TMI Blog2011 (12) TMI 357X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... h, J. S.V. Joshi for the Appellant P.C. Maurya for the Respondent ORDER Rajendra Singh, Accountant Member 1. This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order dated 26.5.2010 of CIT(A) for the assessment year 2006-07. The only dispute raised in this appeal is regarding addition on account of unexplained expenditure under section 69C of the Income tax Act. 2. The facts in brief are that the AO noted from AIR details that the assessee had paid a sum of Rs.2,57,726/- against Citi Bank credit card bills. The assessee submitted the credit card statement of Rs.2,57,726/- and explained that a sum of Rs.51,175/- was paid by the assessee from his regular bank account i.e. American Express Savings Bank. The asse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by him from his cousin sister who was living in USA for more than 15 years. She had confirmed the transactions and the confirmation letter was also notarized. (copy placed at page-3 of the paper book), and also filed copy of passport showing that she visited India in January/February, 2005. The assessee had, therefore, discharged the onus placed upon it to explain the source. The AO had made no further enquiry nor had called for any further details and evidence from the assessee and, therefore, the addition made by the AO was not correct. The CIT(A) also had confirmed the addition in the same manner without calling for further details and evidence or without making any further enquiry. 3.1 The ld. DR on the other hand strongly supported ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in my view, the onus placed on the assessee to explain the source of credit card expenses was discharged. It was for the AO to make necessary enquiries and place any adverse material to controvert the claim of the assessee which has not been done in this case. The perusal of notings in the order sheet shows that after the assessee filed the confirmation, and the passport copy, there was no further query made by the AO. In case the AO was not satisfied about the source of cash, he could have called for further details/evidence or could have himself made enquiries which were not done. Under these circumstances addition made by the AO is not justified. CIT(A) had also not called for any further details/evidence from the assessee nor any furth ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|