9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (4) TMI 210X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cash of Rs. 6,09,500/- as loan/deposits and adding to total income as non genuine loan/deposit u/s 68 of the IT Act. 2. The ld. CIT(A)-XI, Ahmedabad is not justified in disbelieving the claim of the assessee that Rs. 6,09,500/- was collected from members constituted AOP/BOI for the share trading business. 3. Your appellant prays to add, alter or delete any of the grounds at the time of hearing. 2. Briefly stated facts as culled out from the records are that the assessee is an individual engaged in the business of trading in dyes and filed his return of income for Asst. Year 2008-09 on 18.9.2008 declaring total income at Rs. 2,22,101/-. The case was selected for scrutiny assessment and notice u/s 143(2) of the Act dated 20/08/2009 was ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of Rs. 6,09,500/- ld. CIT(A) observed as under :- "4.3 I have carefully considered rival submissions. I have also perused various evidences furnished by the appellant during appellate proceedings and assessment proceedings. The first contention of the appellant is that money has been received by the A.O.P. This contention of the appellant cannot be accepted keeping in view of the facts that this A.O.P. namely Prafulbhai K, Patel (AOP) was never formalized by way of registration. Secondly, this A.O.P. does not have a bank account Thirdly, this A.O.P. has not been issued PAN and it is not assessed to tax. Fourthly, this A.O.P. does not exist no more. This was apparently floated to explain the source of cash deposits in the S. B. account of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s way, these confirmations were engineered and these are self serving documents. Some of these persons are assessed to tax. However, this fact change complexion of entire proceedings. In view of this, I hold that these confirmations are self serving documents and the same are hereby rejected. 4.5 The appellant has also taken an alternate plea that peak in his bank account should be taken as undisclosed income. As discussed above, the A.O. had made an addition of Rs. 6,09,500/--after giving benefit of cash withdrawal from the S.B. account of the appellant of Rs. 6,75,500/-. It is a matter of record that cash of Rs. 11,85,000/-- was deposited in his account. The A.O. has given benefit of cash withdrawal from this account This way, availabi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ut because of negligible income the same were not shown in the income-tax return filed by the assessee but the cash received from relatives was not in a shape of unsecured loan but was part of business venture carried on as an AOP and, therefore, no addition to be made under section 269SS for cash loan taken and alternatively submitted that even if the contention of share trading in the name of AOP is not accepted then the peak credit method to be applied which in the case of assessee is Rs. 2,27,442/-. 8. On the other hand, ld. DR supported the orders of lower authorities. 9. We have heard the rival contention and perused the material on record. Ground of appeal taken by assessee only revolves round the issue against the action of ld. CI ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 0.1 Now we take the issue about addition u/s 68 of the Act of Rs. 6,09,500/-. From going through the Paper Book we find that sumarrized cash flow for Financial Year 2007-08 has been produced which is reproduced below :- From going through the above shown cash flow chart for F.Y. 2007- 08, we see that assessee has shown Rs. 6,11,100/- as new cash introduced during the year which are flowing down in 10 entries. Out of the ten entries Rs. 25,500/- has been shown as an addition made by assessee himself and out of the remaining nine entries in six entries the individual amount of entry-wise loan is less than Rs. 20,000/- and its total comes to Rs. 98,100/-. Only in case of three entries the individual amount received is more than Rs. 20,000/- a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... amed as under :- 1. Bhavesh M. Patel 16,100/- 2 Reshma D. Patel 18,500/- 3. Binal B. Patel 15,000/- 4. Labhuben M. Patel 15,000/- 5. Kanchanben K. Patel 16,000/- 6. Pankaj r. Patel 17,500/- Total 98,100/- As assessee has been able to prove the identity and genuineness of the cash loan from above six parties at Rs. 98,100/- and further total amount received from each person is less than Rs. 20,000/- then there is no contravention of the provisions of section 269SS of the Act and we accordingly accept the submissions of ld. AR about the source of cash at Rs. 98,100/- from above said six parties. 14. Now we take up the issue about cash loan received at Rs. 3,20,000/- from following three parties :- 1. Vi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
