TMI Blog2013 (11) TMI 1741X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 43(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short the Act ). 2. At the outset, the ld. DR representing Revenue, submits that the instant appeal is time barred by a day s delay in filing. He invites our attention to the condonation petition dated 11.6.2013 in the shape of affidavit stating therein that since the approval papers in filing the present appeal were received on 10.6.2013 at 5:45PM i.e last date for filing the appeal, it could be initiated on the next day i.e 11.6.2013 leading to delay of one day in filing. The assessee has been fair enough not to oppose the aforesaid condonation plea. Accordingly, the delay in filing the appeal of one day stands condoned. 3. Coming to merits, the sole and substantive grievance of the Revenue is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ; 8,10,456/- and ₹ 13,75,235/-, respectively. We find from the assessment order dated 28.12.2011 that he could not explain he source of cash deposits and payments of credit cards to the extent of ₹ 34,86,141/- by giving names of payees alongwith other necessary details. Accordingly, the Assessing Officer added the said sum in assessee s income u/s 69 of the Act in the nature of unexplained expenditure. 7. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred appeal before the CIT(A). In the lower appellate proceedings, gist of his arguments was that one of his friend namely Shri Neelamegan had used his credit cards and paid back the sums withdrawn in the accounts. We find that the CIT(A) has accepted the assessee s contentions by observing as un ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Credit Card 4629864162737003 Rs.243,000 3 Axis Bank Credit Card 4718610000515495 Rs.225,000 4 Deutsche Credit Card 5268610004168003 Rs.194,000 5 Kotak Credit Cards 4166461300060908 Rs.150,000 3. During the year the above credit cards are used by him for his personal use and by Mr.Neelamegan, a Ex Colleague who was working along with him in same company and the said Mr.Neelamegan used his credit card in the stores of Sai Akash Decors, Aruna Pharmacy, Jaya Medicals and CR Agencies. 4. Mr.Nee ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lamegan and also the transaction also done by Mr.Neelamegan by using assessee credit cards. 12. The amount of ₹ 34,86,141 treated by assessing officer as unexplained expenditure were because the assessee's credit cards issued by Concern Bank were swiped. 13. The Assessing officer only considered the Credit Card Repayment and completed the assessment by adding ₹ 34,86,141/- as unexplained expenditure. However these amount were given by Mr. Neelamegan for the usage by him through Cheque, cash and Fund transfer /Direct Deposit. 14. During the Assessment procedure the assessee given the details of amount received and the details of Repayment of Credit cards and Bank Statements. 15. The assessing officer consider only ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tements. We are also relying on case law of Addl CIT Vs Bahri Bros(P) Ltd [1985] 154 ITR 244 (Pat) in that case the Identity of creditors is not relevant for cheque transactions Considering the above in our case Mr.Neelamegan has repaid the most of the amount by direct deposit into bank account through cheque and the repayment of credit card swiped are the only source for Payment of credit card dues. Assessing office treated the credit card payment as unexplained Expenses and not considered the amount credited in the bank account. We make the request to consider both the Payment and Deposit (i.e Debit and Credit) as shown in bank Statement, the debit are the payment for the credit cards and Credit are the only source for the p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ese monies were available to the appellant, for substantiating source for repayments to credit cards accounts, if the angle of NM is kept aside or not believed. Even otherwise, there is evidence galore of transfer of monies from the accounts of NM into appellant's bank account and the same going into credit card repayments. Thus, evidence is staring from the record and balanced on both the sides - withdrawal and repayments. In this background, there is no need to bring in the rigors of the section 69 since both withdrawals and repayments are explained. Thus, the addition of ₹ 34,86,141/- under section 69 by treating the withdrawals alone and ignoring the sources for the repayment, does not stand on a single leg also. The AO is dir ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
