TMI Blog2022 (7) TMI 942X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cash deposits in the bank accounts of the assessee. We therefore direct the deletion of addition of cash deposits - Accordingly, ground no. 1 and 2 are allowed. Unexplained investments - HELD THAT:- We find merit in the contention of the assessee that no actual investment was made by the assessee in shares as held by the Revenue authorities, but the assessee had only indulged in buying and selling of shares on the same day, earning profit/loss only in the process without making any investment. The assessee has reasonably demonstrated this fact through broker's note of the investment. The said contract notes clearly reflect the sale and purchase of shares within the same day. The Revenue has been unable to controvert the same. Addition to be deleted - Decided in favour of assessee. Addition made on account of borrowed loan by the assessee from his friends - HELD THAT:- AO found that the assessee made certain transactions in cash relating to share trading transactions, source of which, he stated was loans from his friends and family. However, the loans amounting to Rs. 1,00,500/- was added to his income as source of the same was not explained to the satisfaction of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 00/- and Rs. 41,900/- respectively (ii) unexplained investment in securities of Rs. 6,33,270/-, 1,99,156/- and Rs. 78,307/-, and (iii) unexplained cash credit relating to borrowings made by the assessee from his friends amounting to of Rs. 1,00,500/-. The ld. counsel for the assessee drew our attention to grounds raised as under: 1. The Ld. A. O. has erred in making and Ld. CIT(A) has erred in confirming addition of Rs. 49,000/- towards cash deposit with IDBI Bank, even though it was fully explained that the said cash deposit were made out of the cash available with him from withdrawals as well as from personal borrowings from time to time. 2. The Ld. CIT(A)-5, Ahmedabad further erred in not considering the details of cash transactions filed before during the course of the assessment and made available to him at the time of appellate proceedings. The Ld. A. O. has erred in making and Ld. CIT(A) has erred in confirming addition of Rs. 41,900/- towards cash deposit with HDFC Bank, even though it was fully explained that the said cash deposit were made out of the cash available with him from withdrawals as well as from personal borrowings from time to time. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ng the details of investment filed during the course of the assessment and made available to him at the time of appellate proceedings. 6. The Ld. A. O. has erred in making and Ld. CIT(A) has erred in confirming addition of Rs. 1,00,500/- towards cash credit as per para 9.4 as regards borrowing from appellant's friends even though it was fully explained that the same was received as a loan from his friends. (6a) The Ld. CIT(A)-5, Ahmedabad has erred in not considering the issue even though it was brought to his notice that summons issued and served to the cash creditors, and time allowed to then for their representative. 3. Taking up first the ground no. 's 1 2 relating to the addition made on account of unexplained cash deposits of Rs. 49,000/- and Rs. 41,900/- in the bank account of the assessee in IDBI and HDFC respectively, the ld. counsel for the assessee pointed out that it had been repeatedly explained to the authorities below that these deposits were attributable to cash withdrawals made from the said accounts itself, that the details were also enclosed for verification but the authorities below did not consider the explanation of the assessee and con ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ew our attention the copy of bank book of IDBI placed at page no. 4 to 10 the paper book, pointing out the withdrawal of cash justifying deposits in the said account. The ld. DR on the other hand relied on the order of the ld. CIT(A). 6. We have heard contentions of both the parties, and we agree with the ld. counsel for the assessee that the addition on account of cash deposits of Rs. 49,000/- and Rs. 41,900/- in IDBI and HDFC Banks has been confirmed by the ld. CIT(A) without appreciating the contentions of the assessee; that the same could be attributed to the cash withdrawn from the same bank accounts, which were corroborated with the bank statement also. The Revenue has not controverted the fact of sufficient cash withdrawal in Bank prior to deposit. We do not agree with the ld. CIT(A) that the assessee has to demonstrate one-to-one nexus between cash deposits and withdrawals which is virtually impossible. As long as there is cash withdrawal prior to deposits and gap between the withdrawals and deposits is a reasonably short period of time, it can be, in the absence of any evidence to show the utilization of the cash withdrawal, safely presumed that the cash deposits have b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dated 23.7.2007 trade date and pointed out that the 156 number of shares sold of India Bulls for Rs. 1,02,796/- was followed by purchase of such shares the same day. That the assessee had booked only the difference and not taken any physically delivery of shares purchased. Similarly he drew our attention to PB.13 being contract note for trade date 19/7/2007 containing identical purchase value of shares of Rs. 1,30,800 of India Bulls and on the same day, at a later time, showed sale of the said shares also. Similarly, he drew our attention to P.B 15 reflecting transaction dated 18.7.2007 of Rs. 1,31,400/- and pointed out that they related to sale of shares of 200 equity shares of India Bulls bought on the same day only and squared off. He contended that all the transactions which the Revenue had pointed out as investment made by the assessee were similarly demonstrated through these contract notes to the effect that they did not relate to any actual purchase of shares with physical delivery being taken, but only related to immediately purchase and sales of shares and the assessee getting only net balance thereof. The ld. counsel for the assessee pointed out that the evidence in thi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nal evidences giving details of borrowing of Rs. 1,00,500/- from eight friends ranging from Rs. 3,000/- to Rs. 15,000/-. The ld. counsel for the assessee stated that the AO had issued summons in remand proceedings to his friends, but none come in response to the summons. However, two confirmation letters had been received from one Rajesh D. Desai and Shri Dilipbhai P. Patel, where they stated to have given loan of Rs. 15,000/- and Rs. 14,500/- from their labour work. The ld. counsel for the assessee contended that considering the small amount which was taken as loan from various friends and the fact that two of them did confirm the fact of loans, the addition needed to be deleted. He also pointed out that the AO had accepted loan taken by the assessee from Mr. Rajkumar Sharma, and the CIT(A) had accepted the loan shown to be taken by the assessee from his father of Rs. 78,000/- holding that it could not be doubted that his father had given such advances out of his savings and agricultural income in piecemeal. He therefore contended that there was no reason to doubt the genuineness of loans taken from friends as above. The ld. DR on other hand relied on the orders of the authorit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
