Case Law Details
Kirat Hotels Pvt. Ltd. Vs ITO (ITAT Delhi)
ITAT Delhi held that addition towards unsecured loan under section 68 of the Income Tax Act sustained as assessee failed to discharge the primary onus and burden of proof of providing genuineness, creditworthiness and identity of creditors to the satisfaction of the A.O.
Facts- The case of the assessee was selected for complete scrutiny through CASS on the reason that “an unsecured loans from persons who have not filed their return of income (Form 3CD)”. The assessment order came to be passed u/s 143(3) of the Act on 28/12/2016 by making an addition on account of unsecured loan u/s 68 of the Act of Rs. 34,07,113/- on account of Sundry Creditors of Rs. 49,12,092/-, on account of N/P @ 8% of Rs. 35,26,459/- and addition on account of unsecured investment in non current investment u/s 69 of the Act to the tune of Rs. 63,00,000/-, accordingly computed income of the assessee at Rs. 1,81,45,664/-.
CIT(A) dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee. Being aggrieved, the present appeal is filed by assessee.
Conclusion- Held that the assessee has not proved the capacity, identity and creditworthiness of the lenders and also failed to provide any document to prove the genuineness of the transaction which ultimately resulted in making addition by the A.O. and confirmation of the addition by the CIT(A). Therefore, we find no reason to interference with the finding and conclusion of the Lower Authorities.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
Author Bio
