ACIT Vs Amal Corporation (ITAT Mumbai)
ITAT Mumbai held that addition under section 68 of the Income Tax Act towards unsecured loan unjustified as no information/ material proved that assessee was beneficiary of accommodation entry of loan. Addition merely on the basis of investigation report not justified.
Facts- Vide the present appeal, the Revenue has challenged the deletion of addition of Rs.1,50,00,000/- made in respect of unsecured loans which were alleged to be taken from the concerns of M/s. Bhanwarlal Jain Group who were found to be providing accommodation entries and secondly, deletion of addition of Rs.28,90,574/- which was made on account of interest payment in respect of these loans.
Conclusion- Held that the entire premise of AO is based on Investigation report in the case of Bhanwarlal Jain and nothing has been brought on record by him that any particular information or material was found relating to the assessee that assessee was beneficiary of accommodation entry of loan or advance from any of the group concerns of Bhanwarlal Jain. Once AO himself has carried out his enquiry and nothing adverse has been found, then simply relying upon the investigation report cannot justify the addition. In view of the facts and material placed on record, the aforesaid finding of the ld. CIT(A) cannot be tinkered with and accordingly, the deletion of Rs.1,50,00,000/- by the ld. CIT(A) is upheld.
