9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (2) TMI 214X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... MENT (Delivered By:-Hon'ble Dr. Satish Chandra,J.) 1. The present appeal is filed by the assessee against the order dated 14.5.2001 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi in I.T.A. No.5645/Del/1994 for the Assessment Year 1987-88. 2. The assessee has mentioned six substantial questions of law, but all are leading to the addition of Rs. 3.90 lacs, which was upheld by the Tribunal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e assessee has taken a different version by stating that he had gone Delhi to purchase a plot but the deal was not finalised so he had to return to Bareilly alongwith cash which was taken from the family members and the slip of each family member was attached on the bundle of currency notes. But, the A.O. was not satisfied so he made the addition of Rs. 3.90 lacs. However, the first appellate auth ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... urchase the plot in Delhi, but the deal was not finalized so, the assessee was returning to Bareilly along-with cash. The detail of cash taken by the assessee was given which is as under:- 1 Smt. Sushila Devi (Mother) Rs.54,000/- 2 Smt. Meera Agarwal (Sister) Rs.40,000/- 3 Km. Kiran Agarwal (Sister) Rs.1,04,000/- 4 Sri Radha Raman Agarwal (Ind) Rs.23,000/- 5 -do- (HUF) Rs.13,000/- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ither the amount was meager or the same was shown in the books of accounts. No attempt was made by the Department to verify/examine the creditors. The identity of the creditors has been established. From family members, loan for petty amount can be taken in cash. Hence, it appears that the creditors were genuine. 9. It may be mentioned that in the case of C.I.T. Vs. Orissa Corporation Pvt. Ltd. 1 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
