TMI Blog2005 (2) TMI 103X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pondent-assessee. This court in Income-tax Reference, Bhaiyalal Shyam Behari v. CIT [ 2005 (1) TMI 424 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT] , has held that the principle of peak credit is not applicable in case where the deposits remained unexplained u/s 68 of the Act. It cannot apply in a case of different depositors where there has been no transaction of deposits and its repayment between a particular depositor and the assessee. Respectfully following the same, we are of the considered opinion that the Tribunal was not justified in directing the Assessing Officer to take the peak credit for the purposes of section 68 of the Act. We accordingly answer the question referred to us in the negative, i.e., in favour of the Revenue and against the assessee. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... M/s. Mahesh Chandra Keshav Chand 7,000 Sri Mahesh Chandra Mistry 2,000 Sri Mahesh Chandra Jain 3,600 Sri Prayag Das Agrawal 1,800 M/s. Agrawal Bartan Bhandar 2,000 Sri Din Dayal 1,500 Sri Halke 1,200 Sri Saukat 2,000 Sri Sirajuddin 2,000 Sri Latif Mohd. 4,500 Sri Maqbool 2,500 Sri Hussain Mohd. 2,500 Sri Mianuiddin 2,500 Sri Salim Mohd. 2,500 He considered the explanation/confirmatory letters and treated the following amounts totalling Rs. 23,200 as unexplained deposits liable to be treated as income from unexplained sources under section 68 of the Act: Rs. 1. Paras Ram Numberdar 2,000 2. Bhagwan Das 2,200 3. Mahesh Chandra Jain 2,000 4. Mahesh Chandra Mistri 2,000 5. Prayag Das Agrawal 1,800 6. Din Dayal 1,500 7. Saukat 2,000 8. Sirajuddi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... de order dated January 10, 1989, has expressed his agreement with the Judicial Member. In conformity with the order passed by the third Member, the Tribunal partly allowed the appeal filed by the respondent that the peak credit should be determined by the Assessing Officer and only the amount of peak credit should be added as unexplained cash credit under section 68 of the Act. 8. We have heard Sri Shambhoo Chopra, learned standing counsel for the Revenue. Nobody has appeared on behalf of the respondent-assessee. 9. We find that in respect of the squared up accounts of the two depositors, mentioned above, the Assessing Officer himself had taken the peak credit as unexplained deposit and added the same under section 68 of the Act. 10. So far ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
