TMI Blog2015 (10) TMI 933X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing channels. As for the balance amount of ₹ 5,00,000 represented by contract receipts, in the absence of any cogent evidence, brought on record by the assessee, in support of the said claim, as the net presumed net profit/margin as available to the assessee, would not support the cause of the assessee that entire contract receipts are available for making the investment, more so, since the year under consideration was shown as the first year of contract and there was no accumulated sources of income other than the marginal incomes from the property and agricultural income. We do not find any infirmity in the view taken by the CIT(A) with regard to the own sources, by accepting the claim of the assessee partly. We accordingly reject t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed against assessee and revenue. - ITA No. 1190/Hyd/13, ITA No. 1209/Hyd/13 - - - Dated:- 31-7-2014 - Shri B. Ramakotaiah And Smt. Asha Vijayaraghavan,JJ. For the Petitioner : Shri Solgy Jose T. Kottaram DR For the Respondent : None ORDER Per Smt. Asha Vijayaraghavan, Judicial Member: These are cross appeals for the assessment year 2007-08 and they are directed against the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax(Appeals) VI, Hyderabad dated 13.5.2013. Since only a common issue is involved, these appeals are being disposed of with this common order for the sake of convenience. 2. The only issue involved in these appeals relates to the addition made by the Assessing Officer under S.69 of the Act, on accou ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nsidering this, and the fact that the year under consideration is the first year of contract, the Assessing Officer concluded that with meager sources of other incomes including agricultural income, it is difficult to assume that such investments emanated from the sources explained. The Assessing Officer accordingly disbelieving the version of the assessee, made an addition of ₹ 21,50,000 towards unexplained investment, while completing the assessment on a total income of ₹ 22,84,600 as against admitted income of ₹ 1,12,100, vide order of assessment dated 30.12.2011 passed under S.143(3) read with S.147 of the Act. 4. Aggrieved, assessee preferred appeal before the CIT(A), and in the course of appellate proceedings furn ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... gh confirmations were furnished from them. It was submitted by the assessee that the creditor was the mother of the assessee, and it was quite but human nature, that in need of money, a person falls back on the family member, and the amount was lent through banking channel, and the creditor confirmed the transaction through letter and submitted assessment particulars. As for loan of ₹ 10,00,000 from Mrs. Tahira Fatima, Assessing Officer observed that loan was obtained from Mr.Mohd. Abdul Kareem, whereas confirmation as provided by Mrs.Fatima, wife of Abdul Kareem. The Assessing Officer further observed that on both the occasions of obtaining loan, an amount of ₹ 5,00,000 each was credited into the account of Mr.Abdul Kareem, jut ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (a) accumulated savings out of income from property and agriculture; and (b) contract receipts. The CIT(A) accepted the first source, since the amount represented by the same to the extent of ₹ 1,50,000 has been received from out of banking channels. As for the balance amount of ₹ 5,00,000 represented by contract receipts, in the absence of any cogent evidence, brought on record by the assessee, in support of the said claim, as the net presumed net profit/margin as available to the assessee, would not support the cause of the assessee that entire contract receipts are available for making the investment, more so, since the year under consideration was shown as the first year of contract and there was no accumulated sources of in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the matter, we do not find any infirmity in the view taken by the CIT(A), while accepting the sources explained by the assessee for investing the capital, by borrowing the monies from these two persons, viz. mother and distant relative. We accordingly uphold the order of the CIT(A) rejecting the grounds of the Revenue on this aspect. 9. Though there is one more ground in the appeal of the assessee, which relates to charging of interest under S.234A and S.234B of the Act, wherein the contention of the assessee is that the interest has not been calculated in accordance with the provisions of the Act, no specific arguments have been advanced on this aspect at the time of hearing. In any event, we do not find any merit in this ground of t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
