Case Law Details
Unideep Food Vs T.K. Satapathy (Orissa high court)
Orissa High Court held that assessee failed to produce any fresh affidavits proving that it had borrowed unsecured loans from lender farmers as directed by ITAT while remanding the matter. Accordingly, addition under section 68 sustained.
Facts- This appeal by the Assessee is directed against an order dated 8th July 2019 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Cuttack Bench, Cuttack (ITAT) dismissing the Assessee’s ITA No.328/CTK/2017 for the assessment year (AY) 2007-08. The short question is whether the Assessing Officer (AO) was justified in directing the addition of Rs.45,29,020/- to the taxable income of the Appellant under the head ‘unsecured loan’ under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (Act).
Conclusion- Held that the Assessee did not ask for summons to be issued and the Assessee did not produce any fresh affidavits of the lender farmers to confirm that their loans to the Assessee had been repaid to them. The Assessee could have easily done this to satisfy the requirement of the directions of the ITAT in remand.
The Court is unable to find any substantial question of law arising from the impugned order of the ITAT. The appeal is accordingly dismissed.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
Author Bio
