The Commissioner Of Income Tax-Faridabad v. M/S Shree Motors Pvt. Ltd

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA ATCHANDIGARH. C.M. No.21136-CII of 2008 inI.T.A. No.642 of 2008Date of decision: 15.12.2008 The Commissioner of Income Tax-Faridabad. Vs. M/s Shree Motors Pvt. Ltd. -----Appellant -----Respondent CORAM:- HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOELHON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.N. MITTAL Present:-Mr. Yogesh Putney, Sr. Standing Counselfor the appellant.for the appellant. ----- ORDER: Delay condoned. The revenue has preferred this appeal under Section 260-Aof the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, “the Act”), proposing to raisefollowing substantial questions of law:- A.“Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of thecase, the Tribunal was right in confirming the order of Ld.CIT(A) who had deleted the addition of Rs.10,00,000/-made by Assessing Officer u/s 68 of Income Tax Act andaddition of Rs.45,880/- in respect of interest on cash credit,by holding that the identity of creditor company has beenproved whereas the creditor company had not filed itscase, the Tribunal was right in confirming the order of Ld.CIT(A) who had deleted the addition of Rs.10,00,000/-made by Assessing Officer u/s 68 of Income Tax Act andaddition of Rs.45,880/- in respect of interest on cash credit,by holding that the identity of creditor company has beenproved whereas the creditor company had not filed its returns of income for Asstt. Years 1996-97, 1997-98 and nowhereabouts of the company were available.” B. “Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of thecase, the Tribunal was right in deleting the addition made bythe Assessing Officer, though the assessee failed todischarge the onus to prove the creditworthiness of creditorcompany and genuineness of transaction?” The Assessing officer declared entries of cash credit in theaccount books of the assessee to be its income. On appeal, the CIT(A)upheld the contention of the assessee that the credit entries weregenuine. The identity of the creditor was disclosed and the paymentwas through cheque. The Tribunal upheld the said view. It wasobserved that the assessee proved the identity of the creditor, itscreditworthiness as well as genuineness of the transaction. We have heard learned counsel for the appellant. In view of concurrent findings of CIT(A) as well as theTribunal as to genuineness of the transaction, credit worthiness andidentity of the creditor being established, we are unable to hold that anysubstantial question of law arises. The appeal is dismissed. ( ADARSH KUMAR GOEL )JUDGE December 15, 2008ashwani ( L. N. MITTAL ) JUDGE