TMI Blog2013 (10) TMI 553X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... thiness of the person, whose money is credited in the books is not established and where the identity of the creditor is not proved - There is a peculiar tangent to section 68, where, the director collected the sale proceeds and deposited them with the assessee company. So far, the revenue authorities have looked into, this aspect and fact, which is undisputed. But the fact, as to why the director collected and why the assessee company who had renounced its rights on the original agreement to undertake the sale of sub plots belonging to the trust, and why was the assessee company, through its director was still collecting payments on behalf of the trust, has not been looked into. The real motive and purpose has yet to be ascertained in the light of arguments of the AR - Matter restored back to A.O. - Decided in favour of assessee. - ITA No. 3620/Mum/2011 - - - Dated:- 12-6-2013 - Shri P. M. Jagtap And Shri Vivek Varma,JJ. For the Appellant : Shri Reepal G. Tralashawala For the Respondent : Shri Manoj Kumar ORDER Per Vivek Varma, JM:- The appeal filed by the assessee arisen from the order of CIT(A) 6, Mumbai, dated 01.02.2011, wherein, the following grounds hav ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ails, the addition made of Rs. 46,64,000/- is without any basis, unjustified and may be deleted. 7. The learned CIT(A) failed to appreciate that the source of cash deposits were duly supported by agreements for sale of plots / advance received on sale of plots, etc. and hence, without making any attempt to verify the same or calling for remand report and merely on his own suspicious and doubts, the addition confirmed is unjustified and liable to be deleted." 2. Ground no. 1 pertains to the addition of Rs. 3,55,000/- in aggregate, found credited in the books of the assessee. 3. The issue was raised by the AO, when he found that the following amounts are credited in the books in the following names: S.No. Name of the lender Amount 1 Shri Anandkumar Jaiprakash Sarda 50,000 2 Ms Sumangala Prabhakarrao Gungune 50,000 3 Shri Suresh Ramkrishnji Gungune 45,000 4 Shri Vasantrao Omkarraoji Kale 60,000 5 Ms. Veena Malhotra 1,50,000 TOTAL 3,55,000 As per the details filed, the AO found that the assessee had not filed PAN det ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ted because of their know sources of income, as evidenced. He further submitted that as per evidence given Ms Sumangala Prabhakarrao Gungune was Ms. Asha Bhagvantrao Kherde. The AR therefore, submitted that at least these two credits should be treated as good credits. 10. The DR on the other hand submitted that the since the basic requirements of the deeming provisions have not been fulfilled, the conditions prevailing in section 68 are applicable to the case of the assessee and submitted that the revenue authorities have taken reasonable, reasoned and appropriate view to sustain the addition. 11. We have heard the arguments of both the sides and are of the view that the assessee did not make any serious attempt to establish the creditworthiness of the creditors. We also find that even the AR primarily dealt with the credits of Ms. Sumangala who is a teacher and Shri Vasantrao, an agriculturist, who owned 3.63 acres of agricultural land, both living in villages. Credits in the name of Shri Anandkumar Jaiprakash Sarda, Shri Suresh Ramkrishnji Gungune Ms. Veena Malhotra are considered as not genuine we sustain the addition made on these credits. 12. In the case of Ms Sumang ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... issions made before the revenue authorities and added that the land did not belong to the assessee or the director. It belonged to the Trust. The assessee, was only acting as the confirming party to the sale of plots belonging to the Trust and since the payments were collected by the director, who was depositing the same in assessee's bank account. His name was used, only to identify the nature of the payment. This aspect, the AR submitted, has not been looked into by the revenue authorities, who have simply gone ahead to invoke the provisions of section 68 merely on book entries. The nature and circumstances have neither been looked into nor considered by the revenue authorities. He, therefore, prayed that, since the purpose, nature and circumstances are important to take into consideration with regard to the transactions and the impugned addition, the issue be restored to the file of the AO. 19. On the other hand, the DR relied upon the orders of the revenue authorities and submitted that they have looked into all aspects and submissions before arriving at the conclusion to make the addition. He further submitted, there is no infirmity in the orders of the revenue authorities. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
