TMI Blog2017 (3) TMI 1047X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ecline to interfere in the matter. Additions made on account of disallowance of employees’ contribution to PF and ESI under section 36(1)(va) - CIT-A deleting the additions -Held that:- When it was pointed out to the learned DR that the CIT(A) has given a categorical finding that the amounts well within the grace period, and there is nothing to controvert the same, learned DR did not say anything beyond placing reliance on the order of the Assessing Officer. We, therefore, see no reasons to disturb the conclusions arrived at by the CIT(A) and to interfere in the matter. - ITA No. 2258/Ahd/11 - - - Dated:- 15-2-2017 - Pramod Kumar AM For The Appellant : A K Bhardwaj For The Respondent : Vartik Choksi ORDER 1. This appeal, filed by the Assessing Officer, is directed against the order dated 25th July 2011 passed by the CIT(A) in the matter of assessment under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for the assessment year 2008-09. 2. In the first ground of appeal, the appellant has raised the following grievance: The learned CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in deleting the additions made on account of treatment of ₹ 23,43,537 of share app ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ₹ 1,12,000/- out of salary and loan repayment 22.07.2007 Cheque 23200 Rs.57,000/- from salary and - explained ₹ 23,200/- out of cash on hand 22.07.2007 Cash 65000 Cash deposited of which source could not explain 28.07.2007 Cheque 25000 Cash deposited of which source could not explain 01.08.2007 Cash 75000 Cash deposited of which source could not explain 14.08.2007 Cash 10000 Cash deposited of which source could not explain 16.08.2007 Cheque 235000 Cheque from Axis bank before issue cheque cash deposited, of which source could not explain 16.08.2007 Cash 85000 Cash deposited of which source could not explain 17.08.2007 Cheque 8000 Che ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 000 Not Explained 30.05.2007 Cheque 90000 Not Explained 04.06.2007 Cheque 100000 Not Explained 06.06.2007 TRF 42000 Not Explained 08.06.2007 TRF 100000 Not Explained 08.06.2007 Cheque 100000 Not Explained 11.06.2007 TRF 85000 Not Explained 15.06.2007 Cheque 165000 Not Explained 20.06.2007 Cheque 90000 Not Explained 24.08.2007 Cheque 43000 Not Explained 12.12.2007 Cash 20000 Not Explained 27.12.2007 Cheque 30000 Not Explained ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... completed in the case of Shri Nilesh Mashru. It is to be noted that no addition on account of the deposits given by Shri Nilesh Mashru has been made in the assessment order. The other director is also assessed to tax and has accepted the fact of giving share application money. Both the depositors have confirmed the fact of giving loan. Regarding the issue that certain amount was given by way of cash, I am of the opinion that once the depositor is assessed to tax and is confirming the fact and quantum of the deposit, the responsibility of the appellant ends at that point, more so when the depositors are regular tax payers on the records of the Department. The A. O. has accepted part of the deposits as explained and accepted the credit worthiness to that extent. Once the A. O. is accepting the credit worthiness of the depositor, he cannot do it for the part amount. As he is accepting that the deposit has been given by certain person, the source of the deposit has to be examined in the hands of the depositor and in case he feels that the part of the deposit is unexplained the action should be taken in the hands of the depositor as the appellant has sufficiently discharged its onus. Th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
