Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2022 (11) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2022 (11) TMI 470 - ITAT SURATAddition u/s 68 - burden of proof - Bogus profit from bogus trading in commodities through the broker - AO was of the view that onus to prove the source of income was on the assessee, and hence he had not made any further inquiry and it was sought to be justified on the ground that Section 8, read with Section 106 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 that when the fact is substantially within the knowledge of any person, burden of providing that fact is upon him - HELD THAT:- As the burden was on the department to show that the amount of demand drafts found to be credited in the assessee’s account in the books of account of GMDC belonged to the assessee by bringing proper evidence on record and the assessee could not be expected to explain the source of income or to call responsible officers of the GMDC or bank to discharge the burden that laid upon the department. As further find that in case Dr. Swati Mahesh Vinchurkar vs DCIT [2021 (6) TMI 1123 - ITAT SURAT] the Division Bench of Surat Tribunal also took view that once assessee denied that she has not earned income as reflected in her form 26-AS, the onus shifts of the Revenue authorities to prove such income of such assessee. The addition solely cannot be made by ignoring the submission of assessee. AO was not justified in absence of bringing any cogent evidence to make such addition of alleged profit, when the assessee specifically denied his involvement in the transaction of Multi National Commodity Exchange and has furnished his bank statement showing that there is no such credit in his books. Hence, we direct the Assessing Officer to delete the addition of alleged bogus profit. Appeal filed by the assessee is allowed.
|