TMI Blog2019 (8) TMI 55X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he facts and more particularly when the A.O. has not made any enquiry regarding demise of the lender and the money credited in the account during the assessment year 2010-11 as claimed by the assessee. The issue is restored back to the A.O. to decide it afresh after making proper enquiry. The assessee would cooperate in the proceedings before the A.O. The grounds raised in the appeal are allowed for statistical purposes. - ITA No.418/Ind/2018 - - - Dated:- 30-7-2019 - Shri Kul Bharat, Judicial Member For the Appellant : Shri Niranjan Purandar, A.R. For the Respondent : Shri R.P. Maurya, D.R. ORDER PER KUL BHARAT, J.M: This appeal by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed envelope is very much available in the file of A.O., duly seen by the A.R. of appellant also. 2. The facts giving rise to the present appeal are that the assessee filed his return of income declaring total income at ₹ 10,88,730/- on 31.3.2013. The case of the assessee was picked up for scrutiny assessment under CASS. Accordingly, a notice u/s 143(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called as the Act ) was issued to the assessee by the A.O. Thereafter, the A.O. proceeded to make assessment. The A.O. after considering the submissions of the assessee made additions in respect of disallowance of expenditure related to car, telephone and mobile amounting to ₹ 52,802/-, ₹ 22,501/- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tice sent by the A.O. was returned back with the remark expired . In respect of the cash credit received from Shri Vinit Poddar it was stated that the amount was taken in the financial year 2009-10 and it was duly reflected in the outstanding balance as on 1.4.2011. 4. Per contra, Ld. D.R. opposed these submissions and supported the orders of the authorities below. Ld. D.R. submitted that onus was on the assessee to prove the identity of the creditors, genuineness of transactions and creditworthiness of the creditors. Ld. D.R. submitted that the assessee grossly failed to prove genuineness of the transactions and creditworthiness of the creditors, therefore, the requirement of law remained unfulfilled. Thu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
