9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (4) TMI 315X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of Rs. 4,52,20,332/- was made by the Assessing Officer as "unexplained cash credit". 3. Assessing Officer issued first show cause notice on 4.11.1999. On account of there being no response from the appellant summons u/s. 131 (1A) was issued on 24.1.2000. But on 18th January, 2000 written submission was made by the appellant. Eventually on not being satisfied, this entire amount has been added to the total income of the assessee as "unexplained cash credit" u/s. 68 of the Income Tax Act. 4. When challenged before the CIT(Appeals) impugned order of Assessing Officer, it was of the opinion that only on the basis of general observations, the Assessing Officer had made the said addition. CIT(Appeals) held that confirmation of lenders were supplied to the Assessing Officer and these letters contained names and address of the depositors and bank pass-books of some of the depositors were also produced and most importantly it found that the transactions were rooted through bank as cash credit were received by cheques. PAN and GIR numbers were also furnished. It found the objections of Assessing Officer with regard to non-cooperation on the part of appellant devoid of merits in as much as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ow incorrect approach is adopted by the Tribunal in disregarding such positive findings of the CIT(Appeals). 9. As against that learned senior counsel Mr. Manish Bhatt appearing for the Revenue has urged that what all the Tribunal had done is to remand the matter to the Assessing Officer and sufficient opportunities is to be given to both the sides and this order hardly calls for any question of law to be interfered with. 10. For the detailed reasons recorded hereinafter, this Tax Appeal merits no consideration. 11. As can be noted from the order of the Assessing Officer, he has enlisted the details of all the depositors and the amount of interest on re-payment of loan/deposit claimed to have been received also has been calculated. As the amount was very large, assessee was required to furnish the requisite proof concerning various depositors and opportunity was availed to him to substantiate the queries raised in this regard. 12. Notings of the Assessing Officer suggest that dilatory tactics were adopted with an intent not to comply with the direction of the Assessing Officer and therefore, summons u/s. 131(1A) of the Act was issued . Although Chartered Accountant and other re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... are reproduced hereunder : "From the records, I find that the assessee had produced the loan confirmation letters from all the lenders from whom it had accepted the deposits during the previous year. The said loan confirmation letters do contain name and address of the depositors. Further, the details of transactions are also narrated in the loan confirmation letters. The assessee has also produced the copies of bank passbooks of some of the depositors. More importantly, all the transactions of loan have been routed through bank. The assessee has also furnished P.A Nos. and G.I.R. Nos. in many cases. In such circumstances it cannot be said that the identity and capacity of the lenders have not been established. Nothing has been brought on record to show that the loans are not genuine. The fact which need to be considered over here is that the amount were routed through banking channel and independent brokers were also involved in the transactions of loans. Therefore, there is not even an iota of doubt on the genuineness of the loan. Considering the above factual aspect I am of the opinion that the assessee has discharged its prima facie onus to establish the genuineness of the lo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... se of two years and on 19.11.1999. Thus, the complain of the A.O. regarding shortage of time is not valid. He, therefore, deleted the addition of Rs.4.52 crores. We find that it is not in dispute that P.A Numbers in respect of many depositors was not filed by the assessee. Further, the time limit available with the A.O after filing of the confirmation by the assessee for cross verification was not sufficient though the same was not because of any lapse on the part of the assessee but probably due to lethargic departmental functioning. Be that as it may be, on the above facts and circumstances, in our considered opinion neither the assessee has brought prima facie sufficient material on record to prove the genuineness of all the depositors as it has not disputed the fact that confirmation of few depositors could not be filed, P.A. Numbers in certain cases could not be filed nor the Department has brought any material to disprove the genuineness of the cash credit in respect of the depositors whose addresses were made available by the assessee. Hence, it shall be in the interest of justice to restore the issue back to the file of the A.O with the direction to reframe the assessment o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
