TMI Blog2016 (2) TMI 1092X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... bilities and after considering the surrounding circumstances. See case of Durga Prasad More [1971 (8) TMI 17 - SUPREME Court] and Sumati Dayal [1995 (3) TMI 3 - SUPREME Court]. Thus we are of the view that the authorities below without any justification have made the addition against the assessee. The explanation of the assessee is acceptable and as such no addition is called for in the matter. We accordingly set aside the orders of the authorities below and delete the addition - Decided in favour of assessee. - ITA No. 312/Agra/2013 - - - Dated:- 10-2-2016 - SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND MRS. ANNAPURNA MEHROTRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER For The Appellant : Sh. Rajendra Sharma, Advocate Sh. Ashok Vijaywargiya, C.A. For T ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... xplained that without consent of the mother and brother of the assessee, how agreement was entered into. The AO accordingly, made the addition. 3. The assessee challenged the addition before the ld. CIT(A) and his written submissions are reproduced in the appellate order in which the assessee briefly explained that he had entered into the agreement for sale of family property with four persons, namely Shri Ajmer Singh, Sh. Narayan Singh, Sh. Matadeen and Shri Shivrajan Sharma. The assessee had received the amount of ₹ 17,50,000/- from these four persons towards advance against sale of property on 09.06.2008 which was deposited in his bank account on the same day. The assessee challenged the observation of the AO in the assessment o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... which it was held that once it is established that the amount has been invested by particular person, be he a partner or an individual, then the responsibility of assessee is over. Whether that person is income tax payer or not and where he had brought this money from, it is not the responsibility of the firm. The moment the firm gives satisfactory explanation and produces the person who has deposited the amount, then the burden of the firm is discharged and in that case that credit entry cannot be treated to be income of the firm for the purpose of income-tax. The assessee, therefore, submitted that the affidavits as well as confirmations of the persons were filed before the AO and therefore, the statements were also recorded by the AO ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... plained that since the deal did not materialize, therefore, on the same day, the deal was cancelled and the amounts were refunded to them on the same day. The bank statement support the claim of assessee that same amount has been withdrawn on the same day. Therefore, confirmations/affidavits of the purchasers supported by the statement on oath recorded by the AO clearly prove that the assessee proved the identity of the purchasers, their creditworthiness and genuineness of the transaction in the matter. All these persons in their statement explained their source of income as well. Therefore, the case of the assessee is squarely covered by the judgment of jurisdictional M.P. High Court in the case of Metachem Industries (supra). It is not th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
