Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2014 (10) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2014 (10) TMI 960 - AT - Income TaxTrading addition - Held that:- There is no dispute to the fact that the A.O. has not pointed out any defect in the books of account and the books of account have not been rejected by invoking provisions of Section 145(3) of the Act. Even if this ground has not been raised before the learned CIT(A) or even before us in the grounds of appeal, the fact remains that no books of account have been rejected by invoking the provisions of Section 145(3) of the Act and therefore, the trading results will be deemed to have been accepted by the A.O. Therefore, no additions can be made by the A.O. - Decided in favour of assessee. Addition u/s 68 - establish genuineness of the loans - Held that:- Though the creditor does not appear to be taxable during the years of the savings, and therefore by perusing the earnings and expenses of the family, and assessee not being the income tax assessee, thus of the view that the creditor being the real sister of the assessee must have given ₹ 1,00,000/- loan by depositing cash in her bank account. The assessee had proved the identity, creditworthiness and genuineness of the transaction and therefore, he has discharged his onus and therefore, no addition is called for and the addition sustained by learned CIT(A) is directed to be deleted along with the interest of ₹ 11,047/-. The order of learned CIT(A) is reversed and the addition of ₹ 1,11,047/- is directed to be deleted. Thus, the ground no. 2 raised by the assessee is allowed. Addition of cash credit in the name of Smt. Salochna Devi - Held that:- The creditor Smt. Salochna Devi is the mother of the assessee who is the widow lady of around 67 years has furnished the affidavit confirming the loan given to the assessee by making a cash deposit of ₹ 60,000/-. She is not an income tax assessee. She has stated in her statement before the A.O. of doing book binding business from where she earns ₹ 70,000/- to 80,000/- per annum, is not disputed. The said cash was given to the assessee, who deposited the same in the creditor’s account from where cheque has been taken. She has also stated that she is living with her son. In this circumstances and facts of the case, I am of the view that the assessee has proved the identity, creditworthiness and genuineness of the transaction and accordingly no addition of ₹ 60,000/- is called for alongwith the interest of ₹ 7,200/-. - Decided in favour of assessee. Addition of expenses on account of low withdrawals - Held that:- A.O. has estimated the expenses on account of withdrawals at ₹ 12,000/- per month, but no basis of the same has been given while estimating the same. Though, the assessee is living in his own house in a small town which has been explained by the assessee and in the circumstances and facts of the case, no addition is warranted. Accordingly, the order of the learned CIT(A) on this very ground is reversed and the A.O. is directed to delete the addition so made and sustained by learned CIT(A). Also as the additions made by the A.O. on account of withdrawals have been deleted hereinabove, there is no question of setting off the same against the cash credit. - Decided in favour of assessee.
|