Sponsored
    Follow Us:

Case Law Details

Case Name : Girish Madhukar Rathi Vs DCIT (ITAT Pune)
Appeal Number : ITA No. 184/PUN/2017
Date of Judgement/Order : 05/03/2020
Related Assessment Year : 2013-14
Become a Premium member to Download. If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.
Sponsored

Girish Madhukar Rathi Vs DCIT (ITAT Pune)

The issue under consideration is that confirming the addition made u/s 68 by A.O. in respect of the loan taken from father of the appellant on mere suspicion.

ITAT have heard both the sides on this limited issue of making addition u/s 68 of the Act. It is an undisputed fact that the assessee has Running Account in matters of taking loans from Shri Madhukar Rathi (father) and Shri Madhukar Rathi in turn taking loans from Rahul Anil Birla and Nand Sales Corporation. The said transactions are undisputedly through banking. It is further an undisputed fact that during the year under consideration, the assessee repaid to the tune of Rs.1,25,50,000/- to Shri Madhukar Rathi. So, it is case of taking loans and repayment of loans through a Running Account. Regarding balance of loan in the Running Account, it is also an undisputed fact that, in past too, no addition of these loans amounts were added by AO despite the similar loan transactions with Shri Madhukar Rathi and, in turn, Shri Madhukar Rathi with Rahul Anil Birla, Rakesh N. Birla and Nand Sales Corporation. In our view, therefore, it is case of mere suspicion of the AO that led to invoking of the provisions of section 68 of the Act. Otherwise, there is no evidence with Revenue to demonstrate that it is case of money laundering, non discharge of onus by the assessee. With the loans taken from Birlas & others, Shri Madhukar Rathi is capable of providing loan of Rs. 79 lakhs to the assessee. AO has not disturbed the loans in the cases of Birlas & others. In our view, there is no case of addition u/s 68 of the Act. The additions made by the AO are not sustainable. Therefore, we are of the opinion, the grounds raised by the assessee are required to be allowed. In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed.

FULL TEXT OF THE ITAT JUDGEMENT

This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-4, Pune, dated 28.10.2016 for the Assessment Year 2013-14.

Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.

Sponsored

Join Taxguru’s Network for Latest updates on Income Tax, GST, Company Law, Corporate Laws and other related subjects.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Sponsored
Sponsored
Search Post by Date
July 2024
M T W T F S S
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
293031