Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2016 (7) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2016 (7) TMI 829 - ITAT AHMEDABADAddition u/s 68 - creditworthiness - agriculture income - Held that:- Source of loan has been stated to be agriculture income. But when we peruse the statement, it will reveal that creditor has meager income. It is highly improbable that one could keep saving in cash at home for a long time. For example, Smt. Vijaylaxmi Shrivastva has given an amount of ₹ 3.00 lakhs to the assessee on 31.5.20093. She has bank account with Bharat Co-op. Bank Ltd. She has agriculture land of 16 bighas. Her annual agriculture income has roughly ₹ 50,000/- to ₹ 60,000/-. She has stated that savings were being deposited in the Co-operative Bank. If we appreciate the statement of this creditor, then, it would reveal that it is highly improbable that agriculturist, having meager income would keep safe the sale proceeds of agriculture produce for five to six years in cash at home. Her statement in itself is contradictory. In reply to question no.5, she stated that “I keep all my savings at Bharat Cooperative Bank”. Then, in the next reply to the next question, she deposed that “I keep few amounts of saving at home”. If these two questions are compared with question no.9, where the AO had asked place of keeping agriculture income, she deposed that such income was kept at home. Similarly, we have perused the statement of other creditors. All that statements did not inspire credence to us. The assessee has taken alleged unsecured loan in systematic manner. In some of the cases cash was deposited one or two days before the money was given to the assessee, and the assessee is man of means. How it can be expected that small farmers not having any regular source of income would give loan in this fashion. As far as discrepancy pointed by the assessee with regard to Mr.Mahesh Shrivastva, if that discrepancy is taken note of, he was not credit-worthy of giving any loan to the assessee. The ld.Revenue authorities have appreciated the facts and circumstances in right perspective while making addition. We do not see any reasons to interfere with the order of the ld.CIT(A). - Decided against assessee.
|