Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2019 (11) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (11) TMI 27 - ITAT DELHIUnexplained cash deposit in the bank account of the assessee - HELD THAT:- A perusal of the order of the CIT(A) shows that Sh. Anil Sachdeva in his statement had clearly stated that he had never signed the affidavit nor has given ₹ 3 lacs for getting the demand draft in favour of M/s. Hundai Motors Ltd. PAN number given by the assessee is also incorrect. Similarly Sh. Sanjay Khattar had also stated that neither he has signed the affidavit nor has given ₹ 2,50,000/- for getting demand draft in favour of the assessee Sh. Suresh and Chakresh. He had never given any amount of ₹ 2,50,000/- to Sh. Padam Lal Dua i.e. assessee. Similarly summon issued to Ms. Bhawna Narula was returned back unserved and the assessee, despite being asked by the AO to produce the said party, never produced Ms. Bhawna Narula who has given an amount of ₹ 13,60,000/- to the assessee as claimed by him. A perusal of the order of the CIT(A) shows that assessee has forged the affidavit of Sh. Anil Sachdeva and Sh. Sanjay Khattar and failed to produce Ms. Bhawna Narula before the AO despite being given opportunity by the AO during remand proceedings. The arguments of the assessee that opportunity to cross-examination was not given falls flat especially when the two persons have stated before the AO on oath that neither they have signed the affidavit nor have given any such amount to the assessee. Similarly Ms. Bhawna Narula was never produced before the Assessing Officer for recording her statement despite being asked by the AO to do so since the summon issued to her was returned unserved. Assessee also failed to justify the source of the balance amount of ₹ 75000/- i.e. (1985000 -19,10,000 i.e. (3,00,000+250000+13,60,000). Appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed.
|