TMI Blog1996 (1) TMI 150X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d M/s Amarchand Dharamchand has not been proved. 2. The learned CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 1.50 crores made by the ITO as income from undisclosed sources even though the assessee has not furnished the details of the person or persons who are supposed to have brought this money from Delhi in cash. 3. The learned CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 1.50 crores made by the ITO as income from undisclosed sources. 2. The facts of the case are the ITO noted the following facts with regard to cash credits totalling to Rs. 1.50 crore appearing in the books of the assessee for S.Y. 2033 (asst. yr. 1978-79): "A further scrutiny of the books of account of the assessee-firm has revealed the introduction of cash in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... aramchand. It is the claim of the assessee-firm that these amounts were received by it on the same day from M/s Amarchand Dharamchand, Delhi, and are accordingly appearing in the assessee's books. The books of account of M/s Amarchand Dharamchand as examined by my predecessor showed that on 8th Feb., 1977, M/s Amarcand Dharamchand had received an amount of Rs. 25 lakhs which was deposited in the bank and subsequently withdrawn on the same date. Similarly, on 23rd Feb., 1977, Rs. 50 lakhs were received and were withdrawn on the same date. These amount (sic) 8th Feb., 1977, and 23rd Feb., 1977, respectively are appearing in the books of the assessee from which is in Bombay the money has been withdrawn from bank at Delhi and it has been shown ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assessee to file: (i) Confirmation letter(s) from the person(s) who had brought the moneys from Delhi to Bombay, and (ii) Name(s) and address(es) of the person(s) who had brought the moneys from Delhi to Bombay. 4. The ITO after summarising the reply of the assessee, reproduced hereinafter, made an addition of Rs. 1.50 crores because, according to him, the genuineness of the transaction is not proved: ".....The assessee has stated in its reply that— (1) All the above money was transferred from M/s Prakash Cotton Mills to Delhi. (2) At no point of time, either Prakash Cotton Mills or M/s Ramkumar Jalan, the assessee, or any other concern has tried to use those monies to explain the making of any investment or entries whatso ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... iguous terms stated as under: 'There is no doubt about it that the money has been transferred by M/s Prakash Cotton Mills on different dates to Delhi and the money has been withdrawn in Delhi. Out of the total money transferred amounting to Rs. 1.5 crores, Rs. 75,00,000 appeared in the books of M/s Amarchand Dharamchand, Delhi, and the total of Rs. 1.5 crores is stated to have come back to Bombay. There is no doubt that the money has been withdrawn in cash from Delhi bank....' The ITO's only objection is that the assessee has not filed confirmatory letter(s) from person(s) who had brought moneys from Delhi to Bombay and had not furnished the name(s) and address(es) of such persons. The assessee says that since this information has not ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Rs. 1.5 crores appearing in its books on 8th and 23rd Feb. and 10th and 11th March, 1977. In this view of the matter, I am of the opinion that the ITO erred in making addition of an amount of Rs. 1.50 crores for asst. yr. 1978-79 as income from undisclosed sources. The addition made by the ITO of Rs. 1.50 crores in the assessment for asst. yr. 1978-79 is, therefore, deleted." 6. We have heard the learned Departmental Representative as well as the counsel for the assessee. The arguments of the learned Departmental Representative were on the lines that the assessee has not furnished any evidence as to how and when the money actually came from Delhi to Bombay meaning thereby that out of 3 conditions required to prove the genuineness of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nce or material as to how the money was brought to Bombay and through whom. He also stated that no travelling expenses have been accounted for by any of the parties. When further asked by the Bench that was the money received at Bombay through havala transaction, he again replied in the negative and admitted that it was not brought through havala even. 8. The assessee's failure to prove as to how and when the money was brought to Bombay raises a serious doubt against the actual transaction because had the money come, then it is not believable as to how the assessee has forgotten the mode and the name of the carrier. His plea that the name of the person (carrier) having not been recorded in the books of account, it is not possible for him ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
