The Delhi Bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has directed a fresh assessment in the case of Shri Hemant Kumar, setting aside key additions made by the Assessing Officer for Assessment Years 2010–11 and 2011–12. The additions under scrutiny involved unsecured loans amounting to Rs.2.51 crore and property-related advances totalling Rs.1.66 crore.
The appellant, Hemant Kumar, had challenged the orders of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Gurgaon dated 31 March 2016. The case involved two appeals – one each for A.Y. 2010–11 and A.Y. 2011–12 – which were heard together by the Tribunal owing to the similarity of issues.
Affective Ways Of Tax Planning for HUF, Partnership Firm and Will Click Here
The major contention for A.Y. 2010–11 concerned the addition of Rs.2,51,27,502 under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act, treated as unexplained unsecured loans. The appellant contended that the Assessing Officer had failed to consider important evidence, including repayments, court settlement documents, and death certificates of creditors. Specific transactions were highlighted, such as repayments made to creditors like Sunita, Duggal Properties Pvt. Ltd., and Manika Man Sukhani, among others. The counsel for the assessee argued that the CIT(A) erroneously concluded that no evidence was provided despite documents being submitted.
Additionally, the Tribunal addressed the issue of Rs.1.66 crore received as advances for property sales. The appellant submitted that this matter had already been examined in a prior assessment for A.Y. 2012–13, where a co-ordinate bench of the Tribunal had remanded the matter to the Assessing Officer for verification. In that earlier case, the Tribunal noted the need for fact-based inquiry into the source and nature of such advances. Relying on that reasoning, the Bench ordered a similar approach for the current years under appeal.
For A.Y. 2011–12, the appellant raised similar issues regarding cash deposits amounting to Rs.4.84 crore and additions related to unsecured loans of Rs.3.18 crore. The Tribunal observed that these issues also required factual reassessment based on available records and fresh submissions, in line with the earlier directions issued in the assessee’s case.
3000 Illustrations, Case Studies & Examples for Ind-AS & IFRS Click Here
The order was passed by a bench comprising Challa Nagendra Prasad, Judicial Member, and Naveen Chandra, Accountant Member. The appeals for both years were allowed for statistical purposes, with directions to the Assessing Officer to conduct a fresh examination and grant the assessee full opportunity to present evidence.
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the JudgmentSupport our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates
