TMI Blog2015 (10) TMI 1271X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... itores were made available to the AO.Copies of the returns of the lenders were also filed in most of the cases.The AO could have very well cross verified the genuineness of the transactions.But,he did not make any investigation in that regard. So,we agree with the observation of the FAA that the assessee had sufficiently discharged the burden which lay upon her to explain the nature and source of the credit entry appearing in her books of accounts and the burden had clearly shifted to the AO to prove to the contrary to hold that in spite of her explanation the entries could still be held to represent her income. In our opinion,the AO failed to discharge the onus shifted to him. Therefore, we hold that the FAA had rightly concluded that it was sufficient to delete the addition. - Decided in favour of assessee. - ITA No.7567/Mum/2011 - - - Dated:- 9-9-2015 - Sh. Rajendra,Accountant Member Parthasarathy Choudhury,Judicial Member For The Assessee : Shri K. Shivaram For The Revenue : Shri S.P. Walimbe Challenging the order dt.10.8.2011of CIT(A)-32, Mumbai,the Assessing Officer(AO)has raised following Grounds of Appeal: 1. On the facts and in the circumstances of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lected/submitted before the AO.She enclosed the confirmation of the parties and requested the FAA to admit the same under Rule 46A of the Income tax Rule, 1962(Rules). The additional evidences furnished by the assessee were sent to the AO, by the FAA,for his comments under Rule-46A(3).The AO in his remand report,dt.2.5.2011,stated that assessee had produced the parties consent before him, that he had examined the evidences furnished by the assessee. The FAA gave the comments of the AO to the assessee who submitted her re-joinder. It was stated by her that due to dispute among family members the requisite confirmations could not be submitted earlier,that all of creditors had confirmed the transactions before the AO. The assessee submitted a chart showing opening balance amounts received during the year and the closing balance in respect of each of the parties for which the additions were made by the AO under above mentioned three heads,u/s. 68 of the Act. It was further stated that only ₹ 3.95 lacs were recd during the year under appeal, that the remaining amount was out of the balances of the earlier years. After considering the remand report and the rejoinder submitted ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e amounting to ₹ 4.23 lacs in the name of Pyramid Energy Creations Co. was not proved, that balance amount appearing in the name of Chakreshwari Plastics (India) Ltd. remained unexplained. After considering the submission of the assessee and the remand report, the FAA held that the AO had not made any adverse comment about the balances appearing in the name of BPC Polymers and Rajendra Chopra, that the amount of ₹ 1.38 lacs appearing in the name of Chakreshwari Plastics (India) Ltd. was also old loan, that difference in balance of ₹ 1,000/- in the name of Rajendra Chopra was nominal, that both the amounts were received in the earlier year, that the same could not be added to the income of the assessee for the year under appeal, that in case of K-Sarc Polymers ₹ 9.67 lacs was old balance,that the assessee had received ₹ 2.23 lacs during the year,that the AO had doubted the credit worthiness of the lender without giving any reason or evidence, that Rajendra Chopra had confirmed the balance and given the copy of PAN, and balance sheet of K-Sarc Polymers, that the transactions with the K-Sarc Polymers were through banking channels only, that there was n ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pported the order of the FAA.Authorised Representative(AR)argued that the during the remand proceedings the assessee had filed all the necessary documents and confirmations which could not be filed before the AO due to unavoidable circumstances,that most of the loans or liabilities pertained to the earlier yeas,that in one case the balance had reduced.He referred to the pages no.58-68 and 116,119,122 of the paper book(PB). 4. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record.We find that during the assessment proceedings the assessee had not filed certain information under three heads namely outstanding liabilities,difference in personal balance sheet and difference in business balance sheet,that the assessee produced all the necessary documents and confirmation of the parties concerned before the FAA,that he admitted the additional evidences,that the AO was given a chance to verify the claim of the assessee,that in the remand proceedings the assessee produced the lenders and furnished necessary details.From the details filed it is clear that in most of the cases loans/liabilities are of not current year and the balances were appearing in the balance sheets ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
