Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2017 (4) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2017 (4) TMI 1055 - AT - Income TaxUnexplained credit u/s 68 - addition of loan received - proof of identity of the lender and genuineness of transaction made through banking channel - Held that:- We find that a perusal of the bank statement of the lender Mr. Dattu (p-3 of P/B) shows that there were two withdrawals of ₹ 3,00,000/- each on 08.05.2008. The assessee has not furnished the transactions prior to 04.04.2008. In the statement recorded by the AO (point no 7-9 of the statement) Mr. Dattu confirmed that he had given loans of ₹ 6,00,000/- to the assessee. Mr. Dattu stated before the AO that he received the funds from M/s. Suzlon Ltd. who had acquired his ancestral agricultural land for installation of a windmill. However he had not proof of receiving the funds from M/s. Suzlon Ltd. Mr. Dattu has stated before the AO that he was working in Vashi and Khadk, Mumbai as a labourer and was earning ₹ 9,000/- p.m. It is inconceivable that with such meagre income Mr. Dattu could give a loan of ₹ 6,00,000/- to the assessee. As the Hon'ble Supreme Court laid down in Kalekhan Mohammed Hanif vs. CIT (1963 (2) TMI 33 - SUPREME Court), the onus is on the assessee to explain the nature and source of cash credits, whether they stand in the assessee’s account or in the account of a third party. At para 7 here-in-above, we have delineated that the assessee has failed to prove the genuineness of the transaction. - Decided against assessee
|