TMI Blog2017 (6) TMI 437X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... orderof theLearned Commissioner of Income (Appeals)-XV, Ahmedabad(in short Ld.CIT(A) ) dated 31/03/2013 arising out of order u/s.143(3) of the income tax 1961 (herein after referred as Act ) framedon 05/02/2013 by ITO,Ward(8)-1 Ahmedabad. 2. Assessee has raised following grounds of appeal: 1. The learned CIT(A) has erred in law and on the facts of the case in confirming the action of the learned Assessing Officer in making addition of ₹ 69,48,000/- u/s 69A of the Act without appreciating the evidences submitted by the appellant. 2. The learned CIT(A) in the facts and circumstances of the case ought to have consider the evidences produced by the appellant wherein the appellant has proved the identity, genuineness and credibility of the parties giving loans. The action of disallowance u/s 69A is therefore completely erroneous. 3. Alternatively and without prejudice the learned C1T(A) fails to provide benefit of peak theory to the appellant instead of confirming the action of Assessing officer in making addition of ₹ 69,48,000/- u/s 69A of the Act. 4. Both the lower authorities have passed the orders without properly appreciating the fact an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... acceptance of interest free cash loan and failed to explain the satisfactory source of cash deposit of ₹ 69,48,000/- in the IDBI bank account and accordingly confirmed the order of Ld.AO confirming addition u/s.69A of the Act for ₹ 69,48,000/- 7. Aggrieved assessee is now in appeal before the Tribunal. 8. Ld.Counsel for the assessee submitted that Assessing Officer has made an addition of ₹ 69,48,000/- u/s.69A in respect of cash deposited in bank account which came to be confirmed by CIT(A) as well, however, both the lower authorities failed to appreciate facts in entirety. At the outset, it is clarified that assessee furnished evidences w.r.t cash deposits to the tune of ₹ 57,00,000/- received from following five parties. Sr.No. Name Amount 1. Ghanshyambhai B. Thakor Rs.8,00,000/- 2. Javarsing P. Thakor Rs.11,00,000/- 3. MalaJI C. Thako Rs.3,00,000/- 4. Diwanji Popatji Rs.12,00,000/- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rthiness of the lenders stands established. 11. Thus, all the three ingredients as prescribed u/s.68 of the Actare proved by the assessee. Section 68 of the Act cast an initial burden on assessee to prove identity, genuineness and creditworthiness of lenders which has been discharged by placing on record documentary evidences as specified in Annexure A . Having discharged the initial onus with satisfactory explanation, onus shifts on the revenue. The only objection of Assessing Officer and CIT(A) is that the assessee has not proved source of such persons to provide loans to the assesseei.eassessee has not proved source of source. 11.1 Section 68 of the Act doesn t require an assessee to prove source of the source of deposits. Hence, no addition is called for u/s.68 of the Act. Reliance is placed on: DCIT Vs. Rohini Builders 256 ITR 360(Guj.) MurlidharLahorimalVs. CIT 280 ITR 512 (Guj.) CIT VsPragti Co-Op.Bank Ltd. 278 ITR 170 (Guj.) CIT Vs. Orissa Corporation Pvt. Ltd. 159 ITR 78(SC) 11.2 Having furnished the aforesaid details, the concerned credits, by no stretch of imagination, remain unexplained any further in the assesee s hands. In the facts and circums ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 1. Ghanshyambhai B. Thakor 06/02/2014 Rs.8,00,000/- 2. Javarsing P. Thakor 29/01/2014 Rs.11,00,000/- 3. MalaJI C. Thako 31/01/2014 Rs.3,00,000/- 4. DiwanjiPopatji 11/02/2014 Rs.12,00,000/- Total Rs.34,00,000/- 13.2 As regard to fifth cash creditor namely Shri Laxamanji C Thakor from whom ₹ 23,00,000/- was received, he didn t appear before assessing authorities on medical ground. However, two affidavits were submitted showing details of ₹ 9,00,000/- and ₹ 14,00,000/- given to the assessee on 22/09/2009 and 08/01/2010. The source of ₹ 23,00,000/- was shown from advance received from sale of agriculture land atRs.35,00,000/-. 14. From the perusal of the remand report appearing at page 11 to 14 of the order of Ld.CIT(A), we notice that as regards to cash credits of ₹ 34,00,000/- received from four parties,assessee has been successful in pr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... remium and none of the parties were produced before the assessing authorities whereas in the case of assessee some of cash creditors have appeared before the assessing authorities and gave their statements accepting that they have paid the money to the assessee in cash. 15.1 Summarizing facts of the case, we observe that assessee has been able to prove the identity, genuineness and creditworthiness of the cash credits of ₹ 57,00,000/- received from following four parties who appeared before the assessing authorities and accepted to have provided cash to the assessee with the documents showing agriculture land ownership. Sr.No. Name Amount 1. Ghanshyambhai B. Thakor Rs.8,00,000/- 2. Javarsing P. Thakor Rs.11,00,000/- 3. MalaJI C. Thakor Rs.3,00,000/- 4. Diwanji Popatji Rs.12,00,000/- 5. Laxmanji C. Thakor Rs.23,00,000/- Total ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
