G. JOHNSON, ADDL.CIT /DATE OF HEARING : 13.10.2021 /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 13.10.2021 / O R D E R PER MAHAVIR SINGH, VP: THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS ARISING OUT OF THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-7, CHENNAI IN ITA NO.76(T)/CIT(A)/2017-18 DATED 22.02.2019. THE ASSESSMENT WAS FRAMED BY THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, CORPORATE WARD 6(3), CHENNAI U/S 143(3) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (HEREINAFTER THE ACT) FOR THE A.Y. 2015-16 VIDE ORDER DATED 12.12.2017. 2 I.T.A. NO. 805/CHNY/2019 2. THE ONLY ISSUE IN THIS APPEAL OF ASSESSEE IS AS REGARDS TO THE ORDER OF CIT(A) SUSTAINING THE ADDITION MADE BY THE AO OF RS.2.60 CRORES REPRESENTING UNSECURED LOANS RECEIVED FROM ONE OF THE DIRECTORS BY INVOKING PROVISIONS OF SECTION 68 OF THE ACT. FOR THIS, ASSESSEE HAS RAISED NUMEROUS GROUNDS NUMBERING 1 TO 9 AND HE FAIRLY CONCEDED THAT THIS IS THE ONLY ISSUE. THE LD.COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE STATED THAT ASSESSEE FILED COMPLETE DETAILS BEFORE THE AO AS WELL AS THE CIT(A), BUT HE DREW OUR ATTENTION TO THE FINDINGS RECORDED BY THE CIT(A), WHICH READS AS UNDER:- I FIND THAT THE A.O. HAS GONE TO GREAT LENGTH IN ANALYZING THE ISSUE AT HAND AND THE POINT THAT IS ESTABLISHED IS THAT ALL THE 3 LIMBS REQUIRED TO BE FULFILLED FOR THE PURPOSE OF DISCHARGING THE ONUS U/S 68 OF THE ACT HAVE NOT BE DISCHARGED. THE AO'S ANALYSIS SHOWS THAT THE CREDIT WORTHINESS OF THE LOAN GIVE HAS NOT BEEN ESTABLISHED. THEREFORE, I AM OF THE VIEW THAT NO INTERFERENCE IS CALLED FOR IN A.OS ORDER WHICH IS WELL-REASONED AND SELF SPEAKING. THEREFORE, THIS IS APPEAL IS DISMISSED. 3. THE LD.COUNSEL STATED THAT PRACTICALLY THE ORDER OF CIT(A) IS A NON-SPEAKING ORDER AND EVEN THE AO HAS NOT PROPERLY CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE. THE LD.COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE BEFORE US TRIED TO EXPLAIN THE SOURCES AND FOR THIS, HE FILED SUBMISSIONS DATED 10.11.2017 RUNNING INTO 3 PAGES. 3 I.T.A. NO. 805/CHNY/2019 HE STATED THAT THESE CAN BE CONSIDERED AND THE IN SUBSTANCE THE MATTER CAN BE RESTORED BACK TO THE FILE OF THE AO FOR EXAMINING THE ISSUE IN DETAIL VIZ-A-VIZ THE EVIDENCES. WHEN THIS PROPOSITION WAS PUT TO LD.SENIOR DR, HE OPPOSED THE PLEA OF THE ASSESSEE BUT COULD NOT CONTROVERT THE SOURCE IS EXPLAINED IN THE SUBMISSIONS. HOWEVER, THESE SOURCES ARE TO BE EXAMINED BY THE AO. THE LD.SENIOR DR RELIED ON THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AND THAT OF THE CIT(A). 4. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSIONS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE DATED 10.11.2017, WHICH NEED TO BE EXAMINED BY THE AO. THE ASSESSEE CAN FILE THESE SUBMISSIONS BEFORE THE AO ALONG WITH EVIDENCES AND THE AO CAN EXAMINE THESE EVIDENCES IN REGARD TO UNSECURED LOAN OF RS.2.60 CRORES RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE COMPANY FROM ONE OF ITS DIRECTOR. FOR THE SAKE OF BREVITY, WE ARE NOT REPRODUCING THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE DATED 10.11.2017. GOING THROUGH THE ENTIRETY OF THE FACTS OF THE CASE, WE FEEL THAT THE CIT(A) HAS NOT AT ALL ADJUDICATED THE ISSUE IN LIGHT OF SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE BUT PASSED A NON-SPEAKING ORDER. WE HAVE GONE THROUGH THE SUBMISSIONS AND NOTED THAT THESE REQUIRE VERIFICATION AT THE LEVEL OF AO. HENCE, IT IS BETTER AND VIABLE TO SEND BACK THE 4 I.T.A. NO. 805/CHNY/2019 MATTER TO THE FILE OF THE AO SO THAT HE CAN CARRY OUT NECESSARY ENQUIRIES IN REGARD TO THIS UNSECURED LOAN RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE COMPANY FROM ONE OF ITS DIRECTORS AMOUNTING TO RS.2.60 CRORES. HENCE, WE SET ASIDE THE ORDERS OF THE LOWER AUTHORITIES I.E., OF THE AO AND THE CIT(A) AND REMAND THE MATTER BACK TO THE FILE OF THE AO FOR FRESH ADJUDICATION. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 13 TH OCTOBER, 2021 AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- ( ) (MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL) /ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ( ) (MAHAVIR SINGH) /VICE PRESIDENT /CHENNAI, /DATED, THE 13 TH OCTOBER, 2021 RSR /COPY TO: 1. /APPELLANT 2. /RESPONDENT 3. ( ) /CIT(A) 4. /CIT 5. /DR 6. /GF.