As assessee discharged his burden of proving loan amt., addition deleted, ITAT

Facts in Brief:

1. AO made additions to assessee’s income.

2. On appeal, CIT(A) deleted the additions.

On appeal ITAT held,

3. We find that as per the finding given by CIT(A) on page No. 10 of his order, taking of opening stock of Rs.78,059.38 by the assessee is evident from share purchase details and from DEMAT account and accounts of the assessee.

4. The objection of the Assessing Officer is that the assessee has taken the opening stock in trading account but in the return of income filed by the assessee in preceding year 2007-08, nil closing stock has been shown.

5. On this aspect, this is the claim of the assessee that the return of income for assessment year 2007-08 was filed without any trading account and balance sheet and in the present year, the books of accounts were maintained and opening stock has been taken on the valuation of the shares on DEMAT account as on 01/04/2007.

6. Under these facts, we find no reason to interfere in the order of CIT(A). Accordingly, ground No. 1 is rejected.

2nd Holding:

7. We find that this addition is of the total amount of various loans outstanding in the books of accounts of the assessee and regarding each of these loans, a categorical finding has been given by CIT(A) that the major amount is regarding opening balance and regarding the small amounts which were received during the present year, the assessee has satisfactorily discharged his burden of proving the loan. This categorical finding of CIT(A) could not be controverted by Learned D. R. of the Revenue and therefore, we do not find any reason to interfere in the order of CIT(A) on this issue. This ground is rejected. 

News Reference:Smt. Priya Raheja, Kanpur vs Department Of Income Tax