Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2018 (9) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (9) TMI 529 - AT - Income TaxAddition towards capital introduction - Held that:- CIT(A), the assessee has filed certain details in respect of salary received from his employer and bank statement maintained with Indian Bank, Governorpet, Vijayawada. CIT(A) after considering the bank account of the assessee, he was of the opinion that there is no balance in his account except amount of ₹ 70,240/- and therefore confirmed the order of the Assessing Officer. The assessee has not filed any details and any evidence to substantiate the source for introduction of the capital. Therefore, we find no infirmity in the order passed by the ld. CIT(A). Thus, this ground of appeal raised by the assessee is dismissed. Addition towards sundry creditors - Held that:- On appeal before the ld. CIT(A), the assessee has not filed any evidence, therefore, he confirmed the order of the Assessing Officer. Even before us, no evidence with regard to sundry creditors has been filed. Therefore, we find no reason to interfere with the order of the ld. CIT(A). Thus, this ground of appeal raised by the assessee is dismissed. Addition towards loan creditors - Held that:- The reason for non-filing of confirmation letter is that the promissory note itself is sufficient, however, the assessee has filed confirmation letters in respect of 09 loan creditors. Therefore, in our view, it is not correct to say that he is not aware about the value of the confirmation letter. Therefore, at this stage, this evidence cannot be admitted. Even confirmation letter filed by the loan creditor Mr. S. Venkateswara Reddy is having only Ac. 4.76 of land and he has given loan of ₹ 4.00 lakh, but he has not explained the source properly and genuineness of the transaction. Therefore, this cannot be considered at this point of time. Accordingly, the plea raised by the assessee is rejected. So far as merits of the case is concerned, the ld. CIT(A) has rightly deleted the addition in respect of 09 loan creditors, where confirmation letters are filed. So far as ₹ 24.00 lakhs is concerned, the assessee is not able to substantiate the creditworthiness of the loan creditors and genuineness of the transaction and therefore, the ld. CIT(A) confirmed the order of the Assessing Officer. We find no reason to interfere with the order of the ld. CIT(A). Thus, this ground of appeal raised by the assessee is dismissed.
|