Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2017 (4) TMI 1055

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ral agricultural land for installation of a windmill. However he had not proof of receiving the funds from M/s. Suzlon Ltd. Mr. Dattu has stated before the AO that he was working in Vashi and Khadk, Mumbai as a labourer and was earning ₹ 9,000/- p.m. It is inconceivable that with such meagre income Mr. Dattu could give a loan of ₹ 6,00,000/- to the assessee. As the Hon'ble Supreme Court laid down in Kalekhan Mohammed Hanif vs. CIT (1963 (2) TMI 33 - SUPREME Court), the onus is on the assessee to explain the nature and source of cash credits, whether they stand in the assessee’s account or in the account of a third party. At para 7 here-in-above, we have delineated that the assessee has failed to prove the genuineness of the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ect of loan of 6,00,000/- received from Mr. Shantaram Dattu. As per the assessee Mr. Dattu was a farmer and not assessed to tax. The AO asked the assessee to produce the said party along with supporting evidence regarding source of his income. The assessee filed a copy of application filed before the Manager, Satara Sahakari Bank requesting for a bank statement of Mr. Dattu. As the assessee failed to file before the AO the address of the party nor could explain the source of investment supported by evidence, the AO made an addition of ₹ 6,00,000/- u/s 68 of the Act. 4. Aggrieved by the order of the AO, the assessee filed an appeal before the learned CIT(A). The AR of the assessee filed before the learned CIT(A) the loan confirmatio .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... r upto April, 2009, there were normal transactions undertaken in the said bank account. Not on one occasion had any transaction being in excess of ₹ 5,000/-. There was hardly any balance in the account. In view of the above, the learned CIT(A) upheld the addition of ₹ 6,00,000/- made by the AO u/s 68 of the Act. 5. Before us, the learned counsel of the assessee files a Paper Book (PB) containing (i) copy of confirmation and PAN Card of the lender, (ii) copy of bank statement issued by Satara Sahakari Bank Ltd. of the lender, (iii) copy of assessee s bank account, (iv) copy of assessee s letter dated 12.02.2014 filed before the A.O. (v) copy of remand report dated 03.11.2014 and (vi) copy of return of income filed by the asses .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates