TMI Blog2011 (5) TMI 229X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... credited in the name of Banwarilal Khetan in the regular books of account can be credited in the total income of the appellant as unexplained cash credit under section 68 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Appeal is dismissed - Tax Appeal No. 1 OF 2000 - - - Dated:- 3-5-2011 - PRAKASH TATIA AND H.C. MISHRA, JJ. Biren Poddar for the Appellant. Deepak Roshan and Amit Kumar for the Respondent. JUDGMENT Prakash Tatia, J. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. The appellant-assessee is aggrieved against the order passed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Patna Bench, Patna in ITA No. 90(Pat.)/1996 for the assessment year 1989-90 dated 30-7-1999. The case, in brief, is with respect to the addition of an amount ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... her so as to assess creditor's income if he had no income or if the creditor had invested the money (undisclosed) then creditor could have been charged under section 69 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. Learned counsel for the appellant vehemently submitted that the reasons given by all the authorities including the Tribunal indicate that they proceeded to examine the matter as though it was the assessee who was required to prove further and more than what he has already disclosed to the Revenue and there was no burden upon the Revenue to prove their own case. 5. We have considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the appellant as well as learned counsel for the Revenue who drew our attention to the various reasons given in the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at the same factual situation is available in case in hand as the appellant disclosed the name of the creditor and he was summoned under section 131 of the Income-tax Act and he fully supported that contention of the assessee that he deposited the amount for purchasing the tractor and it was not the cash deposit. Learned counsel for the appellant relied upon the judgment passed in the case of CIT v. Orissa Corpn. (P.) Ltd. [1986] 159 ITR 78/20 Taxman 80F (SC). In this case Hon'ble Supreme Court observed that the assessee had given the names and addresses of the alleged creditors. It was in the knowledge of the Revenue that the said creditors were Income-tax assessees. Their index number was in the file of the Revenue. The Revenue, ap ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... it was only trade credit and not a cash credit. 9. The summon under section 131 of the Act of 1961 was given to the said alleged creditor who appeared before the concerned authority and it would worthwhile to mention here that the Assessing Officer, the C.I.T.(Appeals) and the Tribunal, all have considered the evidence of the said alleged creditor in detail and quoted extensively. On consideration of the said evidence, we are of the firm view that, in fact, not only the creditworthiness of the creditor, the credibility of the alleged trade creditor is also very doubtful which has been noticed by the three authorities. We would also like to mention few of the facts which has been stated by the said person, B.Khetan. In his statement, the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... credibility of the witness first, rather than the creditworthiness of the witness. In fact, from the statement of the witnesses credibility of entry of transaction in question in the books of account has lost its value. It is clearly proved that the transaction for which the finding has been recorded by the authorities below is based on the evidence available on record as stated by non else than the witness suggested by the assessee himself and the said witness was called and it was found that his statement in his proof of the entry made in the books of account of the assessee and in view of the above reasons the facts which have been before the Hon'ble Court in the case of Orissa Corpn. (P.) Ltd (supra) and Sarogi Credit Corpn.'s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
