9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (4) TMI 582X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by the assessee and treating the income as income from undisclosed sources u/s 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. That the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in law in sustaining the addition of Rs. 14,44,575/- on the basis of credit entries in the bank statement. 3. That the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in law and on facts in holding that the claim of the appellant is an afterthought. 4. That the impugned appellate order is arbitrary, illegal, bad in law and in violation of rudimentary principles of cotemporary jurisprudence. 5. That the appellant craves leave to add/alter any/all grounds of appeal before or at the time of hearing of the appeal. 2. The facts in brief are that the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 575/- as unexplained cash credit. Aggrieved, the assessee is before us. 3. In grounds 1 to 3 of the assessee , the sole issue involved is , the addition of unexplained cash credit of Rs. 14,44,575/-. Learned Authorized Representative of the assessee submitted paper book containing 78 pages. The learned Authorized Representative further submitted that the trust was maintaining the imprest account of the assessee in its books of account and duly recorded all those transactions held with the assessee. He referred to page no. 18 of the paper book showing the imprest money given to the assessee by the trust from 13th June, 2008 to 19th June, 2008. The ld AR also referred to receipts issued by the trust in respect of the imprest money advanced t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lower authorities, submitted that no such amount was shown as outstanding in the balance sheet of the trust. 5. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record including the paper book of the assessee. As regard to the deposit of Rs. 14,55,575/-, the assessee explained that Rs. 2,44,575/- was deposited out of his income during the year or from withdrawals from the bank account. The assessee has declared income of Rs. 3,72,330/- during the year which is sufficient to explain the deposit of Rs. 2,44,575/-. As regards to balance of Rs. 12 crores, the assessee explained receipt of the same from Sh. Vedmata Gayatri Trust, Haridwar on following dates: Dates Amount 13.06.2008 Rs. 2,50,000/- 16.06.2008 Rs. 3,50,000/- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uments in support of identity, creditworthiness and genuineness of the transaction. However, the Assessing Officer merely made addition without any evidence in support of his claim. Once the assessee filed all the documents, the burden of proof shifted on the Revenue and if the Revenue was unable to carry out inquiry even after request of the assessee to summon the creditors, the Assessing Officer failed to discharge his burden of proof and unable to establish that the credit of the deposit of Rs. 14,55,575/- in the bank account was from undisclosed sources. The Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of CIT Vs Orissa Corporation (supra) has held as under: 13. In this case, the assessee had given the names and addresses of the alleged creditors. I ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
