TMI Blog2013 (7) TMI 542X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... possession of the employee of the assessee, it cannot be stated that additions were made on the basis of bare statement recorded under section 133A - If assessee was to pay any sum he could have paid the same through cheque as both the parties were having their bank accounts and there was no need to withdraw any sum in cash and then deposit the same to the account - assessee has failed to give any cogent evidence in support of his contention that a sum of money robbed was actually out of money withdrawn from the bank – appeal decided against assesse. - Tax Appeal No. 261 of 2013 - - - Dated:- 8-4-2013 - AKIL KURESHI AND MS. SONIA GOKANI, JJ. For the Appellant : Tushar P. Hemani and Ms. Vaibhavi K. Parikh. For the Respondent : N ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , with respect to cash of Rs.20 lakh, the assessee agreed that same represented assessees unaccounted money. Additional income of Rs.30 lakhs was admitted on the basis of other loose paper and documents found at the time of survey. We are concerned with this disputed sum of Rs.20 lakh with respect to which assessee contends that there was no material other than bare statement of the assessee recorded under section 133A of the Act. The stand of the assessee is that such statement itself cannot form basis of any additions and that therefore, Revenue authorities as well as Tribunal erred in making such additions. 3. Having heard learned counsel Shri Hemani for the appellant who raised above contentions before us, we notice that the Tribunal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on 31.3.2005 was out of assessees unaccounted income and the assessee could not establish that this amount was out of an amount of Rs.24/- lacs withdrawn on 25.3.2005. We are inclined to agree with this view of ld. CIT(A) on account of two reasons (1) If assessee was to pay any sum to Mr. Shroff, he could have paid the same through cheque as both the parties were having their bank accounts and there was no need to withdraw any sum in cash and then deposit the same to the account of Mr.Shroff. (2) If the contention of the assessee is accepted that this amount of Rs.20 lacs was out of Rs.24 lacs withdrawn from the bank on 25.3.2005, the remaining amount of Rs.4 lakhs or part of it should have been found at the time of survey was not shown in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
